The United States and a Central American Canal, 1869-1877

1969 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jackson Crowell

Author(s):  
Michael R. Woods ◽  
Susana V. Rivera-Mills

AbstractThis sociolinguistic study explores linguistic attitudes of Salvadorans and Hondurans living in the United States towards the use of voseo, a distinguishing feature of Central American Spanish. Using sociolinguistic interviews and ethnographic observations, the Central American experience in Oregon and Washington is examined regarding linguistic attitudes toward voseo and tuteo and how these influence Salvadoran and Honduran identity in U.S. communities that are primarily Mexican-American. Initial findings point to participants developing ethnolinguistic masks and an expanded use of tú as a strategic approach to integration into the established Mexican-American community, while at the same time maintaining a sense of Central American identity.



1971 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 151-172 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth J. Grieb

The militarycoup d'étatwhich installed General Maximiliano Hernández Martínez as President of El Salvador during December 1931 created a crisis involving the 1923 Washington Treaties. By the terms of these accords, the Central American nadons had pledged to withhold recognition from governments seizing power through force in any of the isthmian republics. Although not a signatory of the treaty, the United States based its recognition policy on this principle. Through this means the State Department had attempted to impose some stability in Central America, by discouraging revolts. With the co-operation of the isthmian governments, United States diplomats endeavored to bring pressure to bear on the leaders of any uprising, to deny them the fruits of their victory, and thus reduce the constant series ofcoupsandcounter-coupsthat normally characterized Central American politics.



2008 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 32-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Kovic

July 2007. Hundreds of Central American migrants were camped along the railway tracks in Arriaga, Chiapas waiting to for the freight train to leave. Some were eating, perhaps their last food for days, others had bottles of water tied across their shoulders, some attempted to rest under the train cars to escape the hot sun. One young man brushed his teeth under the trees, using the water he carried in a recycled coca-cola bottle, to prepare himself for the journey ahead. Arriaga, a town of 25,000 people, is split in half by the train tracks. The town's tiny plaza, with a small playground, fondas (eateries), and a railway museum, sits on one side of the tracks. The town's church and market lie on the other. These Central American migrants in Arriaga, some 150 miles from Mexico's southern border with Guatemala, were eager to jump the freight train to continue their journey north to the United States. The train had not left Arriaga for a full week and many were desperate as they felt trapped. Their preparations underscored the dangers and harshness of the trip. They would have to hold on to the train for hours and days at a time, riding on ladders and the roofs of tank cars. Those who fall asleep and lose their grip risk death or severe injury, such as dismemberment.



2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 96-115 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denielle M. Perry ◽  
Kate A. Berry

At the turn of the 21st century, protectionist policies in Latin America were largely abandoned for an agenda that promoted free trade and regional integration. Central America especially experienced an increase in international, interstate, and intraregional economic integration through trade liberalization. In 2004, such integration was on the agenda of every Central American administration, the U.S. Congress, and Mexico. The Plan Puebla-Panama (PPP) and the Central America Integrated Electricity System (SIEPAC), in particular, aimed to facilitate the success of free trade by increasing energy production and transmission on a unifi ed regional power grid (Mesoamerica, 2011). Meanwhile, for the United States, a free trade agreement (FTA) with Central America would bring it a step closer to realizing a hemispheric trade bloc while securing market access for its products. Isthmus states considered the potential for a Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) with the United States, their largest trading partner, as an opportunity to enter the global market on a united front. A decade and a half on, CAFTA, PPP, and SIEPAC are interwoven, complimentary initiatives that exemplify a shift towards increased free trade and development throughout the region. As such, to understand one, the other must be examined.



Mortal Doubt ◽  
2018 ◽  
pp. 241-250
Author(s):  
Anthony W. Fontes

The final chapter traces the fates of several main characters in prison and on the street through the chaos of Guatemalan politics in recent years. It splices these narratives into a discussion of how reactionary political movements in the United States are drawing on the image of the Central American gang member (among a list of evil, barbarous “others”) to push anti-immigrant agendas in a moment of profound global uncertainty and unrest.



1967 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 107-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth J. Grieb

The administration of Warren G. Harding found itself facing the issue of Central American Union when it assumed office in March, 1921. Central Americans had debated combination since independence, and the question came to the fore periodically, resulting in numerous attempts to reunite the isthmus. But the previous proposals had all faltered when governments favoring confederation were overthrown. The issue was periodically revived whenever renewed coups returned pro-union regimes to power in several of the countries. In this way the debate continued throughout the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, ebbing and flowing with the frequent revolutions, coups, and counter coups that constituted Central American politics.



Author(s):  
Maritza E. Cárdenas

The use of the term “Central American” as an identity category is neither new nor restricted to the US diaspora. However, it is within the last forty years and in the geopolitical setting of the United States that a thriving identity politics has developed. It is during this time period that the use of the term Central American has emerged to denote a tactical American pan-ethnic social identity. This act of consciously employing the term “Central American” as a unification strategy for peoples from the isthmus in the United States echoes other US-based ethnoracial identity politics. Such movements often utilize a pan-ethnic term not only to advocate on the behalf of a racialized minoritarian community but also seeking to provide them a space of belonging by focusing on sociopolitical, cultural, and ethnic commonalities. As other identity markers in the United States such as “Asian American” and “African American” illustrate, Central Americans are not the first population to utilize a region as a strategic unifying term of self-identification. Yet, unlike these other US ethnoracial categories, for those who identify as “Central American” the term “Central America” often connotes not simply a geographic space but also a historical formation that advances the notion that individuals from the isthmus comprise a distinct but common culture. Another key difference from other US ethnoracial identities is that use of the term “Central American” in US cultural politics emerged during a historical era where the broader collective terms “Hispanic” or “Latino” were already in place. The creation and deployment of “Central American” is therefore an alternative to this other supra-ethnic identity category, as subjects view this isthmian-based term as being able to simultaneously create a broader collective while still invoking a type of geographic and cultural specificity that is usually associated with national identities.



Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document