FOR THE FIRST PAPER, YOU SHOULD USE ONLY THE CLASS MATERIALS PROVIDED. NO OUTSIDE SOURCES ARE ALLOWED EXCEPT FOR THE CURRENT EVENT DISCUSSED IN YOUR CONCLUSION.
MAKE SURE TO DEMONSTRATE THAT YOU HAVE READ THE MATERIAL and CLEARLY STATE YOUR THESIS IN THE INTRODUCTION AND THE CONCLUSION. PLEASE WRITE: “MY THESIS IS” SO I KNOW THAT YOU HAVE ONE.
YOUR ESSAY SHOULD BE AT LEAST 6-7 PAGES DOUBLE-SPACED OR SINGLE SPACED (3-4 PAGES) WITH 1” MARGINS. YOU DON’T NEED A COVERSHEET.
Please Use Chicago Citation Style: http://www.lib.subr.edu/Chicago.pdf. Or go to Purdue Owl
MAKE SURE TO CITE YOUR SOURCES CORRECTLY—ANY QUOTES MORE THAN THREE LINES LONG SHOULD BE SINGLE-SPACED (BLOCK QUOTES, NO QUOTATION MARKS). QUOTES 3 LINES OR LESS SHOULD HAVE QUOTATION MARKS. YOU SHOULD CITE THE SOURCES (HELLMAN AND VANDEN/ PREVOST/Hamilton) EVEN IF YOU ARE PARAPHRASING. YOU CAN USE FOOTNOTES OR IN-TEXT PARANTHETICAL CITATIONS IN YOUR PAPER (YOUR CHOICE).
Late papers graded down ½ letter grade for each day it is late
Check for grammar, spelling and structural errors in your paper—you will be graded down for such errors
MAKE SURE TO SUBMIT YOUR OWN WORK—KEEP IN MIND, TURN IT IN HAS ACCESS TO ALL PAPERS.
According to Collier (Basta! Land and the Zapatista Rebellion, 1994),
When in 1992 President Salinas de Gortari brought land reform—the issue on which his party had originally risen to power—to a halt, he signaled an abrupt end to a traditional government covenant with the peasantry and deprived many peasants not just of the possibility of improving their livelihoods, but of their power as a constituency. The Zapatistas are trying to reclaim that constituency (Collier, 1994:8).
The above quote says a great deal about the relationship between the peasant sector and the Mexican state that emerged after the Mexican Revolution. It also suggests a relationship between the economic restructuring of Mexico’s economy and the rise of the Zapatista rebellion. Indeed, the transition to free market economic principles and the adoption of neoliberal reform
permanently transformed the lives of Mexicans in the urban and rural sectors of Mexico’s economy. Such changes were social, political and economic in nature.
With this in mind, discuss the significance of the Mexican Revolution to the transition of the New Economic Model (Neoliberalism) in Mexico. How did the Revolution address the problem of “two Mexicos” that emerged under Diaz? What were the goals of the Revolution?
In what ways did meaning of the Revolution change with the Presidency of Salinas de Gortari?
How do the testimonials provided by Hellman demonstrate and provide insight into understanding how free market mechanisms (NAFTA) would influence the lives of individuals? Were all sectors impacted the same way? (Hellman discusses this in her book) Has Mexico returned to an era where there are “two Mexicos”? Where would you place Mexico today in the context of its political and economic development? Why? (Make sure to cite a current event to support your position, discuss it in the conclusion of your paper).
Make sure to put the discussion in proper historical context by clearly explaining the significance of the Mexican Revolution, the factors that led to the rise of the PRI and ISI (state-led development model and what it entailed) and the factors that led to the adoption of Neoliberalism and its policy prescriptions. Make sure to refer to at least (5) testimonials in Hellman’s work. DO NOT OVERQUOTE. You are welcome to include the documentary LA TORMENTA QUE AZOTO MEXICO (The Storm that Swept Mexico) or any other class materials in your discussion.
