World Society and Culture in Mexico

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Between the Cultures
This New World, Conquest, and Colony
Cultural Hybridity
Independence
The Mexican Mind
Revolution and Continuing Problems
Mexican Ways and Two Mexicos
Political Rollercoaster
Pre-Postmodern Mexico and the Future
Works Cited

Between the Cultures

Understanding another culture, takes a lot of effort and a lot of knowledge in different spheres. A person who tries to understand the culture that he or she does not belong to must be ready that his ideas of life will be confronted by what he or she will see in that culture’s customs and traditions. But the most important thing for a person studying a foreign culture is the history of its development, i. e. history of the nation because it helps to understand modern processes in the culture and society.

Concerning Mexico, these points are true as well. I mean that to understand Mexico and Mexicans, it is not enough to examine their modern life. Merrel and Riding single out history as the key to the understanding of the Mexican mentality. These authors state that Mexicans are such a nation that has no resemblance either to Europeans or to other Latin Americans due to their history.

They combine in themselves the features of indigenous Mexicans, Spanish conquerors and the result is the nation called “mestizo” which is the mixture of different types of blood and characters (Insight, 2007). Thus, even Mexicans themselves do not have an exact definition of their own nation. They are mestizos but many of them neglect it saying that they are a complete nation, while there being a mixture of other nations is offensive for their concepts of honor, masculinity, and “machismo” (Riding, 1984).

What is intriguing about Mexican culture is the attitude towards time, as Mexicans do not see birth and death as limits of life. But their fatalist view of life is confusing, as they do not like to plan things thinking that that will happen what is destined. Thus, we should study this culture as it is special, and presents great interest due to its originality and richness.

This New World, Conquest, and Colony

The history of the territory later called Mexico is rich and roots deep into the centuries when the so-called Pre-Hispanic Civilizations existed. That epoch is divided into Pre-Classical (2500 B. C. – 300 A. D.), Classical (300 – 900 A. D.), and Post-Classical Periods (900 – 1521 A. D.) During these periods the Pre-Hispanic civilizations of Inca, Maya, Aztec, and others developed. These were huge Empires and flourished until the Spanish Conquistadores headed by Hernan Cortez came to explore their lands at the beginning of the 16th century (Insight, 2007).

The arrival of strangers was met differently by Aztecs. Some of them were hostile to the Spaniards, others sought their friendship. Other people saw the omen of the Aztec God returning in the coming of the conquerors, because when they arrived different evil signs like comets in the sky, floods and fires, stressed the Aztec Empire. Aztecs considered Spaniards to be the bringers of the legend they believed in and that had to come true one day (Merrel, 2003).

Spaniards, in their turn, came looking for riches but at first, they were cautious as their number was too little. But after the Aztec King Moctezuma had sent rich gifts to the Spaniards they saw that they can become rich if they conquer the land of Aztecs. Cortez was a rather enterprising person and decided not to lose such a chance. He signed an agreement with the tribe of Totonacs who were suppressed by Aztecs and started the conquest of the Aztec Empire. Their first steps were converting Indians into Christianity. Then, military raids against Aztecs towns and cities, especially the Capital city of Tenochtitlan, were started. Some Aztecs preferred the Spanish way of life to be exterminated and took up marriages with Spaniards thus giving birth to the first mestizos in Mexico (Leon-Portillo, 1992).

Cultural Hybridity

Defining race and ethnicity in Mexico is a rather difficult matter because of a number of reasons, some of which have been listed above. All scientists agree that in Mexico it is so difficult to define people belonging to the Indigenous population and “mestizos” on the basis of race that it is preferable to define them based upon their cultural traditions and identity they have (Merrel, 2003).

Cultural Hybridity is an important phenomenon present in modern Mexico. Cultural Hybridity is a process of the interrelation of two or more cultures that appears during the conquest of one nation by another one. It emphasizes that the conquered culture is not destroyed, both cultures, conquered and conquering, develop together and influence each other. In Mexico, such cultures are Indigenous Aztec culture and Hispanic culture that conquered the original one. But neither of the cultures destroyed another, even vice versa, they both enriched each other and formed what is now called Mexican culture (Insight, 2007).

In the past, a lot of people were ashamed of their racial heritage, especially if they had some indigenous roots, as Spanish culture was very popular. But nowadays things are changing, people are proud of being a part of the indigenous population of Mexico, and the experiences of Felicia Mercado are one of the best examples proving this point. The modern Mexican population consists of a large number of ethnic and racial groups, but the largest of them are Indigenous people (Indians), descendants of Europeans who settled in Mexico after its Spanish Conquest, and mestizos who are children of mixed marriages between Indians and Europeans. All these groups have their own peculiarities in respect of culture, traditions, and ethnic identity (Merrel, 2003).

Independence

The war of Independence took place in Mexico in 1810 – 1821 and was the war against Spanish rule in the country. The conflict appeared as a struggle of all ethnic groups of Mexico against the so-called peninsulares, who were Spaniards born in Spain. Their main opponents were criollos – Spaniards born in Mexico, whose status was lower due to their birth-place. After the war, the power in the country was taken by caudillos who were the military leaders of Mexico. This kind of ruling was typical also for other Latin American countries. This kind of ruling was viewed as the most effective due to its military nature and concentration of power in the hands of a single person important in a period of instability (Oster, 1989).

The most important image in the War of Independence was the Virgin of Guadalupe. Her image is considered to be the symbol of Mexico since the time of the war. The Virgin herself appeared to a Mexican monk in the 16th century, he built a church in her honor and since then her image is very important for Mexican.

Among the real leaders of the War of Independence there are such names as Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla, a priest of criollo origin who was the founder of the anti-Spanish movement and the leader of the war; Jose Maria Morelos who was also a priest and took the lead after Hidalgo; Vicente Guerrero who was one of the leaders of the war and then became the 2nd President of Independent Mexico; Agustin de Iturbide who was another leader of the Independence war but then joined the royalists and became the first Emperor of Mexico (1822 – 1823); Antonio Santa Anna who took part in the war and then became president of Mexico. All these people were the heroes of Mexico as they fought for its Independence and won it. They changed the course of Mexican history and helped it to develop as a history of an independent nation (Insight, 2007).

The Mexican Mind

The central place in the Mexican Mind is taken by such fundamental notions as personalismo, machismo, and caudillismo. These notions reflect the way of Mexican thinking. Personalism is the practice in politics when a political party or the whole country is glorifying their leader. This was evident in Mexico in the early years of Independence when Santa Anna and Iturbide ruled Mexico. A kind of more particular reflection of personalism is machismo, which can be defined as the cult of masculinity in Mexico and many other Latin American countries. Caudillismo is the most radical form of personalism which usually appears during revolutions and rebellions (Oster, 1989).

All these notions affected greatly the thinking of Mexicans, especially machismo. From early Mexican history, Mexican men were absorbed by the idea of honor and masculinity. But when Spanish conquerors began to marry their wives, the concept of anger appeared. This concept developed into the idea of full control over women in society. Thus, ideas of gender and sexuality were always forbidden for Mexican women who had to obey men.

But with time and with the development of feminist movements in the whole world, and in Mexico in particular, the state of things started changing. Fighters for equal rights for men and women, for example, Rosa Maria Ortega, the author of “La Feminista”, have achieved considerable progress in their activities. Their work gave great results that allow women to be elected to the political institutions, even become President, as well as have equal rights with men in day-to-day life and feel as rightful citizens of the country and rightful representatives of the Mexican culture (Insight, 2007).

Revolution and Continuing Problems

In 1846 the war between Mexico and the United States of America broke out. The main reasons for the war are two factors – the expansion of the US territory to the west which was proclaimed as the national policy, and the document called Manifest Destiny. The essence of it lied in the idea that the USA had to embrace the territory from the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean.

In 1858 another war, the War of Reform broke out in Mexico. The reasons for the war were the constitutional initiatives of the Liberal Government. The new Constitution was adopted in 1858 and according to it, the Catholic Church was not recognized as the only and leading church in Mexico. The war began in which liberals stood for limiting the power of the church with their government in

Veracruz; conservatives wanted things to stay the same with their Government in Mexico City. As a result of a bloody war, liberals won and Benito Juarez became President.

In 1910 another civil war in Mexico broke out. Its main reason was the caudillismo of President Porfirio Diaz. He was a dictator and wanted to be re-elected for another term. Diaz sent his opponent Madero to jail and proclaimed his victory at the election. Madero’s supporters were unsatisfied with it and started an armed rebellion against the Diaz government (Insight, 2007).

During all this time the relations with the US stayed cold and were on the verge of another armed conflict. At first, the USA pretended for the territory of Mexico, then it opposed the governments that ruled in Mexico after the revolution of 1910. Although instability is typical for all developing countries, caudillismo is a specifically Mexican trait. Namely, these problems were the ones that could not be overcome by Mexican governments (Merrel, 2003).

Mexican Ways and Two Mexicos

In his work, Floyd Merrel uses certain specific notions and definitions that can be applied to Mexico exclusively. The author speaks about ejido, maquiladora, and other notions. The special place in the 10th and 11th chapters of his work is taken by the idea of “aguantar”. Ejido is used to indicate the system of communal property that was in use until Mexico entered the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and was abolished according to the constitutional amendments in 1992. Maquiladora is a result of entering NAFTA. It is the name for a great number of factories created for Mexican workers where the owners are foreigners and they use the cheap labor force and mild tax climate of Mexico.

This notion is connected with the image of poverty and hard, almost slave work which Mexicans have to do because of the policy of neoliberalism and being a member of NAFTA. The special place among these notions is taken by “aguantar” which is translated as “to stand/to bear” in English. This word is widely used to define Mexican policy of last years, built upon patience and standing of interests of other countries (Insight, 2007).

Due to these very notions, scientists can speak about the two Mexicos. They single out the rich industrial north and poor agricultural south of the country. Here, also the idea of Mexico being modern and not modern can be speculated on. Numerous examples show how different are parts of Mexico according to their economic development, as well as the layers of society according to their profit. The brightest example is the city of Cuernavaca which combines the industrial economy with agriculture that exists there since the Spanish Conquest. It, as well as Mexico City, is one of the largest cities in the country, and due to this, the difference between the development of its parts and between the levels of profit of its citizens is one of its typical features (Merrel, 2003).

Political Rollercoaster

The Mexican miracle that is to be discussed in this entry is rather fake than real. The official governmental sources claimed at the end of the 1990s – at the beginning of the 2000s that Mexico’s economy experienced a great rise and the standards of living in the country were constantly growing. This was connected with NAFTA’s influence, but the actual effect of NAFTA was different. The real profit of the main part of the population fell, and the gap between the small pert of rich people and the large rest of poor people increased drastically due to the new policies and effect of NAFTA (Merrel, 2003).

The famous organization that fights with the neoliberal policies of the Government of Mexico, with globalization and activities of NAFTA is called Zapatista National Liberation Army. This group is based in the poorest state of Mexico, Chiapas. It is no wonder that such an organization appeared in Chiapas, as this state has always been described as a rich land of poor people. The agricultural sphere dominates in Chiapas but the Government has always ignored it and developed the northern industrial areas. At the same time, rich deposits of natural minerals are taken out from Chiapas for the well-being of the rest of the country, while the population of Chiapas does not benefit from them.

According to this state of things the EZLN has always tried to draw the attention of the international community to the problem of Chiapas in Mexico. Their activities include peaceful demonstrations, political actions, and even armed conflicts with the governmental forces. The current aims of EZLN are further fighting for Chiapas autonomy, for the development of its agriculture and economy. EZLN claimed last year to call the meeting of all the indigenous people of Mexico but also stated that they will not take part in the coming Presidential Elections (Insight, 2007).

Pre-Postmodern Mexico and the Future

In the modern politics of Mexico, there are several interesting notions that help to develop democracy in this country. The first one no longer exists, as the politicians claim. It is the so-called “dedazo”, i. e. the right of the head of the ruling party (PRI) to choose and appoint the candidate from the party for the next presidential elections. To make Mexican society democratic this phenomenon is proclaimed to not be used anymore as it contradicts the basic democratic principles.

The notions of “politicos” and “technicos” are also very important for modern politics in Mexico. Politicos are the politicians of the old kind, i. e. the people who prefer caudillismo and communist ideals of ruling to the democratic principles of the society. Technics are those progressive politicians of the new kind who support the free market economy and private property but do not support the overall expansion of neoliberalism and NAFTA (Merrel, 2003).

One of the most interesting things in modern Mexican politics is the “pendulum” policy, which means that every next president of the country changes the direction of its politics. If one President supported the conservative methods and state property ownership, then the next one would always try to implement market economy and private property ownership. But these politics gave results, as the policy of Tepoztlan, where people get money for their own use if they have no medical and educational problems. Even the New York mayor Bloomberg visited the city to learn the details of the program for its possible usage in New York.

As for the current state of things, I think that Mexico is on the right way because it has limited its contacts with NAFTA, and has developed a good policy to reach the aim of becoming a highly developed country of the world (Insight, 2007).

Works Cited

“In a Mexican Town Lies a Key to Ending Poverty”. NewYorkTimes, 2007.

Insight Guides. Mexico. APA Publications (Langenscheidt). 2007.

Leon-Portillo, M. The Broken Spears: The Aztec Account of the Conquest of Mexico. Beacon Press; Exp Upd Su edition, 1992.

Merrel, Floyd. The Mexicans: A Sense of Culture. Westview Press. 2003.

Oster, Patrick. The Mexicans: A Personal Portrait of a People. NY: Harper Perennial. 1989. Vivid personal vignettes are used to illustrate the contemporary Mexican social situation. A good introduction to applying the sociological imagination in bridging between biography and society. (Ch 18 -19 pages 247 – 270).

Riding, Alan. Distant Neighbors: A Portrait of the Mexicans. A classic account of Mexican society by a journalist who was immersed in the events described. (pages 1 -21) NY: Knopf. 1984.

Click Here To Order Now!