Mexico

Free Traders ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 76-93
Author(s):  
Malcolm Fairbrother

Mexico came to North American free trade in a very different way than Canada. Unlike in Canada, not even economists favored greater integration with the United States before the 1980s. Over the course of the 1980s, however, the worldviews of Mexican economists, and then the country’s political and administrative elites, changed substantially. Economic crises and ongoing negotiations between the Mexican government and its foreign creditors reshaped the domestic political field, and a new generation of “technocrats” with PhDs in economics from prestigious American universities came to occupy most top posts in government. Under the technocrats, Mexico joined the multilateral trading system, and then in 1990 began negotiating North American free trade—even in the absence of broad-based support from businesspeople. The undemocratic Mexican state limited the opportunities for either dissident businesspeople or civil society to criticize its free trade initiative.

Author(s):  
Bruce Campbell

Mexican comic books are a cultural product whose development is tied to the history of the modern Mexican state. The consolidation of the state in the aftermath of the armed conflict period of the Mexican Revolution (1910–1920) shaped the conditions for the emergence of a domestic industry and market for comics, and in particular for comic books, alongside other important cultural industries such as radio, film, and television, through state supports for and controls over the nation’s culture industries. In the late 20th century, the neoliberal character of the Mexican state—for which official policy has centered on privatization of state economic enterprises, the reduction of public subsidies for goods and services, and the elimination of import tariffs—subsequently reshaped the conditions for production and consumption of the nation’s sequential art. The term “comics” is applied to graphic narrative generally, which in turn is defined by the sequential use of images, usually in combination with language, in order to tell some kind of story. Comics are therefore a broad category of cultural production that includes newspaper strips, comic books, graphic novels, fotonovelas (comprising photographs in series with inserted dialogue text), and, more recently, webcomics. Comics are a cultural commodity the production and distribution of which are affected by changes in public supports, as well as by governmental controls over comics content. In the period of institutional consolidation that followed the armed phased of the Mexican Revolution, government supports were provided principally through the subsidizing of newsprint and the implementation of national literacy campaigns. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)—a tri-national trade liberalization regime signed by Mexico, Canada, and the United States and implemented on January 1, 1994—significantly altered the circumstances of comics in Mexico, in terms of both the economic conditions for comics production and readership, and the political environment and public discourses addressed and communicated through Mexican comics art. The most direct impact on comics production came through the Mexican state’s retreat from control of the paper supply under the terms of NAFTA. Because paper is a key productive input, changes in paper cost and availability had the largest impact on the cost of long-form or sustained graphic narratives, such as comic books. As a result, the NAFTA period (1994 to present) is marked by the emergence of the Mexican graphic novel and of webcomics. Both of these cultural forms are based on a reorganization of the economics of comic-book production. Comics production and consumption are therefore implicated in neoliberal policy constructs such as the North American Free Trade agreement, despite not being an explicit category of economic activity addressed by the treaty.


Author(s):  
Sandra Mendiola García

The miners of Pachuca and Real del Monte have extracted silver from the mountainous region of what is now the state of Hidalgo for centuries. In the colonial period, these mines were owned by the Spanish. In the modern period, they were owned by British (1824–1849), Mexican (1849–1906), and American (1906–1947) entrepreneurs. The Mexican government bought the mines from the United States Smelting, Refining and Mining Company in 1947 and kept them until 1989. In that year, the Mexican state sold the Compañía Real del Monte y Pachuca, the company that monopolized most of the region’s mines, to Mexican businessmen (Grupo Acerero del Norte) who kept them in operation until 2005. The silver miners who worked for the company belong to Locals One and Two of the Sindicato Nacional de Mineros, Metalúrgicos y Similares de la República Mexicana (SNMMRM). The union was created in 1934 in Pachuca. Miners’ activism, however, goes back to the colonial period. In 1766, miners went on strike to defend the partido system (a profit-sharing payment) under attack by their employer Pedro Romero de Terreros, the first Count of Regla. Subsequent employers, both British and Mexican, also faced strikes, slowdowns, and threats of violence by miners who tried to improve their wages and labor conditions. In 1934, Pachuca and Real del Monte played an important role in the formation of the national union. Most ceased their activism in 1946. It was not until 1979 when these silver miners organized Liberación Minera (Miner Liberation) to fight against their charro (government and employer-aligned) leaders and to defend workers’ rights. By the late 1970s, the miners of Pachuca and Real del Monte lacked access to proper health care, received low wages, and experienced dangerous labor conditions. Miners were under the control of local and national charro leaders, including Napoleón Gómez Sada who directed the national miner union from 1960 to virtually 2001. The dissident current, Liberación Minera, organized a strike in 1980 and a naked protest in 1985. As a result, miners increased their wages, democratized their locals, and gained several benefits. These achievements were short-lived as the Mexican government announced the sale of the company in 1989. As part of Mexico’s embrace of neoliberal policies, the privatization of the company meant the virtual end of the industry and of organized labor in these areas by 2005.


Author(s):  
Richard D. Mahoney

How did the U.S.-Colombia free trade agreement come about? The officially named “U.S.-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement” was the stepchild of a rancorous hemispheric divorce between the United States and five Latin American governments over the proposal to extend the North American Free Trade Agreement...


1994 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward B. DeBellevue ◽  
Eric Hitzel ◽  
Kenneth Cline ◽  
Jorge A. Benitez ◽  
Julia Ramos-Miranda ◽  
...  

Significance Canada has a temporary exemption, but Trump is calling for North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) renegotiations to be completed speedily. The NAFTA and tariffs issues have, therefore, become fused, raising questions about the outlook for Canada-US foreign relations. Impacts In the short term, Canadian steel companies may benefit from reduced foreign providers’ presence in the United States. Canada’s NAFTA negotiators will not respond to the Trump team’s threat to impose tariffs. Canadian businesses will begin to migrate south to take advantage of the new and more competitive US tax regime. Canada’s efforts to diversify its foreign trade and decrease US dependence will further accelerate, but still face hurdles.


Author(s):  
E. Komkova

2014 marked the 20th anniversary of the entry into force of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which created the world’s largest free trade area. Now it links 470 million people producing more than 19 trillion USD worth of goods and services. The article addresses five issues: the international importance of NAFTA; the economic transformation that has occurred in the USA, Canada and Mexico since the advent of the NAFTA; a “thought experiment” on what American, Canadian and Mexican performance might have been without the NAFTA; the detrimental effect of 9/11 on the North American economic integration; and what’s next? At the time of its signing, NAFTA in many ways was considered a “gold standard” in terms of international free trade agreements. For the first time ever a free trade agreement brought together both developed and developing countries. It also broadened the scope of traditional FTAs by embracing services, foreign investments and property rights, and recognized the importance of workers' and environmental rights and issues. In terms of trade and investment NAFTA has been an undisputed success. Canada ranks as the United States’ largest export market, while Mexico is its second-largest export market. Today – thanks to NAFTA – North Americans not only sell more goods to one another, they also make more things together. For every dollar of goods that Canada and Mexico export to the USA, there are 25 cents’ worth of US inputs into Canadian goods and 40 cents’ worth into Mexican ones. Regardless of the impressive economic record, NAFTA has its critics. The agreement has not underwent a major update since its inception in 1994, i.e. prior to the rise of electronic commerce and, digital services, advanced manufacturing and many other innovative features of the global economy. As far as there is no political appetite to update NAFTA directly, indirect route is a subject of wide speculation. Canada, the USA and Mexico are negotiating partners to the Trans-Pacific Partnership and any benefits conferred by the TPP that go further than NAFTA would take precedence. It is assumed that the TPP should help to modernize NAFTA commitments and upgrade the North American trade and investment.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document