Marshall Fox

I am a bad man. At least in the circles that I run in, I am a bad man: I tend to think that Vicente Fox (despite his shortcomings) is a fairly astute fellow. Some times I even agree with him.

"This is brand U.S.A.: the goodness of America. And the day America no longer stands for this goodness - the day the United States turns out the torch on the Statue of Liberty and replaces it with the searchlight of the guard tower, the day that the visionary America of the Marshall Plan becomes the Fortress America of the Minutement- on that day America will cease to be the good and witll no longer be the great." Revolution of Hope, 352.

What do I mean by a Marshall Plan for Mexico (and I'm sure I depart from VF on some points):

1) Regulated (for the safety of the workers) but free flow of labor between Mexico and the United States. What more could the U.S. do for Mexico than to make sure that immigrants could make AT LEAST minimum wage and have the opportunity to keep their families together in Mexico because they would have the freedom to come and go at will. Happy families. More money remitted. Good times all around.

2) Microfinance banks. Mexicans are some of the best capitalists in the world. Microfinance has worked well in Mexico (consider Pro Mujer or even the controversial Compartamos). A pool of money made available to NGOs for microfinance in Mexico kicks to the curb the notion that a Marshall Plan has to be about foreign control.

3) Infrastructure. Highways for the transportation of goods. The revitalization of rail. Water distribution and water quality projects in general. In terms of environmentally sound infrastructure projects, the possibility of jobs in Mexico is infinite. A little funding from the U.S. without the "hands on" approach of the IMF/World Bank crew would be an incredible boost to commerce in Mexico. I think some of these projects can be carried out in areas not sensitive to the indigenous and not in general promotion of Mexico's already massive D.F.

4) PEMEX restructuring. I still think you can have a prosperous, state-owned PEMEX. That's not possible right now with the company losing over a billion $US a year in inefficiency and corruption. Is there something Europe or the U.S. could offer in terms of helping to restructure PEMEX? Is there a French of Scandinavian model that Mexico could work with? What about a successful Mexican model? Venezuela?

A Kinetic Nobel Peace Prize vs. A Potential Nobel Peace Prize

How the president could turn a “potential” Nobel into a “kinetic” Nobel by engaging in a reform of Latin American policy.

1) Drop the embargo with Cuba. Numero uno. Top of the heap. If you want to inspire the world, El Presidente, drop this sham right now and strike a blow for international cooperation and sovereignty.

2) Drop the drug war in South America. Propping up the military in Colombia is a benefit to nobody. A massive resource draw on the United States and a human rights nightmare in el sur, just wake us up from this nightmare.

3) Commit to a dual reformation plan: Treat narcotics as a health issue in the United States and promote true free trade for Latin American agricultural products entering the United States.

4) A Marshall Plan for Mexico or Brazil. Mexico and Brazil are on the edge of entering into the next tier of development (particularly Brazil) and reasoned and well developed Marshall Plan for those nations could serve as an engine for the region. Not some interventionist Kennedy-style plan, but a real plan that allows for different paths toward development. For Mexico this may mean the real free flow of goods, services, capital, and … labor.

5) Take a real stand for indigenous rights. Refuse to do business with Latin American nations that refuse to treat indigenous populations with equality and dignity. This would have to include U.S. sponsored projects from the IMF/World Bank that have, at times, been incredibly detrimental to the indigenous.

And Also With You, Legislature.

The Archdiocese of Mexico under Cardinal Norberto Rivera Carrera rebuked the legislature this last week, attacking what he sees as a real lack of accountability on the part of the legislature.

"...el Congreso es una de las instituciones menos sujeta al control de los ciudadanos y con menos rendición de cuentas sobre sus trabajos y responsabilidades, de tal forma que pueden realizar o no su tarea sin que sea posible un reclamo efectivo."

It is also one of the institutions "menos sujeta al control" of the PAN - and I have to wonder if that isn't what has El Cardinal in a "mood." I don't recall hearing this sort of talk when Fox had to deal with an unruly legislature - and no surprise that Fox was not a favorite of the Church PANistas and FCH is.

On the other hand, I like this "accountable to the people" talk coming out of Cardinal Rivera: keep it up for all legislatures - and their accompanying presidents.

Seeking Familia

MWNP* seeks tracts and pamphlets by La Familia for his collection of religious tracts. Where can I get me some? Will be in Cuernavaca this summer.


*Married White Nerdy Professor

Guns, Guns, Guns (sung to the Motley Crue tune)

This from the Houston Chronicle about guns from Texas:

Agents inspected gun dealer records and knocked on doors to ask people what happened to guns they purchased that ended up in Mexico. Among the cases that have yet to be resolved are those involving a small-town Texas policeman who bought a few military-style rifles, left them in his car and — on the same night — forgot to lock a door. He couldn't explain why he had not filed a police report or why he visited Mexico the next day.

Sigh. And I have students that freak out about going to Mexico because they think all the cops are dirty... .

Mexico: Fiery Social Explosion?

Sez Todd Miller at NACLA:

"They say that we're due for another revolt in 2010," Javier says. His eyes slightly spark when he says this. It's the kind of spark that says that something has to give, something has to change, there are too many people like him with not much more to lose.

https://nacla.org/node/6141 to read the whole thing.

1) If everybody has been reading drug violence incorrectly, and what we have seen is a series of local revolts then I might buy it. After all, isn't the big emphasis on 19th C social banditry in Mexico designed to explain a precursor to the 1910 Revolution? But I'm not buying that drug violence in Chihuahua is the same as something like a Tomochic ... but then again, my wife does tell me I am wrong about most things. And not all of the violence Miller refers to in the last 20 years is even remotely connected to narcotics.

2) When I hear these reports by U.S. scholars about a possible Revolution, I often wonder if they aren't getting a kick out of the idea. They've spent a lot of time Romancing the Revolution and maybe (just maybe) there's a little tickle in the back of their mind that looks forward to the carnage of a new revolution.

3) Who would lead this thing? Clearly there are groups in the Huasteca and the Tierra Caliente that have operations already in place, but for the most part, who would lead any revolutionary factions? Angry AMLOistas? I'm just not sure who the clear regional leaders are that would stir up a 2010 scuffle.

4) Who would benefit? Clearly there are social factors at play that Scott or Wolf would identify, and I guess I'll have to start looking at what some of the folks in poli sci (sigh...charts and graphs) are up to. But in the end, I'm hard pressed to see what large result would come of a Revolution. While you could turn back the PAN tide, I'm unclear as to what massive changes can happen in Mexico at this point with limited resources - no matter who is in charge. $$$ is global now, and it isn't like a revolution would place all the wealth and resources of Carlos Slim in the hands of the urban poor. More likely, if things continue as they do, I think we can count on urban riots - and we have a long pattern of urban riots in Mexican cities.

Hate Crimes, Indigenous Style?

Prairie Mary, whom I used to read with far more frequency before the baby was born, has posted an interesting note about a bar fight just off the Blackfoot reservation in Cut Bank, MT. Sez Mary:

The narrative: Three brothers, not Indians but possibly with some Mexican blood, liked to fight and had been drinking all evening. At closing time, 2AM, they chose as their victim a hired hand, a Native American single guy who was mild-mannered and well-liked, but not very good at self-control or social smarts, esp. once he was drunk. They picked a fight with him and all three began to beat on him. When he went to the ground, they began to kick.

A Native American county commissioner came out with his wife, saw what was happening and decided to intervene. At first he just remonstrated, saying he was going to call the police. (He had a cell phone.) So the brothers began to beat him and took him down. His wife tried to help but she, too, was shoved and sent flying. By that time enough people were there that the brothers thought they should get scarce.

But the county commissioner, a handsome and resourceful man from a strong rez family chose to make an issue out of it. He tried to press charges, saying it was a “hate crime” because the men were shouting phrases like “dirty Indian.” The white county attorney refused, saying that it was NOT a hate crime, just a fight as usual.

Read the whole post.... (A great discussion of race and class.)

Indigenous folks in the United States and citizens of Mexico (and the empire before it) have had close ties for generations. Nevertheless, I don't think most Anglos think about those ties - at least not since we quit making Westerns - and perhaps many U.S. Americans of Mexican descent don't either. Last semester one girl gasped when I said that we were going to talk about the right of those of indigenous descent in the United States, but that we were not yet going to focus on people who self identified as being descended from one of the Latin American nations. She raised her hand and said that she had never thought of herself and U.S. Native Americans having anything in common.

Anywho, a couple things struck me about this post from the talented Prairie Mary:

1) The county decision not to call it a hate crime. In Latin America if you have a few mestizo guys whooping up on a guy shouting "Indio sucio," I don't think anybody would think twice about calling it a racially motivated crime. Of course in Guerrero or Oaxaca you might just call it the police.

2) The fall back position that this was just a standard bar fight for the area. You know, all those hot-blooded folks like fightin' anyway. (***Please note that last sentence was written dipped in irony and dripping with exasperation***)

The Great Falls Tribune had an article on the incident, but what I liked most about that post was the comment of one of the readers. To find an "impartial" jury they moved the trial to the extreme NW corner of the state - the Lilliest portion of the state bristling with militia members, drugged up vets, and white supremacists (at least it was 15 years ago). Violence in Latin America, indeed.