martes, 21 de abril de 2009
"Bordertown" Discussion
After watching the movie, read Chapter III of the course anthology, "Nationalism and Culture: Latin America and the USA" (pages 50 to 68) Then, extract three central ideas from the theory which can be illustrated by a particular scene or sequence of scenes from the movie and explain the connection. In order to complete your assignment, after your own entry is ready, read all of your classmates' entries and respond to at least one, whether it is to agree or disagree with the ideas presented in it.
Suscribirse a:
Enviar comentarios (Atom)
The chapter initiates by telling us the notion of nation as a myth created by the hegemonies to unify people in a single feeling of communion and to make use of them as productive work forces or defensive military units under control. The scenes of the movie where women are working illustrates us the concept of “unification”, I would say exploitation. It is also said that in Latin America, many believe that USA stands for all that is evil and materialistic in this world: capitalism, consumerism and love of money. Since capitalism equal exploitation, the movie has a lot of different scenes that shows us the concept, “richness in hands of foreign people at the expenses of the poor.” This movie has the power to educate and raise awareness on people by describing us how US interventions in Central America has affected the lives of innocents. In the movie we have several scenes of torture, rape, and even murder which are obvious in the scene when Alfonso Diaz died.
ResponderEliminar1. Imaginary “equality” of rights and duties for all the members of the nation. As we know, not all the members of a nation are “worth” the same. Rich/powerful people lifes tend to be more important of those who are poor/ powerless. Nobody seems to care about the lifes of the Juaréz’s women because they are “nobodies”. Women are being tortured, raped and killed, but neither the government does anything about it, nor does the police. What about their rights? If the victim would have been a rich business man’s daughter, I think the authorities would have taken whatever steps necessary to find the attacker/rapist/murderer. There is not equality in a nation and Teresa and the other Juaréz’s women are the vivid example.
ResponderEliminar2. According to Benedict, the individual that do not agree with the system imposed by interest groups are considered “bad members”. They are usually “persecute, repress, and control through intimidation or force”. That’s clearly the case of Alfonso Díaz; the newspaper’s owner. In the movie, we notice how he is unable to publish/distribute his newspapers since power groups interests were to be compromised.The police were keeping and an eye on him. The system needs to silence him; he is a “bad member”. He rebels about the government and police because they do not do anything about the happening in Juaréz. At the end, he is murdered.
3. In the same way many US interventions in Latin American have been kept silenced/ concealed, the events in Juaréz are hidden to rest of the world. The media is part of the game plan. This portrayed in the movie as we see how Lauren Adrian’s article is not published and how her boss is also place between the rock and the hard spot. Hegemonic groups control the information because they do not want “the rest” to know what they are doing.
The movie clearly reflects the standards of submission, behavior and productivity impossed by hegemonic groups to satisfy their interest. In the case of the Mexican society and its proximity to the USA, it is evident that the last groups controlls the first.
ResponderEliminarThe "maquilas" is a cruel way of ensalving people. Although it generates work, people are mistreated and subjugated.
The movie also shows the inhabity to express the disaproval towards the decisions of the nation. Alfonzo Diaz wants the citizens to know what the maquilas are doing to the people in Juarez, but unfortunately the is silenced.
According to Benedit the nation as myth makes use of citizens as productive work forces but to the benefit of few people. Lauren has the opportunity to show the world the other face of maquilas and human exploitation but her ideas are considered to affect NAFTA and she is forced not to publsish her article.
One main idea of the reading is that nations create “imaginary characteristics and relations of a particular country in a way that they seem natural” and that citizens are born into a system that “trains and raises them… as members of a particular nation” (53). That is, nations employ means to make their citizens feel like members of that nation and work to make them feel an unnatural sense of belonging and loyalty to that nation. This is clearly manifested in the main character of Bordertown. Although Lauren Adrian identifies herself as wholly American, she eventually reveals that her parents were Mexican immigrants and that therefore she can technically be considered Mexican or Mexican American. This demonstrates that nations and nationalities are invented and not natural because there is no cut and dry scientific way for Lauren to identify herself; she can be considered American, Mexican, or Mexican American because this link to a particular nation identity is not natural, but rather ideological, cultural and essentially invented and imagined.
ResponderEliminarAnother central theory of the reading is that “the state is able to manipulate different people… under the terms of nationalism and patriotism: it is able to create an imaginary ‘equality’ of rights and duties for all the members of the nation” (54). That is, the state persuades or forces citizens to act in a particular way by advertising them patriotic or nationalistic duties, even if the act may go against a citizen’s or citizens’ ideology. This is clearly demonstrated in the movie when Lauren’s boss refuses to run her story about the dangers and atrocities that the female workers employed by NAFTA experience. Obviously, no equality of rights exist here, as the political supporters of NAFTA have great influence over the press and over Lauren’s boss, who in turn have much more power than Lauren as a single reporter. The politicians and NAFTA supporters parade their refusal to run Lauren’s story as a ‘patriotic duty’ that is in the best interest of the nation; to them, their belief in their ‘patriotic duty’ to expand NAFTA justifies their refusal to publicize the atrocious rapes and murders of thousands of Mexican women.
The reading also addresses the fact that some individuals are unable to accept the ideologies of their nation. In these cases, the nation looks for ways to appease, repress, or control these individuals. The individual is forced to either find a way to resist the hegemonic power, or explore some other way to live with the enforced social structure. This is demonstrated a few times in the movie. The character Alfonso Diaz does not agree with the Mexican police or politicians in their silence about the thousands of murders of Mexican women. His strategy to resist the hegemonic power is to publish the murder stories in his newspaper, despite attempts by the police to silence him and prevent the distribution of his paper. Furthermore, although Alfonso Diaz is eventually murdered, Lauren Adrian is unable to accept the silence of her own country’s press about these murders and decides to continue Alfonso’s work as her own form of resistance to the hegemonic power.
The idea of "Foreigners in their own land" that Anderson explains in the text is exemplified by Diaz when he rebels against the system and the government and denounce the atrocities that the big companies and rich people are doing against the poorest.
ResponderEliminarThe idea of comradeships could be explained in the scenes where the victims blame the "evil" for their situation. Most of the villagers and even Eva seem did not blame the government or the the big companies but they looked for external and/sobrenatural forces and blame them for their bad luck as good members of the society//nation.
Through all the movie we see the power of the "hegemonic group" and how they control the most disadvantaged. The movie fit perfectly the concepts develop in the reading because the control is not base over fear or force but it is something mental, dependency, ideology and something seem as natural for many of them.
I have to agree with Wainer's opinion about Diaz being a foreigner in his own land. Diaz rebeled agianst the system and he paid the ultimate price with his life.
ResponderEliminarWainer brings up the idea of subnatural forces as being the reason for their "tragedy" which i find very interesting. People do not realize that what is happenning is more political and economical than anything else, and that the authorities should put an end to it.
Lauren Adrian's character demonstrates that the concept of nation is merely a myth, for she does not really "fit" into the standards of submission she is supposed to follow. However, the film also unveils the internal struggle she underwent to reach self-acceptance and a critical perspective of the culture she grew up into.
ResponderEliminarFirst of all, the scene in which she dyes her hair, reveals that she was afraid of being excluded from her nation because of her physical appearance. From this we can conclude that she was also a victim of highly superficial impositions,although she is later able free from them.
Second, as a "loyal" America citizen, she should have never placed the well being of others (Mexican women, in this case) before the economic interests of her "fraternity;" however, she dared to criticize her own "nation's" economic policies openly and became a "threat" to the hegemonic group,a traitor to her nation. Finally, when she realizes she could have been one of the victims in Juarez(as she tell her boss)she reaches a sense of true empathy, and the viewers understand that the concept of "nation," contrarily to common belief, is not a unifying notion, but rather a destructive tool to isolate people from a larger global community.
Regarding Cynthia's comment about Alfonso Díaz, the newspaper’s owner -with which I strongly agree-, I wanted to point out that the government's attempt to "silence him" is also a strategy to keep this situation off-the-record, and help the "nation" forget about it easily. This proves, once again, that official history is written by and and in favor of the elite.
ResponderEliminarThe chapter of the anthology difines basically three concepts that are patriotism, nationalism and nation as a myth. Patriotism refers to a feeling or an attitude that a person has/feels for his/her nation, but that “feeling” is linked to determined values, culture, history and goverment.Another concept is nationalism which defers from patriotism because nationalism does not need a goverment to manifest. As an illustration of the patriotism presented in the movie is the issue of migration. Mexicans cannot enter to U.S freely but “Americans” feel powerful enough to dominate a entire culture. This feeling of independence make citizens to protest when they feel threaten by other nation. One example of this presented in the movie is when the Ciudad de Juarez citizens go to the streets and manifest their concerns against women murders. The other concept is nation which is argued by Benedict Anderson. He argues that nations were "imagined communities" because the members of even the smallest nation will never know most of their fellow-members, meet them, or even hear of them. One example of this is Laureen, the protagonist of the movie. She declares herself American; however, she could not forget her Mexican roots, and she tries to feel the same mexican women suffer.
ResponderEliminarI agree Alberto's point of view about the U.S.A interference in other countries. It has caused the sufering of innocents in many aspects such as physically,psychologically and emotionally. I personally feel that the damage is similar to Hitler's desire of dominating the world.
ResponderEliminarOne part of the reading says, “SOA/WHINSEC graduates have included some of the worst and most notorious human rights abusers in Latin American history…” we can relate this group of “graduates” with the dehumanized people in charge of the maquilas in the movie. They were exploiting women and making them work many hours a day without a fair salary. They were also one of the examples of human rights abusers that gave unequal job opportunities in Latin America.
ResponderEliminarThe second part of the anthology that gives a summary of the assassinations and rape of four U.S. nuns can be compared with the maquila workers in the movie that were raped and killed. The reading says that the nuns also showed signs of torture. This also happened in the movie showing how women were mistreated, hit, raped and finally, killed.
On page 52, the author says, “After all, we have been programmed to believe that the nation is even worth dying for,” this phrase reinforces the fact of nationalism and patriotism tendencies of many Americans. In the movie, this is exemplified in the part when the journalist came back to the U.S because her boss was not going to publish her story. She started to fight and defend her ideas because she could not accept the fact that something that was happening was not going to be shown to people. Her boss is the illustration of a patriotic and nationalist man who could not publish the story because that would be going against his nation and his country.
I agree with Josue’s ideas of the inability to express the disapproval towards the decisions of the nation. People sometimes disagree with certain political, social, cultural, and economic situations that happen; however, when they want to show what is behind, the truth, they are silenced.
ResponderEliminarWhat I'm about to refer to has to do with the following lines on page 55: “Hegemonic groups create their own ideology and make their subjects work (for it) and believe (in it) as the natural order of it”.
ResponderEliminarAs Sylvia mentioned, Lauren had to change both her physical and psychological appearance not to be rejected from the society was part of. However, she realised that if she wanted to fully immerse herself into Juárez society, she had to look as the other women, following some other patterns imposed by this other society: she’d dress differently, she’d have to speak Spanish, she’d listen to Juanes’s music, and would even accept wearing a medallion of virgin of Guadalupe. So, basically she forgot about the stereotypes that “stigmatized” her as a Caucasian US noisy journalist, but she adopted a bunch of some other (for good or bad) stereotypes, like the one of the typical religious/superstitious third-world woman believing in the power of el diablo.
So, I agree with Sylvia, as to saying that nothing should've restricted Lauren from freely expressing herself in order to sell an image or to obtained prestige in the US. Nevertheless, I also believe that she should'nt've imposed some other stereotypes in return. This not only reinforced the image that many people around the globe have about Latin American women, but it also showed how easy it is to fall into a society's established ideologies.
The movie shows how most of the political systems are based on the power of certain groups and how “the truth” can be manipulated…
ResponderEliminarOne character of the movie wants to change a reality that many countries have to face, poor people or certain groups do not seem to be taken into account in their own “nation”. Some people are not considered human beings in the land that gave them their backgrounds.
Wainer says: The idea of "Foreigners in their own land" that Anderson explains in the text is exemplified by Diaz when he rebels against the system and the government and denounce the atrocities that the big companies and rich people are doing against the poorest…
Wainer is right, I think that the girls of the company were not able to identify their-selves as Mexicans…
The concept of nation is a myth, living in a place does not make you part of it.
The movie is really interesting, because we Costa Ricans depict Mexicans as people with a high level of patriotism; however, the movie presents us a different reality.
........... rebk.............
In the movie, as the book says, Lauren is seen as one of these "troublemaking" people who like to protest against everything. She just tries to help a woman that was raped and who has not only physical but also psychological scars due to the horrible situation that Mexico is living. For the big organizations that are in charge of the crimes, Lauren is the rock in the shoe who is trayin to solve the problem. These people are so powerful that its easier for them try to cover the real situation making Lauren seem as the rebellious woman who causes damages to their nation.
ResponderEliminarThe other scene is when she returns to her country, she thinks that her story will be published so that all the people will know about the situation. Then, her boss tells her that the story can't be published because that is dangerous for her. The people who commit the crimes influenced her boss not to say anything, threatening them in order to avoid bigger scandals and then continue with the atrocities. This scene is related with the following quotation of the book on page 54: "The state is able to manipulate different people, from different contexts within the national context, under the terms of nationalism and patriotism."
The third example is not a scene but the whole massacre which seems to the "El Mozote" massacre that was in El Salvador. The only difference is that in Mexico only women were the target population, not a whole community as in El Salvador.
I srongly agree with what angie said that "The concept of nation is a myth, living in a place does not make you part of it." Many other different characteristics make people to be unified as a group,as a nation because to be a citizen of any country does no guarantee that this citizen agrees with the politics, the policies, and the ideologies of the rest of the "nation".
ResponderEliminar"Bordertown" and the article definitely go hand in hand by exploiting the manipulation that comes along with promoting patriotism and extreme nationalism. The movie portrays nationalism as more of an alliance between both the US and Latin America through the utilization of the NAFTA agreement. The NAFTA agreement was utilize as propaganda for the strengthening of national relations, which would in turn benefit all citizens, however masked the true underlying issues that came with that. Mexican factory-working women were being raped and tortured, yet national relations and free-trade were more of a priority than innocent lives.
ResponderEliminarThe underbelly of "capitalism, consumerism and love of money" as the reading explains is the main issue portrayed in the "Bordertown". For instance,the author of the chapter stayed: "capitalism is based on the exploitation of the poor by the rich and that foreign policy and military interventions of US have the only interest of taking care of US economical interest abroad at the expense of the poor and exploited peoples of the third world"; the exploitation is clearly portrayed in the "maquilas" where only women work with low wages, no protection, and no security at all. Therefore, more profit for the richest is sure.
ResponderEliminarHowever, working in such "inhuman" conditions are not enough; in order to continue this "progress", the "rebels" or "traitors", as the reading describes,have to be silenced as depicted in the movie when Alfonso Diaz is murder because he was the one telling the truth, and when Lauren Adrian's story did not go public by the "hegemonic groups".
Also, the author of the chapter stays that "critical thinking" of the US people is "less predominant" because, as long as the underbelly of NAFTA stays quiet, they are not the victims. This statement is clearly portrayed by Lauren Adrain because she did not care about the murders of Juares at the beginnig; Mexican people is not of her concerning. In fact, she only goes to Juares because her boss promised her a higher job position when she is done with the murders' story. However, as she puts on the shoes of the victims of NAFTA, she becomes aware and critical.
1 The idea of nation as a myth created by the hegemony to "UNIFY" people...to make use of them as a productive work force is portraited in the scenes of the maquila workers, where women are merely used as a tool for their benefit. They are not recognized by their names or personal characteristics -as individuals- , but as a whole group as a "work station" as it they were called by the off-voice speakers "line 3 is behind the manufacturing goal...."
ResponderEliminar2. Forgetting as a useful tool of manipulation and control... Lauren's background was buried very deep, even for herself, before being assigned with the Juarez' news. She unconciously forgot who she was and where she came from; she felt no relation to the problem in Mexico because she wasn't a mexican women any more. The unconcious way in which Lauren forgot her past resembles the way in which many people forget their root to the point in which they are no longer recognice their past; then, the governments can take advantage and implant "new" ideas to fit thier poupose.
3. In "Bordertown" the idea of social groups that reject compromising the country's interest to the transnational companies is portraited by Diaz and the paper "El Sol de Juarez" who were constantly rejected by the authorities and, as the author says "portrayed by the government as reactionaries opposed to progress", "traitors"... who have to "surrender to the govenment desires or be discarded from the social sphere." (or in this case, were silenced with a bullet)
*Any*
I agree with Josue when he discusses the difficulty or inability of individuals to express disapproval of those in power. In the movie, both Alfonzo Diaz and Lauren Adrian risk great personal danger while attempting to research and publish information about the murders that the Mexican government, police, and eventually powerful American NAFTA supporters are desperate to keep quiet. Because Alfonso and Lauren have little control of the press as individuals and have basically nothing to use as leverage against those in power, they are at a great disadvantage to speak out against the policies of those in power.
ResponderEliminarEste comentario ha sido eliminado por el autor.
ResponderEliminarPaola's comment on the SOA/WHINSEC graduates including some of the worst abusers in Latin American …” made me think on the POSSIBLE relation with the character of el "diablo", who was such a powerful individual that was above the law; The book explains that graduates from this "school" were responsible for the rapes and murders of many in Central America and the school itself is a "synonymous with torture and impunity". Even more worrying is the fact that most of the graduates from this school have powerful positions in our governments; for instance, as the book states: "the heads of the Costa Rican police"....
ResponderEliminarI think that Lauren clearly represents the idea of patriotism because when she found out that Mexican women were been killed, she remembered her childhood and her roots and how one of those dead women could have been her. Consequently, she took over the investigation to discover who the murderer was. In other words, she took it personal. I guess what she wanted was to give to all of these women the same opportunity that she had. This sense of equality was the reason why Lauren stayed in Mexico. I really think that she wanted to resolve this problem, but at the same time her internal struggle. What surprised me the most was that she felt identified with the Juarez ‘society because at the end of the movie not only did she stay there but also she kept this “Latina look”, black hair and jeans I mean… She looked awful by the way…
ResponderEliminarAs Benedict Anderson said the concept of a free nation is just an imaginary idea that people have in their minds since the intervention of powerful countries and the silence of the media are making people lose their voice in society. These governments are oppressing not only the society, but also the free right of communication that everybody is supposed to have. The movie presents these actions in which people are oppressed by a powerful society that controls their lives and makes them estrangers in their own country. This oppression that is imposed in this kind of society reflects the “standards of submission” that make the individuals of one country foreigners and in some cases exiles in their own land. Therefore, as Benedict Anderson said these powerful governments are “hegemonies to unify people in a feeling of communication and to make use of them as productive work forces or defensive military units under control.” The movie portrays how this control is made in peoples’ life in terms of labor and abuse.
ResponderEliminarI agree with Angie’s point of view since I also think that certain powerful groups manipulate and control other countries making them lose their voice and their opinion. Moreover, when someone tries to change that reality his or her voice is not taken into account since many powerful governments do not consider these poor people real individuals in the society that they are conquering economically.
ResponderEliminarTo claim that the United States’ tactics are free of error, or that the USA never operates in its own best interest, would be naïve and ignorant. It is undeniable that although the United States has accomplished good throughout the world, damage has also been done. However, I disagree with Vanessa’s opinion “That the damage [of ‘U.S.A. interference’] is similar to Hitler's desire of dominating the world.” Hitler’s regime served the interests of a self-proclaimed “perfect race,” and considered many people to be less than human because of their respective ethnicities, religious affiliations, decisions regarding personal lives, and political beliefs. The United States intervenes internationally for the sake of justice, freedom and democracy for all people. They advocate the belief that all are created equal and are entitled to certain inalienable rights. When those rights are not afforded or are threatened, the U.S. responds. Also, Hitler’s regime had an imperial desire to conquest land for Germany. The United States, on the other hand, asks “just enough land to bury their fallen comrades,” as mentioned on page sixty. Marginalizing workers in order to keep prices low and profits high, as seen in "Bordertown," is an undeniably immoral business practice. However, I do not believe that is a reflection of the United States as a whole. Rather, it is a reflection of each business that participates in this exploitation. Perhaps a more active way of dissenting this commercial travesty is to refuse to fund it. Capitalism emphasizes competition between businesses, thus creating an advantage for morally conscientious consumers. We have the option of “taking our business elsewhere,” or if there is no “elsewhere,” we can start a business that stresses a higher moral standard. Regarding Alberto’s statement, “capitalism equal[s] exploitation,” there are many thriving, capitalist businesses that do not exploit their workers and take measures to do away with commercial oppression (http://www.business-humanrights.org/Categories/Individualcompanies). While it is true that exploitation is very much a reality of capitalism (as it is in communism and socialism), it is unreasonable to equate the two things.
ResponderEliminarThe artificially hegemonic imaginary of the situation in Juarez, as well as its system of social ranks, are social conditionings that emprison those born to that system. An example of that is the condition of Eva, who was reluctant to seek help from authorities both because she was a woman, and because she is Native. In her case, she is trapped by two conditions she had no choice on, and the authoritie's dismissal of the wave of femicides occurring makes it impossible for her to denounce a crime she knows will not be resolved.
ResponderEliminarThe state depicted in the film uses tools to manipulate the collective conscience of its citizens in order to create an false imaginary of "equality." In the film, women do not have neither the same rights as men (since they are depicted as powerless and unable to stand up for themselves) nor are they protected the same way under the law, since the police would not assist them. Mexico as a country would not openly declare women as second class citizens, but they clearly are within the context of the movie.
This disparity of rights serves as a segue to reveal the censorship towards dissident voices that would point pout to it. Such is the case of reporter Alfonso Diaz, who is killed because of his pursuit for truth in spite of the censorship from the authorities. By attempting to denounce a situation that would clearly upset the "national order" of things, he unwittingly exposes himself to be silenced by the governmental machine.
I have to respectfully disagree with Kelly's assumption that "The United States intervenes internationally for the sake of justice, freedom and democracy for all people." Even if that is surely one of the excuses given for the U.S.'s military commitment to international power grabs (Irak, anybody?) the premise itself is flawed.
ResponderEliminarA clear example of that is the U.S.'s relations with Cuba and China. Clearly, Cuba's minute, and, for many years, almost entirely self-sufficient economy is of barely any consequence for the United States gov't. So they embargo Cuba and maintain a policy of non-diplomacy towards it, because they can. On the other hand; communist, authoritarian, despotic China is the greatest trade partner for the U.S., and its purchase American treasury securities has made it such an important partner that, if China were to cease its purchase of bonds, there is fear the entire U.S. economy would collapse. As a matter of fact, when U.S. Secy. of State Clinton visited China earlier this year, she urged the Chinese government to keep purchasing U.S. treasuries to, in her words, help jump-start the lagging U.S. economy. Unfortunately, China, having the U.S. by the balls, can get away with trampling on any resemblance of justice or democracy without as much as a faint whimper from the U.S.'s diplomatic apparatus (there's an American embassy in Beijing, for Christ's sake!).
So the U.S. government pals up with some, and snobs others, but it's not because it wants the world to be a better place, but because it wants the world to be a better place FOR ITSELF. And it's not that there's anything wrong with that, the Costa Rican Gov't ceased to recognize Taiwan as an independent nation to get under China's blessing because China is clearly wealthier and more powerful than Taiwan. And to hell with all that peace and freedom talk. It's precisely what lies beneath the discourses what we should all question.
Este comentario ha sido eliminado por el autor.
ResponderEliminarThe notion of Nation as Myth is supported in the movie through the characters who claim to be part of the Mexican law enforcement. I assume that most countries, if not all, have their share of “dirty cops” but I am saddened, angered and appalled when I’m reminded that one of the most profound fears of rape victims is the police force. The police, as individuals but especially as a whole, should do everything in their power to make civilians feel protected. Not only should citizens feel safe, but it should be backed up with protective measures. In the “fraternity” that nationalism claims, oppression from the very people whose purpose is protection reveals one of Mexico’s worst kept secrets.
ResponderEliminarAnother example of Nation as Myth in “Bordertown” is the censoring of media. The assassination of Diaz ultimately occurred as a result of his insistence upon publishing the truth. The Freedom of the Press is something that I value greatly and that scene spoke volumes to me because my dad works for “The Plain Dealer,” a newspaper in Ohio. Like Alfonso Diaz, my dad is sincerely hated by many people. There have been days where my mom has told me, “Pray for Dad’s safety. There are people protesting outside his office.” Each week, my father’s column is published and his readers encounter an unapologetically conservative viewpoint on the topic of his choosing, usually current events (especially politics). My dad, though despised by all kinds of people, from students to little old ladies to politicians, is allowed to write whatever he wants. No one can stop him from publishing his opinions and I'm very proud of him for doing so. The Freedom of the Press puts food on our table and a roof over our heads. It is reprehensible that writers in Mexican media have to fight in order to print. Censorship is manipulative and undermines individuals’ search for truth. Through silencing opposing opinions, the hegemonies are able to deceive members of the nation. It hypocritically negates their claim that they have everyone’s best interest in mind because if that were the case, censorship would not be considered “necessary.” If a nation is truly “A deep, horizontal comradeship” (51) it would support, not detain, its members’ pursuit of truth.
Finally, the cover-ups that the Mexican government officials used to deflect attention from the killings in Juarez exemplify the statement, “Forgetting is a useful tool of manipulation and control employed by states to erase from and implant in the collective memory certain episodes” (55). By downplaying the killings and disabling further investigations, the officials hoped to keep the matter “out of sight and out of mind.” As long as the victims remained silent, justice could be easily neglected. This supports the theory of Nation as Myth because if it is necessary to manipulate people in order to gain their support, it is not a fraternity. It is a hoax.
The explanation developed after Renan’s quote (“Members of nations forget [or are driven to forget] about bloody past events, repressions and oppressions they or their ancessors might have had to experience, and, especially, the ‘differences’ between them, so that they will act in certain politically specific ways”) is clearly manifested in Lauren’s initial behavior. At the beginning of the movie, she seemed to be convinced that she was a white, blonde, American and that because of her looks she wouldn’t be able to earn the Mexican girl’s and her mother’s trust. Even more, since she was assigned to cover that situation in Juárez, she seemed very defensive and claimed not to have anything to do with that place. Of course, the climax of the situation was finding out how she wanted no only to suppress her Mexican looks but also her Mexican past. Lauren’s indifference towards the situation of the women being killed in Mexico proves one of the possible ways people are driven to act to truly belong to a nation in power. This situation, in fact, can be related to the whole paragraph (54-55) because it is excellently fit to Milan Kundera’s quote “The struggle of man against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting.”
ResponderEliminarAt the same time, Lauren and Alfonso, though driven by different beliefs and aspirations, also represent the dissidents that have to be (and are, for a while) silenced, fought, and mocked by the ruling government as depicted on page 56. They might not have been considered “lazy” but they were certainly considered traitors and a threat to the government and the elite of the area.
Finally, the somewhat final manifestation of U.S. government in the movie is also the one depicted on the second paragraph on page 58: an image in which the U.S. equals capitalism and capitalism involves the rich (literarily and metaphorically) walking over the poor who make their wealth possible. Near the end of the movie, Lauren makes sure to point that out very explicitly when she got upset in the newspaper offices.
Gloria.
ResponderEliminarI support Allan’s counterargument about how the US government wants a better place for itself. Kelly pointed out early that “The United States intervenes internationally for the sake of justice, freedom and democracy for all people.” I honestly believe that countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan disagree with Kelly’s point. However, it is true that the United States has intervened in other conflicts where nobody wants to help, for example Somalia, but I think that it is an overgeneralization to say that in every matter that the US government intervenes is because it is for the sake of justice, freedom and democracy. I have to say that I admire Kelly’s patriotism because in our country it is a strange thing to even talk about.
ResponderEliminarI'd just like to share these two videos about the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation (former School of the Americas):
ResponderEliminarhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oitgQ8iBchI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XKDvuUekh0
According to the book, the standards of the myth of the nation are adopted from the United States: productivity, morality, submission, and behaviour and these standards are supported by Latin American elites. The "Free Trade Agreement" was introduced in all Latin America with the help of the dominant and financial superior families. In the movie the Salamanca family was representing these rich families which have immense influence in the local governments.
ResponderEliminarPeople who are believed that do not fit into myth of nation are those who have different languages and customs. The “others” within the nation have to adapt to the new customs even if they have been there since the beginning, and their lands are taken away as in the case of Eva and her family. They had to leave their lands and be “productive” in the sense of capitalism, working in factories learning English and Spanish to fit in their own country. On the other hand, the owner of the factory said to Lauren that he was Mexican and “American” and said that “everyone wants to be American”. Lauren had her blond hair and said “who cares about Mexicans anyway?” she was already part of the hegemonic group leaving behind her Latin American origins.
In the book the author links military violence with capitalism and describes the situations in Latin America where mass killings were covered by local governments without punishing the killers. In the movie, it is clear that the information about how many women were killed is bias in order to protect the company’s responsibility and participation on the killings. Lauren found a mass grave, and they were thousands of bodies added to those other thousands of women that were not reported.
Kelly said that "The United States intervenes internationally for the sake of justice, freedom and democracy for all people. They advocate the belief that all are created equal and are entitled to certain inalienable rights. When those rights are not afforded or are threatened, the U.S. responds. Also, Hitler’s regime had an imperial desire to conquest land for Germany. The United States, on the other hand, asks “just enough land to bury their fallen comrades,” as mentioned on page sixty."
ResponderEliminarI disagree with this statement because what it is understandable by the U.S. Government as freedom and democracy can be very different in other countries. “Freedom and Democracy” are very exploited terms in order to excuse MILITARY INTERVENTIONS that do NOT DO ANY GOOD especially to the “lower class” people. That equality that U.S. government protects in other countries (when it is threatened) is a way of trans-cultural intervention to make them function as their own country. And maybe other countries can function differently; maybe democracy doesn’t even exist and functions as we believe in other countries (or in our own). If other different cultures in the world are starting to have similarities with U.S. culture due to interventions; isn’t it that a way of imperial desire to conquest lands?
“All political Systems are base on the power of certain groups (50).” I also would see it the other way around “All political Systems are base on the power OVER certain groups.” In the case of the movie the power is leaded by economic interest. This is the power OVER the workers who do not have even the choice to verbally defend themselves. Female worker who are under the power of multinationals that care only about the benefit they get from them.
ResponderEliminar“The reject groups and individual become the other (51).” In the movie, the other is perceived through the silent female voices (that of the women who are been mistreated, raped, and killed). The male voice controls, creates, and dominates. The female voice is perceived as a menace for the “authorities” for it may disturb the national order, the economic trades, and the social male hierarchy for they were “only women”. When the female voice tries to make others listen to her, it was a fail attempt; the journalist has to struggle for having the story printed.
“The state […] manipulates the images of its mass media … (54).” The massive female massacre that was (is?) taking place is reported only partially. The number of women is reported only partially for the protection of people involved; that is, the people who were committing the murders. The state did nothing against it because it (the state) has economic interests to defend.
Then , the manipulative power the state has over the media that the reading comments on is clearly vie in the way the number of murders and the information provided are being reported. People´s nemes and details of the female massacre are hidden with the purpose of "protect" people and money involved.
Finally, Rosita´s comment on the economic interests that manipulate society and make citizens be traded less than humans is really wise. Workers are asked to work mor and to improve the quality of their job but the conditions their are exposed to are not the more appropiate ones. Money is directed to the budget of business people and people are treated like a machines (however even a machine nededs to have certain conditions to provide a good service).
I agree with Kelly… “To claim that the United States’ tactics are free of error, or that the USA never operates in its own best interest, would be naïve and ignorant” ALL RIGHT! In regards to the claim that “The United States intervenes internationally for the sake of justice, freedom and democracy for all people” … I have to say…thank god for the U.S.!!! Because, who the fuck cares about autonomy? Besides, they are naturally protecting the rest of the world from the “nuculear” weapons our enemies certainly hide (ask Lil Bush if you don’t believe me!). “They advocate the belief that all are created equal and are entitled to certain inalienable rights”… only life is unaffordable for some of them,…who happen to live in 3rd world countries with oil…god’s bad, I guess! Don’t worry… the US army is above the 10 commandments… it’s true, I read it on the last memo FROM GOD!! Seriously! But!!! “When those rights are not afforded or are threatened, the U.S. responds”…because its place is extended as far as their explosives reach. Some people have dared to compare the US with Hitler’s regime, but “Hitler’s regime had an imperial desire to conquest land for Germany”…and I ask those people: why in hell would the US want to conquer lands for Germany? The US wants lands for the US! I know…it’s only obvious…!
ResponderEliminarI could go on, and on…AND ON… but at this point it’s only important for me to make public my gratitude to whatever higher power there is in this universe or beyond… for making of the US such a philanthropic nation… a nation that would never even consider brainwashing its people.
Rainbows, unicorns, and love,
Gloria!
Maes, I encourage you to use your real names, so that we don't have to go finding out who "PseudoMami69" or "DracuMachine" really are. Please!
ResponderEliminarThe three main points that I found in the reading were: “the state promotes the artificial union of “its” citizens by means of a series of images, symbols, and ideologies with the intention of controlling and utilizing them”, “we have been programmed to believe that the nation is even worth dying for,” and “the state is able to manipulate different people, from different contexts within the national context, under the terms of nationalism and patriotism; it is able to create an imaginary “equality” of rights and duties for all the members of the nation”. I think that these points were vital to understanding the movie. Although there are many specific scenes that demonstrate these theories, the movie in general is a big representation of it. In particular, the two indigenous womyn move to Juarez because the government tells them to, and they trust what their government tells them to do. There is not second thought, or even a question about alternatives. The theories come into play when the government has these womyn move there when they very well know the on going problem with womyn being raped and murdered. Although moving these womyn into harms way is of no consequence to them, strictly based upon the fact that it is in the best interest of the men (although an assumption, mostly this is a male dominated sector) who work for the government. They are the people that are profiting from this, and are treating these womyn as disposable products. If there was really a grave concern there would have been more of an effort on the part of the police, and there would have been more international coverage, which clearly there was a lack of both.
ResponderEliminarI do not want to put anyone on blast, but I would have to agree that the United States makes moves on account of their own agenda, and for their own social benefit. Although there are great individuals that are or have come from the United States, I think that this is more so because they are individuals, or small groups of peoples. There have been many great things to come from the States, but at the same time the States has been responsible for many brutal attacks, and the slaughtering of a peoples. Many parts of the history of my land disgust me. The lack of social justice intervention is unacceptable and the domination of other peoples is not something that I am at all in accordance with.
marykate