I've always wondered why exactly Mexico has been so low on the world totem pole when it is so close to the economic Eagle Head of the United States. Its a mystery to me, not the why, which i am certain is through continuing market control from large european and american corporations, but the how, the mechanism of 
control. Simular control was attempted by europe against the united states in its infancy, but could not be maintained in face of such economic advantaged afforded by the US's position. A position that Mexico is very close to, and yet so far away.
So close, in fact, that the political left's great quotemaker, Hugo Chavez, has been heard to say "Poor Mexico, so far from heaven, and so close to the devil"
Chavez won the recent election in Venezuela, and shows no sign of letting his reign there end, as he continues to make great soundbites, and not much else for the people of his country, unless you consider the threats passed down at the government owned industries (including the all important petroleum industry) that "government dissenters", those who would vote against Chavez's re-election, would have no place in their jobs, or perhaps the country.
Mexico, as the rest of the world with a few exceptions, seems to have little interest in Chavez's moderate socialism, or whatever they are calling it these days, other than these phenominal anti-US quotes popularized in the media worldwide. Everyone, it seems, even if they cant explain it, holds the popular opinion that the United States is responsible for almost all of the economic problems in Mexico. (and elsewhere) Some do explain it, either by the persecution of people who want to work on both sides of the border, the economic redistribution and concentration of wealth brought about by NAFTA, the "disappearances" claimed to be perpetrated by Border Patrol, the impending wall, stories of illegal weapon testing on Mexican fields... the list goes on.
Some of these stories have merit, as I learned talking with a rural farmer who cant get a visa to take a truckload of tomatoes to a buyer waiting in Texas. There isn't any reason for his visa application to be denied, as he meets all the requirements for someone wanting to do business in the united states, but his name came up on some list somewhere, or something, and it was denied. Now he considers selling his crop for considerably less in Mexico, or paying 1000$us to an official who offered to get him less than legal papers, papers that would get him across the border, but could get him sent to a detention cell once he is across. Ive heard that his story is not uncommon here.
Really though, the actions of the United States has little effect on day to day trade here, and the wages paid by US manufacturing companies who relocated plants to Mexico in the face of NAFTA is low, but only because its comparable (generally higher) to the wages paid by local companies. I continued to look for an answer to why Mexico, with its vast mineral, land, sea and human resources has never reached the level of prosperity, if not felt by the general populous in the United States, is always believed to be possible. Mexico, since the 50's really, in many places, seems without hope, and i could figure out why, until it was explained to me by a local college student. "Mexico suffers from a hundred years of state run public education designed to divide its people." she claimed t
hat while she was taught about ancient Mexican culture, its status and symbols, and the Spanish conquest, she was only taught about it in Spanish, while more rural areas are often taught only in the Nahuatl or Mayan languages, and are either expected to never leave their communities, or to learn Spanish on their own time.
Divisions seem rampant, It seems as if there are no real Mexican national movements, because there is no Mexican national identity, In the south of Mexico, where the majority of the population is indigenous peoples, there is a denial of that perceived cultural inferiority, and people want to be seen as the brave and noble Hispanics who defeated the brutal indians. In Central Mexico, with its capital, and a primarily Hispanic population, people want to be seen as having the great honor and a noble spirit of an indegenous linage. In northern Mexico, which is even more Hispanic in origin, the people just want to be powerful and prosperous, like the Gringos.
This type of division has in the past resulted in a democratic system that is sometimes described as being practicaly autonomous in the fact that the only people who bother to vote for its leaders, are people involved in the political machine.
I state again:
A united people, with common interests, are the people most likely to achieve active prosperity.
control. Simular control was attempted by europe against the united states in its infancy, but could not be maintained in face of such economic advantaged afforded by the US's position. A position that Mexico is very close to, and yet so far away.So close, in fact, that the political left's great quotemaker, Hugo Chavez, has been heard to say "Poor Mexico, so far from heaven, and so close to the devil"
Chavez won the recent election in Venezuela, and shows no sign of letting his reign there end, as he continues to make great soundbites, and not much else for the people of his country, unless you consider the threats passed down at the government owned industries (including the all important petroleum industry) that "government dissenters", those who would vote against Chavez's re-election, would have no place in their jobs, or perhaps the country.
Mexico, as the rest of the world with a few exceptions, seems to have little interest in Chavez's moderate socialism, or whatever they are calling it these days, other than these phenominal anti-US quotes popularized in the media worldwide. Everyone, it seems, even if they cant explain it, holds the popular opinion that the United States is responsible for almost all of the economic problems in Mexico. (and elsewhere) Some do explain it, either by the persecution of people who want to work on both sides of the border, the economic redistribution and concentration of wealth brought about by NAFTA, the "disappearances" claimed to be perpetrated by Border Patrol, the impending wall, stories of illegal weapon testing on Mexican fields... the list goes on.
Some of these stories have merit, as I learned talking with a rural farmer who cant get a visa to take a truckload of tomatoes to a buyer waiting in Texas. There isn't any reason for his visa application to be denied, as he meets all the requirements for someone wanting to do business in the united states, but his name came up on some list somewhere, or something, and it was denied. Now he considers selling his crop for considerably less in Mexico, or paying 1000$us to an official who offered to get him less than legal papers, papers that would get him across the border, but could get him sent to a detention cell once he is across. Ive heard that his story is not uncommon here.
Really though, the actions of the United States has little effect on day to day trade here, and the wages paid by US manufacturing companies who relocated plants to Mexico in the face of NAFTA is low, but only because its comparable (generally higher) to the wages paid by local companies. I continued to look for an answer to why Mexico, with its vast mineral, land, sea and human resources has never reached the level of prosperity, if not felt by the general populous in the United States, is always believed to be possible. Mexico, since the 50's really, in many places, seems without hope, and i could figure out why, until it was explained to me by a local college student. "Mexico suffers from a hundred years of state run public education designed to divide its people." she claimed t
hat while she was taught about ancient Mexican culture, its status and symbols, and the Spanish conquest, she was only taught about it in Spanish, while more rural areas are often taught only in the Nahuatl or Mayan languages, and are either expected to never leave their communities, or to learn Spanish on their own time.Divisions seem rampant, It seems as if there are no real Mexican national movements, because there is no Mexican national identity, In the south of Mexico, where the majority of the population is indigenous peoples, there is a denial of that perceived cultural inferiority, and people want to be seen as the brave and noble Hispanics who defeated the brutal indians. In Central Mexico, with its capital, and a primarily Hispanic population, people want to be seen as having the great honor and a noble spirit of an indegenous linage. In northern Mexico, which is even more Hispanic in origin, the people just want to be powerful and prosperous, like the Gringos.
This type of division has in the past resulted in a democratic system that is sometimes described as being practicaly autonomous in the fact that the only people who bother to vote for its leaders, are people involved in the political machine.
I state again:
A united people, with common interests, are the people most likely to achieve active prosperity.
No comments:
Post a Comment