Friday, September 22, 2006
What's Mexico Hiding?
What's Mexico Hiding?
The Federal Electoral Institute's refusal to allow access to ballots from the contested presidential election taints the country's march toward democracy.
By Irma Sandoval and John M. Ackerman
IRMA SANDOVAL and JOHN M. ACKERMAN are professors at the Institute for Social Research and the Institute for Legal Research, respectively, at the National Autonomous University of Mexico. They advised
September 22, 2006
MEXICO now has two presidents-elect. One officially recognized by the electoral authorities - Felipe Calderon - and the other proclaimed the "legitimate president" by millions of followers - Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador. There is one way to settle this crisis. As in the aftermath of Bush vs. Gore in the 2000 U.S. presidential election, a group of Mexico's newspapers should be allowed to conduct their own canvass of the ballots.
Unfortunately, the Federal Electoral Institute, which organizes the presidential elections, has announced that it will not open up the ballots to public scrutiny. The institute appears bent on repeating the government's performance after the 1988 presidential election, in which the computers "malfunctioned." It is widely believed that massive fraud allowed Carlos Salinas de Gortari, the candidate of the Institutional Revolutionary Party, or PRI, to mysteriously overcome the early lead of the leftist candidate, Cuauhtemoc Cardenas. To cover its tracks, the government then quickly burned the evidence.
Mexico's freedom of information act, enacted in 2002, is one of the best in the world. It gives full priority to transparency, stating that everything should be made public except when disclosure might harm economic stability or national security. But even this "reserved" information must be made available after 12 years have passed.
Mexican law does keep confidential personal information, including names, photographs and sexual orientations of particular individuals. But, of course, secret ballots don't contain any of this material. Although the institute is required by law to destroy the ballots eventually, there is no need to do so immediately. And it would be illegal to carry it out prematurely for the purpose of avoiding the freedom-of-information requests.
To his credit, Calderon has asked the institute to "preserve the ballots for as long as possible" in the interest of ensuring the "certainty" of the electoral results. This is a positive step, but it does not get to the heart of the issue. Preserving the ballots will do no good if no one is allowed to examine them.
Even worse, Calderon's National Action Party voted Tuesday against forming a special congressional commission to keep watch over the ballots, placing doubt on PAN's commitment to transparency. Calderon and his party should explicitly state that the ballots should be opened to public scrutiny and take measures to ensure this takes place.
There is a larger issue. If the Federal Electoral Institute is permitted to hide and prematurely destroy the ballots, this would open the door to widespread flouting of the access-to-information law by other government agencies. The institute has argued that the ballots are not "documents" but only the "material expression of electoral preferences" and therefore not subject to the information law. Such ad hoc re-categorizations for the purpose of avoiding disclosure are punishable by law, and allowing it here would set a dangerous precedent in this fledgling democracy.
Mexico's Federal Institute of Access to Public Information, which has the mandate to promote compliance by all government agencies to the access-to-information law, also has maintained a worrisome silence on this crucial issue. It is high time for a public pronouncement by its commissioners backing up the information law. Such a statement also would help dispel concerns about the personal ties and any conflict of interest between the chief commissioner and Calderon
IN GENERAL, the electoral authorities have needlessly encouraged suspicions about Calderon's victory. The Federal Electoral Tribunal, which certifies the election results, announced that Calderon won. But it failed to disclose details of its partial recount, which showed widespread irregularities in the computation of the votes. And even though it condemned illegal campaign advertisements and the intervention of President Vicente Fox, it failed to assess their overall impact. In an election decided by only 230,000 votes out of 41 million cast, even small discrepancies could have made a big difference.
The Florida ballots from the 2000 U.S. presidential elections were not destroyed. They are available for public viewing and research for generations to come. Recently, Ohio delayed the destruction of its presidential ballots from 2004 to allow further study of irregularities.
Mexicans deserve no less. They have a right to know what actually happened on election day. We are at a crucial moment in Mexico's transition to democracy. After 70 years of electoral fraud under the PRI, Fox's PAN government must ensure absolute integrity in the process through which he passes power to Calderon, his PAN successor. Burning the ballots would set back Mexican democracy 20 years. Full access to the ballots - and then a full recount, if it's deemed warranted - by reputable civil society organizations in the manner of Bush vs. Gore would restore credibility to Mexico's damaged electoral institutions.
Copyright 2006 Los Angeles Times
The Federal Electoral Institute's refusal to allow access to ballots from the contested presidential election taints the country's march toward democracy.
By Irma Sandoval and John M. Ackerman
IRMA SANDOVAL and JOHN M. ACKERMAN are professors at the Institute for Social Research and the Institute for Legal Research, respectively, at the National Autonomous University of Mexico. They advised
September 22, 2006
MEXICO now has two presidents-elect. One officially recognized by the electoral authorities - Felipe Calderon - and the other proclaimed the "legitimate president" by millions of followers - Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador. There is one way to settle this crisis. As in the aftermath of Bush vs. Gore in the 2000 U.S. presidential election, a group of Mexico's newspapers should be allowed to conduct their own canvass of the ballots.
Unfortunately, the Federal Electoral Institute, which organizes the presidential elections, has announced that it will not open up the ballots to public scrutiny. The institute appears bent on repeating the government's performance after the 1988 presidential election, in which the computers "malfunctioned." It is widely believed that massive fraud allowed Carlos Salinas de Gortari, the candidate of the Institutional Revolutionary Party, or PRI, to mysteriously overcome the early lead of the leftist candidate, Cuauhtemoc Cardenas. To cover its tracks, the government then quickly burned the evidence.
Mexico's freedom of information act, enacted in 2002, is one of the best in the world. It gives full priority to transparency, stating that everything should be made public except when disclosure might harm economic stability or national security. But even this "reserved" information must be made available after 12 years have passed.
Mexican law does keep confidential personal information, including names, photographs and sexual orientations of particular individuals. But, of course, secret ballots don't contain any of this material. Although the institute is required by law to destroy the ballots eventually, there is no need to do so immediately. And it would be illegal to carry it out prematurely for the purpose of avoiding the freedom-of-information requests.
To his credit, Calderon has asked the institute to "preserve the ballots for as long as possible" in the interest of ensuring the "certainty" of the electoral results. This is a positive step, but it does not get to the heart of the issue. Preserving the ballots will do no good if no one is allowed to examine them.
Even worse, Calderon's National Action Party voted Tuesday against forming a special congressional commission to keep watch over the ballots, placing doubt on PAN's commitment to transparency. Calderon and his party should explicitly state that the ballots should be opened to public scrutiny and take measures to ensure this takes place.
There is a larger issue. If the Federal Electoral Institute is permitted to hide and prematurely destroy the ballots, this would open the door to widespread flouting of the access-to-information law by other government agencies. The institute has argued that the ballots are not "documents" but only the "material expression of electoral preferences" and therefore not subject to the information law. Such ad hoc re-categorizations for the purpose of avoiding disclosure are punishable by law, and allowing it here would set a dangerous precedent in this fledgling democracy.
Mexico's Federal Institute of Access to Public Information, which has the mandate to promote compliance by all government agencies to the access-to-information law, also has maintained a worrisome silence on this crucial issue. It is high time for a public pronouncement by its commissioners backing up the information law. Such a statement also would help dispel concerns about the personal ties and any conflict of interest between the chief commissioner and Calderon
IN GENERAL, the electoral authorities have needlessly encouraged suspicions about Calderon's victory. The Federal Electoral Tribunal, which certifies the election results, announced that Calderon won. But it failed to disclose details of its partial recount, which showed widespread irregularities in the computation of the votes. And even though it condemned illegal campaign advertisements and the intervention of President Vicente Fox, it failed to assess their overall impact. In an election decided by only 230,000 votes out of 41 million cast, even small discrepancies could have made a big difference.
The Florida ballots from the 2000 U.S. presidential elections were not destroyed. They are available for public viewing and research for generations to come. Recently, Ohio delayed the destruction of its presidential ballots from 2004 to allow further study of irregularities.
Mexicans deserve no less. They have a right to know what actually happened on election day. We are at a crucial moment in Mexico's transition to democracy. After 70 years of electoral fraud under the PRI, Fox's PAN government must ensure absolute integrity in the process through which he passes power to Calderon, his PAN successor. Burning the ballots would set back Mexican democracy 20 years. Full access to the ballots - and then a full recount, if it's deemed warranted - by reputable civil society organizations in the manner of Bush vs. Gore would restore credibility to Mexico's damaged electoral institutions.
Copyright 2006 Los Angeles Times
Immigration Ugliness
Immigration Ugliness
Without objection from the president
Friday, September 22, 2006; A16
THE CYNICAL immigration endgame of the 109th Congress isn't particularly surprising. But after a session in which the Senate actually managed to produce a bipartisan, comprehensive measure to overhaul the existing system, the latest, enforcement-only developments are nonetheless disappointing and dangerous.
The House has passed, and the Senate seems ready to go along with, a measure to require construction of a 700-mile fence along the Mexican border. That would cost at least $2 billion, and that's in addition to a $2.5 billion initiative, entrusted to Boeing Co. this week, to erect "virtual fences" along the northern and southern borders.
A fence would damage relations with Mexico, harm the environment and, especially in the absence of broader changes, be ineffective. Even if a foolproof fence could be placed along every mile of the border, it wouldn't eliminate illegal immigration. Perhaps half of those in the country illegally did not slip secretly across a border but arrived through official entry points, using fraudulent documents or coming in legally and overstaying their visas.
But the fence is, sadly, the least offensive of the measures under consideration. On Wednesday, the House approved an unnecessary and arguably unconstitutional bill to require voters to show photo identification to take part in federal elections beginning in 2008; in 2010, the ID would have to demonstrate proof of citizenship. This would effectively disenfranchise many poor and elderly Americans, who are less likely to have, or be able to obtain, such documentation. It responds to a non-problem. The manifold challenges of election administration do not include large numbers of noncitizens trying to vote. The Senate should not go along.
Yesterday, the House passed another batch of immigration-related measures, the worst of which would deputize state and local law enforcement officers to enforce federal immigration laws. The measure would permit, but not require, state and local police to arrest and detain illegal immigrants for even civil violations of federal immigration law. This would undermine the ability of law enforcement to deter and prosecute violent crime. As New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg told the Senate Judiciary Committee in July, "Do we really want people who could have information about criminals -- including potential terrorists -- to be afraid to go to the police?"
The most disappointing aspect of the debate is the passive posture of President Bush. Mr. Bush could have used his bully pulpit to make clear the importance of comprehensive reform. He could promise to veto the bills on the understanding that enforcement measures, even justifiable ones, will be needed as leverage to obtain the comprehensive program he says he wants. Instead, he's meekly following the worst instincts of his fellow Republicans. "Yes, I'll sign it into law," Mr. Bush told CNN, adding, "If your question is, 'Will I stop trying to push for a comprehensive reform?' The answer is, 'No, I won't stop trying to push for comprehensive reform.' " With pushing like this, who needs opponents?
© 2006 The Washington Post Company
Without objection from the president
Friday, September 22, 2006; A16
THE CYNICAL immigration endgame of the 109th Congress isn't particularly surprising. But after a session in which the Senate actually managed to produce a bipartisan, comprehensive measure to overhaul the existing system, the latest, enforcement-only developments are nonetheless disappointing and dangerous.
The House has passed, and the Senate seems ready to go along with, a measure to require construction of a 700-mile fence along the Mexican border. That would cost at least $2 billion, and that's in addition to a $2.5 billion initiative, entrusted to Boeing Co. this week, to erect "virtual fences" along the northern and southern borders.
A fence would damage relations with Mexico, harm the environment and, especially in the absence of broader changes, be ineffective. Even if a foolproof fence could be placed along every mile of the border, it wouldn't eliminate illegal immigration. Perhaps half of those in the country illegally did not slip secretly across a border but arrived through official entry points, using fraudulent documents or coming in legally and overstaying their visas.
But the fence is, sadly, the least offensive of the measures under consideration. On Wednesday, the House approved an unnecessary and arguably unconstitutional bill to require voters to show photo identification to take part in federal elections beginning in 2008; in 2010, the ID would have to demonstrate proof of citizenship. This would effectively disenfranchise many poor and elderly Americans, who are less likely to have, or be able to obtain, such documentation. It responds to a non-problem. The manifold challenges of election administration do not include large numbers of noncitizens trying to vote. The Senate should not go along.
Yesterday, the House passed another batch of immigration-related measures, the worst of which would deputize state and local law enforcement officers to enforce federal immigration laws. The measure would permit, but not require, state and local police to arrest and detain illegal immigrants for even civil violations of federal immigration law. This would undermine the ability of law enforcement to deter and prosecute violent crime. As New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg told the Senate Judiciary Committee in July, "Do we really want people who could have information about criminals -- including potential terrorists -- to be afraid to go to the police?"
The most disappointing aspect of the debate is the passive posture of President Bush. Mr. Bush could have used his bully pulpit to make clear the importance of comprehensive reform. He could promise to veto the bills on the understanding that enforcement measures, even justifiable ones, will be needed as leverage to obtain the comprehensive program he says he wants. Instead, he's meekly following the worst instincts of his fellow Republicans. "Yes, I'll sign it into law," Mr. Bush told CNN, adding, "If your question is, 'Will I stop trying to push for a comprehensive reform?' The answer is, 'No, I won't stop trying to push for comprehensive reform.' " With pushing like this, who needs opponents?
© 2006 The Washington Post Company
Thursday, September 14, 2006
No Class Monday
We will not have class next Monday Sept. 18.
I have to travel to Mexico and don't think I can make it back on time.
We will continue with class on Wed. Please bring your responses next Wednesday.
I have to travel to Mexico and don't think I can make it back on time.
We will continue with class on Wed. Please bring your responses next Wednesday.
Church leaders speak out against immigration sweeps
Church leaders speak out against immigration sweeps
Arrests, deportations in Santa Cruz area part of national drive
Leaders of four different religious faiths spoke out Wednesday near Santa Cruz on behalf of families of scores of immigration violators deported last week as controversy continued over federal immigration sweeps that have netted thousands of people since May.
The 107 arrests in near Watsonville, Santa Cruz and Hollister last week were part of a new crackdown on illegal immigration by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
In Operation Return to Sender, federal authorities have arrested 24,000 people nationally, 2,000 of them in Northern California, and deported 6,800 people.
The arrests targeted individuals, said Timothy Aitken, deputy director of the agency's detention and removal office in San Francisco. He said the agency doesn't do random sweeps.
About one-third of those arrested nationally -- and one-fifth of those picked up in Northern California last week -- have criminal records. The rest either had ignored deportation orders issued by immigration judges or were "collateral arrests" -- people picked up on immigration charges while agents were seeking specific fugitives.
"We're trying to put integrity back in the immigration process," said Aitken. "You need to comply with the law, or you may find someone knocking at your door and you'll get deported."
Of the people arrested last week, 42 had ignored deportation orders, and the remaining 65 were illegal immigrants the agents happened to encounter. Most were Mexican citizens, but a few came from El Salvador, Guatemala and India. As of Wednesday, 93 had been deported, said Aitken, who leads Northern California's three fugitive operations teams, which are among 45 such teams across the country.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement expects to add seven more teams by the end of the year, according to Lori Haley, an agency spokeswoman. The agency estimates there are more than 590,000 "fugitive aliens" in the country, including 29,000 in Northern California.
The religious leaders who spoke out Wednesday acknowledged that the government has a right to enforce immigration law. But they said enforcement can tear apart families in which some members are illegal and others are U.S. citizens.
"It is clear that we have reached a point where we need legislation that will produce a viable path to citizenship for undocumented persons residing in our nation and one (law) that protects the integrity of families and the safety of children," Roman Catholic Bishop Sylvester Ryan said at a press conference at the Resurrection Catholic Community Church in Aptos.
Stacy Tolchin, a San Francisco immigration attorney representing two children whose parents were deported to Mexico, criticized the operation as much more aggressive than in the past.
"Don't deport them the same day," she said. "Give them access to counsel. You're ripping them away from their families. It's really malicious."
The increase in immigration enforcement inside the United States as well as at the border comes as Congress has stalled on revamping the nation's immigration system.
President Bush has failed to win support from conservatives in his own party for a guest worker program and a path to legal status for many of the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States.
Some observers said the current crackdown is an effort by the Bush administration to prove it is tough on enforcing immigration law.
Michael Cutler, a former immigration agent in New York now associated with the Center for Immigration Studies, a think tank in Florida that supports tighter restrictions on immigration, said a better name for the current effort would be "Operation Backrub."
"The administration has administered warm milk and a backrub to the American people to inspire a false sense of confidence," he said. "The president has an agenda, which appears to be open up the border between the U.S. and Mexico and the U.S. and Canada. ... He's been doing this to be able to sell his package."
Immigration enforcement has generally focused on policing the border, but that alone cannot reduce illegal immigration, said Deborah Meyers, a senior policy analyst at the Migration Policy Institute in Washington, D.C. Boosting enforcement inside the country -- removing criminals and people who have already had their day in court -- is a sensible next step, she said. But it too is limited.
"You can deport the people, but if employers are still hiring illegal workers, you're not going to solve the problem," she said. "They're tackling the symptom of the problem, which is that people are here. But are they tackling the employment magnet? Are they tackling the fact that there's no way for these workers to come legally? It's not clear."
E-mail Tyche Hendricks at thendricks@sfchronicle.com.
Page A - 8
Arrests, deportations in Santa Cruz area part of national drive
Leaders of four different religious faiths spoke out Wednesday near Santa Cruz on behalf of families of scores of immigration violators deported last week as controversy continued over federal immigration sweeps that have netted thousands of people since May.
The 107 arrests in near Watsonville, Santa Cruz and Hollister last week were part of a new crackdown on illegal immigration by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
In Operation Return to Sender, federal authorities have arrested 24,000 people nationally, 2,000 of them in Northern California, and deported 6,800 people.
The arrests targeted individuals, said Timothy Aitken, deputy director of the agency's detention and removal office in San Francisco. He said the agency doesn't do random sweeps.
About one-third of those arrested nationally -- and one-fifth of those picked up in Northern California last week -- have criminal records. The rest either had ignored deportation orders issued by immigration judges or were "collateral arrests" -- people picked up on immigration charges while agents were seeking specific fugitives.
"We're trying to put integrity back in the immigration process," said Aitken. "You need to comply with the law, or you may find someone knocking at your door and you'll get deported."
Of the people arrested last week, 42 had ignored deportation orders, and the remaining 65 were illegal immigrants the agents happened to encounter. Most were Mexican citizens, but a few came from El Salvador, Guatemala and India. As of Wednesday, 93 had been deported, said Aitken, who leads Northern California's three fugitive operations teams, which are among 45 such teams across the country.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement expects to add seven more teams by the end of the year, according to Lori Haley, an agency spokeswoman. The agency estimates there are more than 590,000 "fugitive aliens" in the country, including 29,000 in Northern California.
The religious leaders who spoke out Wednesday acknowledged that the government has a right to enforce immigration law. But they said enforcement can tear apart families in which some members are illegal and others are U.S. citizens.
"It is clear that we have reached a point where we need legislation that will produce a viable path to citizenship for undocumented persons residing in our nation and one (law) that protects the integrity of families and the safety of children," Roman Catholic Bishop Sylvester Ryan said at a press conference at the Resurrection Catholic Community Church in Aptos.
Stacy Tolchin, a San Francisco immigration attorney representing two children whose parents were deported to Mexico, criticized the operation as much more aggressive than in the past.
"Don't deport them the same day," she said. "Give them access to counsel. You're ripping them away from their families. It's really malicious."
The increase in immigration enforcement inside the United States as well as at the border comes as Congress has stalled on revamping the nation's immigration system.
President Bush has failed to win support from conservatives in his own party for a guest worker program and a path to legal status for many of the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States.
Some observers said the current crackdown is an effort by the Bush administration to prove it is tough on enforcing immigration law.
Michael Cutler, a former immigration agent in New York now associated with the Center for Immigration Studies, a think tank in Florida that supports tighter restrictions on immigration, said a better name for the current effort would be "Operation Backrub."
"The administration has administered warm milk and a backrub to the American people to inspire a false sense of confidence," he said. "The president has an agenda, which appears to be open up the border between the U.S. and Mexico and the U.S. and Canada. ... He's been doing this to be able to sell his package."
Immigration enforcement has generally focused on policing the border, but that alone cannot reduce illegal immigration, said Deborah Meyers, a senior policy analyst at the Migration Policy Institute in Washington, D.C. Boosting enforcement inside the country -- removing criminals and people who have already had their day in court -- is a sensible next step, she said. But it too is limited.
"You can deport the people, but if employers are still hiring illegal workers, you're not going to solve the problem," she said. "They're tackling the symptom of the problem, which is that people are here. But are they tackling the employment magnet? Are they tackling the fact that there's no way for these workers to come legally? It's not clear."
E-mail Tyche Hendricks at thendricks@sfchronicle.com.
Page A - 8
Monday, September 11, 2006
Class update and reminder
I just want to remind students who have been absent or who turn response papers via email, to please bring hard copies of your response papers after you email them to me. I don't print papers at home.
Also, try not to be absent. This monday we had our second quiz, which was based on previous lectures. Quizzes and class work cannot be made up. If you are absent one day make sure you get the notes from someone.
Thank you.
Also, try not to be absent. This monday we had our second quiz, which was based on previous lectures. Quizzes and class work cannot be made up. If you are absent one day make sure you get the notes from someone.
Thank you.
Friday, September 08, 2006
Room Change / Revised Syllabus
New Room Number: G206
M/Lat 12: United States Relations with Mexico and Latin America
Laney College
Fall 2006
Instructor: A. Palacios
Email: apalacioses@gmail.com
Course Website: http://mlat12.blogspot.com/
Course Meets: 10:00-11:00 MWF Room G206 [ Code: L1644 ]
Course Description
This course analyzes US involvement in Mexico and other parts of Latin America from colonial times to the present. In this class we will pay particular attention to the ways in which economic, politics, culture and ideology, along with domestic and international concerns, have shaped and continue to influence the ways the US has become involved in Latin America. In addition, we will also analyze the ways in which people from Latin America have perceived and reacted to US involvement in the region and the ways in which changes that have taken place in Latin America itself have influenced the United States and US involvement in the region.
Student Responsibilities, Assignments and Grades
Students are required to arrived on time, attend all class meetings, and complete the assigned reading prior to attending class. Class participation is required. Students will write weekly response papers as well as well as do some in class work. There will also be a final exam. Please do not hesitate to speak directly with the instructor if you have any questions about any of the assignments. In order to pass the class students must complete a majority of the weekly response papers as well as the exam. Daily attendance is mandatory.
1) Response Papers (50%): Every Monday you will turn in a response paper to the readings (at least 1 full page, 12 point font, Times or Times New Roman, cover page preferred, 1 inch margin.) These should focus on your personal response to the readings, and how they inform your understanding of US-Latin American relations. You must include 2 quotes with page numbers from the readings. It should be clear what exactly in the readings/films you are responding to. Please start your response at the very top of the page and end at the very bottom. Any late or incomplete responses, no matter the reason, will only receive half credit. You have three days (or next class) to turn in any late response.
2) Workshops and Class Work (30%): We will have a number of workshops relevant to Latin American Studies, a few quizzes, and some small in class assignments. In-class work cannot be made up in case of absence, whether excused or not.
3) Final Paper (20%): Short paper based on class material. Take notes during class as these will help you with the paper.
Community Rules:
1. Have respect. (You are welcome to disagree, but please do not try to silence others.)
2. Be humble.
3. Be strong/ Have courage.
4. Do the readings before class.
5. Be present (physically and mentally).
Please be sure that cell phones and other devices are turned off during class. Students are not allowed to eat during class and should remain in the classroom for the entire class period.
Required Texts
P. Smith, Talons of the Eagle: Dynamics of U.S.-Latin America Relations (Oxford, 1999)
R. Holden and E. Zolov, Latin America and the United States: A Documentary History (Oxford, 200)
Articles available at course website:
1. Susan George “A Short History of Neo-liberalism.” http://www.globalexchange.org/campaigns/econ101/neoliberalism.html.pf
2. Elizabeth Martinez and Arnoldo García “What is ‘Neoliberalism’?”
3. Subcomandate Marcos. “The Seven Loose Pieces of the Global Jigsaw Puzzle.”
4. What is it that is different about the Zapatistas? http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/mexico/comment/andrew_diff_feb01.html
5. Zapatista Declarations 1, 4-6.
Films: Salt of the Earth, Zapatista, Grain of Sand, When the Mountains Tremble, Señorita Extraviada, The Fourth World War, The Motorcycle Diaries.
You are responsible for downloading and printing all the articles. You should plan to print these at least a week before they are assigned in case you run into trouble. You might need to try another computer. Not being able to print or download articles is not a valid excuse.
COURSE OUTLINE
Note: This outline might change. Please check course website for specific dates and for syllabus updates. If there’s a change, I will make it known in class as well as post it in the website. http://mlat12.blogspot.com
Students should read the entire week’s readings by Monday.
Week One
NOTE: Your first response paper will be due on week two. Students should read all the week’s readings by Monday.
Introduction to the Course
Socio-Political Mapping Workshop
Talons of the Eagle: Introduction, Chapter 1
Latin America and the United States: No. 3, 4, 6
Week Two
Talons of the Eagle: Chapters 2 and 3
Latin America and the United States: No. 7, 10 and 11
Film: The Motorcycle Diaries
Week Three
Talons of the Eagle: Chapters 4 and 5.
Latin America and the United States: No. 21, 25, 34, 37
Film: Salt of the Earth
Week Four
Talons of the Eagle: Chapters 6
No. 44, 47, 51, 62, 74, 75
Film: When the Mountains Tremble
Week Five
Talons of the Eagle: Chapter 7
Latin America and the United States: No. 78, 90, 92, 93, 95, 96.
Week Six
Talons of the Eagle: Chapter 8
Latin America and the United States: No. 99, 100, 109, 110, 114
Week Seven
Talons of the Eagle: Chapter 9
Film: Grain of Sand
Week Eight
Talons of the Eagle: Chapter 10
Latin America and the United States: No. 115, 116, 118,
Week Nine
Talons of the Eagle: Chapter 11
Latin America and the United States: No. 119, 120, 123.
Articles available at course website: 1)Susan George “A Short History of Neo-liberalism.” http://www.globalexchange.org/campaigns/econ101/neoliberalism.html.pf
Week Ten
2) Elizabeth Martinez and Arnoldo García “What is ‘Neoliberalism’?”
Zapatista Declarations 4, 5. Available at course website.
Film: Zapatista
Week Eleven
What is it that is different about the Zapatistas? http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/mexico/comment/andrew_diff_feb01.html
Sixth Zapatista Declaration. [Available at course webiste.]
Week Twelve
Subcomandate Marcos. “The Seven Loose Pieces of the Global Jigsaw Puzzle.”
Lectures on Latin America today. Review of current news. Please visit LatinoUSA.org and listen to the specified program. Please visit NARCOnews.com and read the specified news article.
Week Thirteen
Film: The Fourth World War
Workshop.
Week Fourteen: Latin America Today
Lectures on Latin America today. Please visit LatinoUSA.org and listen to the specified program. Please visit NARCOnews.com and read the specified news article.
Film: Señorita Extraviada
Week Fifteen: Contemporary U.S.-Latin American Relations
2nd Workshop on Socio-Political Mapping
In Class Work on Final Paper.
Week Sixteen
Final Paper due.
You can download Word format here
M/Lat 12: United States Relations with Mexico and Latin America
Laney College
Fall 2006
Instructor: A. Palacios
Email: apalacioses@gmail.com
Course Website: http://mlat12.blogspot.com/
Course Meets: 10:00-11:00 MWF Room G206 [ Code: L1644 ]
Course Description
This course analyzes US involvement in Mexico and other parts of Latin America from colonial times to the present. In this class we will pay particular attention to the ways in which economic, politics, culture and ideology, along with domestic and international concerns, have shaped and continue to influence the ways the US has become involved in Latin America. In addition, we will also analyze the ways in which people from Latin America have perceived and reacted to US involvement in the region and the ways in which changes that have taken place in Latin America itself have influenced the United States and US involvement in the region.
Student Responsibilities, Assignments and Grades
Students are required to arrived on time, attend all class meetings, and complete the assigned reading prior to attending class. Class participation is required. Students will write weekly response papers as well as well as do some in class work. There will also be a final exam. Please do not hesitate to speak directly with the instructor if you have any questions about any of the assignments. In order to pass the class students must complete a majority of the weekly response papers as well as the exam. Daily attendance is mandatory.
1) Response Papers (50%): Every Monday you will turn in a response paper to the readings (at least 1 full page, 12 point font, Times or Times New Roman, cover page preferred, 1 inch margin.) These should focus on your personal response to the readings, and how they inform your understanding of US-Latin American relations. You must include 2 quotes with page numbers from the readings. It should be clear what exactly in the readings/films you are responding to. Please start your response at the very top of the page and end at the very bottom. Any late or incomplete responses, no matter the reason, will only receive half credit. You have three days (or next class) to turn in any late response.
2) Workshops and Class Work (30%): We will have a number of workshops relevant to Latin American Studies, a few quizzes, and some small in class assignments. In-class work cannot be made up in case of absence, whether excused or not.
3) Final Paper (20%): Short paper based on class material. Take notes during class as these will help you with the paper.
Community Rules:
1. Have respect. (You are welcome to disagree, but please do not try to silence others.)
2. Be humble.
3. Be strong/ Have courage.
4. Do the readings before class.
5. Be present (physically and mentally).
Please be sure that cell phones and other devices are turned off during class. Students are not allowed to eat during class and should remain in the classroom for the entire class period.
Required Texts
P. Smith, Talons of the Eagle: Dynamics of U.S.-Latin America Relations (Oxford, 1999)
R. Holden and E. Zolov, Latin America and the United States: A Documentary History (Oxford, 200)
Articles available at course website:
1. Susan George “A Short History of Neo-liberalism.” http://www.globalexchange.org/campaigns/econ101/neoliberalism.html.pf
2. Elizabeth Martinez and Arnoldo García “What is ‘Neoliberalism’?”
3. Subcomandate Marcos. “The Seven Loose Pieces of the Global Jigsaw Puzzle.”
4. What is it that is different about the Zapatistas? http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/mexico/comment/andrew_diff_feb01.html
5. Zapatista Declarations 1, 4-6.
Films: Salt of the Earth, Zapatista, Grain of Sand, When the Mountains Tremble, Señorita Extraviada, The Fourth World War, The Motorcycle Diaries.
You are responsible for downloading and printing all the articles. You should plan to print these at least a week before they are assigned in case you run into trouble. You might need to try another computer. Not being able to print or download articles is not a valid excuse.
COURSE OUTLINE
Note: This outline might change. Please check course website for specific dates and for syllabus updates. If there’s a change, I will make it known in class as well as post it in the website. http://mlat12.blogspot.com
Students should read the entire week’s readings by Monday.
Week One
NOTE: Your first response paper will be due on week two. Students should read all the week’s readings by Monday.
Introduction to the Course
Socio-Political Mapping Workshop
Talons of the Eagle: Introduction, Chapter 1
Latin America and the United States: No. 3, 4, 6
Week Two
Talons of the Eagle: Chapters 2 and 3
Latin America and the United States: No. 7, 10 and 11
Film: The Motorcycle Diaries
Week Three
Talons of the Eagle: Chapters 4 and 5.
Latin America and the United States: No. 21, 25, 34, 37
Film: Salt of the Earth
Week Four
Talons of the Eagle: Chapters 6
No. 44, 47, 51, 62, 74, 75
Film: When the Mountains Tremble
Week Five
Talons of the Eagle: Chapter 7
Latin America and the United States: No. 78, 90, 92, 93, 95, 96.
Week Six
Talons of the Eagle: Chapter 8
Latin America and the United States: No. 99, 100, 109, 110, 114
Week Seven
Talons of the Eagle: Chapter 9
Film: Grain of Sand
Week Eight
Talons of the Eagle: Chapter 10
Latin America and the United States: No. 115, 116, 118,
Week Nine
Talons of the Eagle: Chapter 11
Latin America and the United States: No. 119, 120, 123.
Articles available at course website: 1)Susan George “A Short History of Neo-liberalism.” http://www.globalexchange.org/campaigns/econ101/neoliberalism.html.pf
Week Ten
2) Elizabeth Martinez and Arnoldo García “What is ‘Neoliberalism’?”
Zapatista Declarations 4, 5. Available at course website.
Film: Zapatista
Week Eleven
What is it that is different about the Zapatistas? http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/mexico/comment/andrew_diff_feb01.html
Sixth Zapatista Declaration. [Available at course webiste.]
Week Twelve
Subcomandate Marcos. “The Seven Loose Pieces of the Global Jigsaw Puzzle.”
Lectures on Latin America today. Review of current news. Please visit LatinoUSA.org and listen to the specified program. Please visit NARCOnews.com and read the specified news article.
Week Thirteen
Film: The Fourth World War
Workshop.
Week Fourteen: Latin America Today
Lectures on Latin America today. Please visit LatinoUSA.org and listen to the specified program. Please visit NARCOnews.com and read the specified news article.
Film: Señorita Extraviada
Week Fifteen: Contemporary U.S.-Latin American Relations
2nd Workshop on Socio-Political Mapping
In Class Work on Final Paper.
Week Sixteen
Final Paper due.
You can download Word format here
