LAST100

Writing this weeks post feels a lot harder than writing the posts from earlier weeks. I find it extremely hard to think about where Latin America, let alone the whole world, is heading. We are faced with a pandemic, ecological disaster and global political instability. Jon asked us in the lecture, now after thirteen weeks, to think about three things that come to our minds when thinking about Latin America, and all I could think about was: inequality, struggle and neoliberalism. My idea about the region has definitely gotten much darker, and therefore, my idea of its future isn't much brighter. However, as the world is continuously more globalized, I don't think it is realistic to talk about the Latin American future excluded from the global context. While every place has its own histories, and therefore also their own futures, they develop in relation to one another. As we have seen, first the involvement of the Europeans, then that of the United States has played crucial role

This weeks documents demonstrated the ways in which people attempted to appeal to their authoritarian regimes. I was surprised how imaginative and diverse they were: from a student flashmob to political movements. Furthermore, I was surprised about how cheerful and catchy the Chilean "No" campaign's song was, taking into account its context and that it was mocking the dictatorship.  However, as I did my research assignment on the Argentine dirty war, I thought the videoclip about the Abuelas was powerful in conveying the pain and anxiety they were experiencing. Those women served as a way of turning statistics into real people and real loss that could be faced by basically anyone. Their requests don't seem much when they're asking to know if their children are alive or dead. However, in my short research assignment (and I think this was also mentioned in the lecture videos), I found that people were kept "disappeared" and their fates undisclosed in order

  Source 2 This is a speech of Jorge Videla in the opening of the World Cup in 1978, two years after he assumed the presidency. This was an event that caught a lot of attention due to the political atmosphere of Argentina at the time. This source could be used as to demonstrate how the state perceived the situation in the country and how they used discourse in order to convince the international audience that everything was going well. Soccer is a big part of Argentine culture and people attend the matches and support the teams passionately, which makes it an easy source for influence. Taking into account the severe human right violations that were happening, it seems astounding to be celebrating a soccer event, calling it a “joyous day of our country.” Furthermore, when he says “On the other hand, the amiable visit of thousands of women and men coming from the most diverse regions of the Earth, (who) honour us today with their visit on the sole condition of their good faith in a cl

In my research assignment I focused on the Dirty War in Argentina.  Source 1 In his book  “State Terrorism. In The Ideological Origins of the Dirty War: Fascism, Populism, and Dictatorship in Twentieth Century Argentina.” (2018) Frederico Finchelstein provides in-depth insight to the Argentine military regime and its ideology. This book chapter serves as a general source, which we can use in order to better understand the circumstances that existed in Argentina during the military regime. The author highlights that the Dirty War wasn’t actually a war between two opponents, but rather violence perpetrated on its victims. Overall, the book focuses on fascism and anti-semitism in Argentina. The Argentine dirty war began in March 1976, when the President Isabel Perón was overthrown by the military and replaced with the military general, Jorge Videla. The Dirty War lasted until 1983, and during this time, the military junta had killed, tortured and kidnapped between 10,000-30,000 individual

In the beginning of my exchange year I had a very eager history teacher, who was committed to teach me about the Argentine history, even if I didn't speak or read Spanish. I remember reading about the military junta and that horrible things happened, but as it was in a completely weird language, the topic never really opened to me. Therefore, this weeks readings were really helpful in making sense of what I was trying to learn during my exchange.  However, this week's document's provided insight to the Peruvian conflict from many different angles: the state, the guerillas and the victims. Together they highlight the profound division that existed in the country. The essay from Mario Vargas Llosa, who was sent to investigate the murders of the eight journalists, paints a picture of a gruesome slaughter by the savage indigenous. The motive behind the murders has been twisted: instead of explaining the conflicts between the Sendistas and the Inigenous, which led into a misunde

I found this weeks topic quite interesting because of what I saw and learned during my exchange in Argentina. I arrived to Argentina in 2015, right under the elections. People were extremely unsatisfied with their peronist president Cristina Kirchner, who they claimed to steal money from the state and keep the poor poor by providing them with extensive social welfare. The Argentines elected the rightist Mauricio Macri as their new president, hoping for a jobs and a stronger economy. To be fair, at this time, my level of Spanish was really poor and my understanding as to what was going on and why was really non-existent. However, in 2016, at the end of my year there, I lived with a family who really struggled to get by because they were unable to find a job of any kind. Macri had been in power for some time now, and people were already longing for Cristina and Peronism. Furthermore, the Argentine peso had been going downhill rapidly, making everything constantly more expensive. "At

 This weeks readings focused on the North American influence in Latin America. As discussed in earlier lectures, Latin Americans perceived North America as a progressive, modern and wealthy nation, filled with exciting opportunities. On the other hand, Latin Americans were perceived as backward and childlike nations. Through commerce, however, Latin America began to gain more visibility in the United States when culture and products were exchanged. As discussed both in lecture and by Dawson, Carmen Miranda was one of the first ones to introduce Latin American culture and gain fame in the United States. She came to represent a beautiful, exotic and sexual Latin American woman. Dawson notes in his text: "One of the most obvious costs came in the ways that particular cultures and individuals were flattened into a single image of Latin American sensuality for a global audience." (p. 195) I think this is an issue that translates into the context of today's presentation of both