This week we will be paired with a partner for the blog assignment. After you have read the assigned reading in MLAH, contact your partner. Together pick two aspects or characteristics from the three primary source articles (“The Lions of Payara,” “Ribbons and Rituals,” and “Protagonist on a National Stage”) that seem to be central to the individuals described in the articles. Discuss these characteristics with your partner with relationship to how those characteristics either confirm or refute assumptions made by the authors in one or both of the first two articles (“Caudillo Scourge” and “Caudillos as Profit Maximizers”). In the blog, post a description of the two characteristics you have chosen and how they support or contradict the biases in the first two articles. Please post your answer on Saturday the 24th only and as close to 5 pm as you or your partner can make it. I want to avoid some students leading and others following.
Pairings:
[1+4] , [2+12] , [3+13], [25+14], [6+24], [7+23], [8+22], [9+21], [10+20],[11+ 19], [15+18], [16+17] .
9+21
ReplyDeleteHanah Gowaty and Rebecca Robinson
The first article called “The Lions of Payara” was about a man in control of the country that went to war against a man that kept rebelling. He knew this man for he once served in his army, but in the end he still killed majority of the rebels, and kept the government the way it was. This idea went along with the first story “Caudillo Scourge.” In the story it was a democratic society that was not doing well. They had taxes that people did not agree with and there for rebelled against their government. The government then stopped the rebellion showing their power over the people. There was no form of negotiating the problem.
The second story “Ribbons and Rituals” is the opposite of the “Caudillo Scourge” article. In the story it is one ruler that rules an entire nation. Unlike in “Caudillo Scourge” where there is a different ruler for each section of the country, which is the opposite of the story “Ribbons and Rituals.” It is not a democracy either; they have no say in what is being done. It seems to us that they are brainwashed to believe what the government wants them to think.
The last story “Protagonist on a Nation stage” also contradicted the reading “Caudillos as Profit Maximizers.” The maximizer story told about men and they never seemed weak or showed any sign of distress. But in the article on the Protagonist and seemed scared, weak, and vulnerable. He spoke of his sadness about his wife’s death and this should not have happened according to the maximizer story.
8+22
ReplyDeleteChris Giles and Shawn Short
Ribbons and Rituals - Rosas had the government in his hand. Everyone had to show their loyalty to him. It was his program of government with a goal and heading of, “whoever is not with me is my enemy.” The people had to obey. Terror was the disease of the spirit that can be epidemic. No one is safe in the end from this contagion.
Protagonist on a National Stage - He had taken office when the government desired him to take the place. He then left but when Bustamante’s lose of prestige with the people occurred, he was then asked again to take office. He called a group of people in order to instigate needed reforms. He left office when his wife died and then came back. When it was time to battle, he decided to leave his country and not fight.
We would say that the characteristics in Ribbons and Rituals matched the characteristics from the first articles and Protagonist on a National Stage went against the characteristics. In Ribbons and Rituals, he was showing much masculinity. He took the government in his hands and wanted full control. Whoever was not with him was then his enemy and against them. He did what he felt was right and fought anyone that would get in his way. His plan was terror and no one was going to get away from that. He had complete control.
The characteristics of Protagonist on a National Stage was almost the opposite. He would just keep filling in the position of office. He wanted to do what was right but he also got the input of others. He even appointed people to help him. The one thing that was similar was that the people kept changing the position in office to go with what they thought they needed. But when it was time for him to fight and take charge, he then left his country and backed away. The characteristics of the first articles stated that the man would battle and would not be afraid to kill especially publicly. In this article, he did not do that.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete13+3
ReplyDeleteErika Klempay
Brad Comport
In the excerpt "Ribbons and Rituals," the cuadillo, Juan Manuel de Rosas, epitomizes a ruler of terror. The story explains that the initial rule of Rosas was something to be celebrated until the parishes took it too far and a year and a half later, the red ribbon became a symbol of terror. By this time, everyone was forced to wear or exhibit a red ribbon and a portrait of the ruler in his honor. The Mazorca patrolled the streets and if they saw that one was not wearing a ribbon, they would identify them as Unitarians and go so far as slitting their throats. This is comparable to the story of "Cuadillo as a Scourge" because in this excerpt, it explains that the cuadillo is "party, flag, principle, and objective all in one person." There is no "democracy" or sense of control under the cuadillo, and they only bring about mayhem to their country.
The excerpt "Protagonist on a National Stage," however, refutes the story of "Cuadillo as a Scourge" in several ways. In this story, Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna is about to become President of Mexico for the fourth time. After the fall of Bustamante due to his loss of prestige to the country, the people pleaded with Santa Anna to take office once again even in his state of poor health. He did so, and with this came up with a national constitution, The Principles of Political Organization, and every state ratified without question. He was forced to embark on a revolution with the capital to protect his country. After receiving horrific news about the revolt, Santa Anna took it upon himself and for the good of his country, revoked his presidency. This autobiography refutes the story of "Cuadillo as a Scourge" because even though the Cuadillo had full reign, he did not take advantage of this and terrorize his country. In fact, the people of his country had begged for his return and allegiance to the country. He was well respected withdrew for the benefit of his people and himself.
Rob and I discussed the ideas presented in the assigned readings. In the “Ribbons and Rituals,” we felt that it kind of contradicts or goes against the points presented in the “Caudillo Scourge.” In “Caudillo Scourge” there is democracy, but there is not in “Ribbons and Rituals”. Furthermore, we read that there are people that are in charge of different areas throughout the country (much like a governor for our states) in “Caudillo Scourge”, which is not the case in “Ribbons and Rituals.”
ReplyDeleteFor the “Protagonist on a Nation” we discussed that there is a contrast in the type of characters in the stories. The Protagonist on a nation had weak and fearful men, while the previous readings had strong willed and successful.
For “The lions of Payara” we discussed that both this story and the “Caudillo Scourge” talked about rebellions against the governments/leaders that were eventually stopped. The rebellions happened because the people/soldiers were tired of the situations they were in. Eventually, the rebellions were stopped and everything returned to its normal state (as it was before the rebellion).
All three of the men described in the articles were very egocentric; they saw the world through their own narrow lenses, never entertaining the perspectives of others. Egocentrism made itself known through Rosa’s vanity (forcing his followers to wear his picture), through Paez’s refusal to see what was principled about the rebels holding him to his promises, and through Santa Anna’s self absorbed autobiography. All three were also very cunning; they possessed the mental machinery to analyze the political climate and manipulate it to serve their needs.
ReplyDelete“Caudillos as Scourge” (CAS) makes the assumption that caudillos were a product of a psychological pathology, which was evidenced in the degeneration of inferior races, and in their need to be ruled by violence and domination. The vanity of the three men supports Chapman’s point of view. In “Caudillos as Profit Maximizers” (CPM), the basic assumption is that socio-economic factors necessitated the need for caudillos. Those men who were smart, or cunning, enough to be able to fill that need became the caudillos. Therefore, the second attribute supports the assumption made in CPM. This second trait involving intelligence refutes the bias in CAS, because one can’t argue upon the foundation of racial inferiority, yet acknowledge the superior intelligence of those within that race.
Oliver Lewinson (16)
ReplyDeleteEmily Mitnik (17)
From the reading, we believe that the articles “Lions of Payara,” “Ribbons and Rituals,” and "Protagonist on a National Stage" support the views from the articles "Caudillos as Profit Maximizers" and "Caudillos as Scourge." The first characteristic we found prominent in the articles is that caudillos are violent. They implement fear upon the people in order to gain their support. In "Caudillos as Scourge" it sates that the Caudillos would threaten the people in order to sway elections in their favor and would corrupt the elections with the use of violence. In "Ribbons and Rituals,” the caudillo Rosas made the slogan: "Death to the Unitarian." In the article the "Lions of Payara," Paez states that he was going to lance people if they did not get out of his sight. All of these articles suggest that the caudillos were not afraid to use their power and violence to get the results they desired. The second characteristic is that Caudillos have no problem making themselves known. For instance, Rosas makes his people wear red ribbons, his picture over their hearts, and participate in church ceremonies that show their allegiance to his cause. Everyone knew who Rosas was and feared him. In "Protagonist on a Nationalist Stage," Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna was also an attention getter but used a dramatic approach. In "Caudillos as Profit Maximizers" it states that caudillos make themselves widely known by engaging in competition against rivals and viciously defeating them. Overall, the articles support the fact that caudillos wanted power, wealth, and recognition and would not stop until that was achieved.
I worked until 5 but here is me and Kiana's. (6+24) Kiana and I chose the article "Ribbons and Rituals", which was about Juan Manuel de Rosas, an Argentine caudillo. To say the least, he was a very strong figure. However I do not really like his methods. I think the two characteristics of this particular caudillo are Power, and Intimidation. He is a very powerful figure that took the government into his own hands following the death of Facundo Quiroga, another caudillo. He stood for one main thing, and that was to be against the Unitarians. So much so that he made people wear ribbons that said "Death to the Unitarians". He had the city policed to make sure everybody wore these ribbons, and he made people refer to him as 'The Restorer'. I think that Rosas thought he was doing a good thing for Argentina; he wanted to instill uniformity. It got to a point where everybody had to wear a picture of him over their heart, and that red ribbon or they would get their throat slashed. Through his power and intimidation, people had to conform to him to avoid death. This means that people who didn't even agree with him had to act like they did. There were months of celebrations and parades for him, and he had his picture put into churches and buildings everywhere. This showed me that caudillos were very arrogant but I guess that is how it had to be, if they were the Don of the 'family'. Women and children were lashed if they didn't have their ribbon. The article says that if a woman forgot to put her red bow in her hair, the police would supply her with one. And attach it to her hair with hot tar! I think this made the whole community live in fear and that was proved in the reading. I actually think this contradicts the first two readings in my opinion. Yes the caudillo is very strong and powerful, but I do not sense a family here. When I think of mobs even, I think the family all stands for one thing. They may fear their leader, but not fear for their lives. So I think Ribbons and Rituals is very different from what I expected.
ReplyDeleteCourtney(7)
ReplyDeleteMelanie(23)
One of the characteristics from the articles that were confirmed by “Caudillos as Profit Maximizers” was masculinity. This characteristic can also be best explained as one who has the capacity to dominate females, strong, and readiness to use force.
The article, "Lions of Payara," showed assertion of masculinity when rebel forces outnumbered three times willingly fought and won. Masculinity is also very apparent in the article, "Ribbons and Rituals." The Caudillos forced people to wear red ribbons to show their support for the Federalists. To show masculinity through dominance, especially over females, police were instructed to supply women who were not wearing a red ribbon with a free red bow for their hair. However, this generosity was not as nice a gesture as one might think, because it was applied to the hair with melted tar. The actions of the characters in “Lions of Payara” and “Ribbons and Rituals” confirm that caudillos worked to affirm their masculinity.
The second aspect is the caudillos’ support for the absence of government. In the article by Domingo Sarmiento “Ribbons as Courage” the slogan “whoever is not with me is my enemy” is described as “undisguised and unambiguous”. In the article elections often went in favor of the way caudillos wanted them, through their use of force or fraud. Therefore if some force did not have the caudillo’s interests in mind there would be repercussions. The caudillos and government felt the Latinos, blacks and Indians were barbaric and incapable of being educated so they felt they could "bully" them into submission to get the results they desired. The same leader that forced the people to wear red ribbons of face punishment was the same person in which they celebrate is reign for a year and a half (77&78). That is some loyalty. It also stated in "Ribbons and Rituals" the people were forced to wear a button supporting the cause.
A final and third characteristic is found in Eric Wolf and Edward Hansen’s article “Caudillos as Profit Maximizers.” Caudillos are described as having incredible interpersonal skills because they “build personal ties” with their followers to continue their loyalty. In those loyal ties, the followers were then lead into ventures to participate in pillage, such as looting and plundering. In conclusion, the final paragraph of “Caudillos as Scourge” sums up the impact of the caudillos very well, stating that caudillos were either depicted as heroes or tyrants – it all depended on who was reporting. In “Caudillos as Profit Maximizers” they "had a code that had 2 basic attributes of leadership: The person needed interpersonal skills to keep the band together; the second the acumen required to cement these relationships through the correct distribution of wealth"(65). I think it is important to understand that not just any person could be a leader; machismo was an important part of the skills. The more wealth the caudillo had the more machismo they had. They had to be prepared to defend their wealth even if it meant violence and bloodshed. They also had a certain standard of what they were willing to fight for; resources had to be "available and not be a taboo"(65)
25/14
ReplyDeleteThe caudillos seem to have the love of partying. They also have less intelligence. In both the caudillo scourge and the caudillos as profit maximizes. They believe the darker the skin, the more inferior and they are less intelligent. These chararacteristics are supported the bias in the first two articles.