5 ms·

>Radical, indigenous, feminist, anti-colonial, self-organising. According to the BBC's laughable propaganda. Not according to any of the people actually invol

>Radical, indigenous, feminist, anti-colonial, self-organising. According to the BBC's laughable propaganda. Not according to any of the people actually involved. Even then there's nothing colonial about Mexican cartels stealing from Mexicans. >The actual situation of control will turn out to be a set of family relationships embedded in the matriarchy running the town What a bizarre notion. Why and how would that suddenly occur?

joshuaissac 6y ago
>According to the BBC's laughable propaganda. Not according to any of the people actually involved. Also not according to the BBC, since the article does not contain any of the words you attributed to its propaganda, except "indigenous".
- asdkjh345fd 6y ago
  It doesn't need to contain the words. It clearly and repeatedly portrays this as some kind of women's movement, when it is not.
  - joshuaissac 6y ago
    That the uprising was started by women is corroborated by other, older sources as well,[1] and is not a misportrayal by the BBC. That Cheran is populated by the indigenous Purépecha people is also supported by other sources, including the Mexican legal system that upheld the town's autonomy. I cannot find anything else in the article that would support what you are saying. Can you provide some quotations? 1. https://www.wired.com/2013/05/cheran-uprising/ https://www.wired.com/2013/05/cheran-uprising/
    - asdkjh345fd 6y ago
      Look at the photos in the article. See how it is mostly men but they focus on the one woman in the big group of men? You have to be very suggestible to buy such an obviously conjured narrative.
      - joshuaissac 6y ago
        There are 8 photos in the article (not including the map); women are shown in 4 of those; there is exactly 1 photo where they focus on one woman at the front of a line in a parade (with multiple lines). To put that in perspective, there is also 1 photo that focuses on a man surrounded by men and women. There are also 2 photos of one woman each, but they were just two of the people who were interviewed (and one of them was an instigator of the revolt). There no conjured narrative here that I can see. If every other source were saying that there were no women involved in the revolt, and the BBC were inserting women into the story, then it would be a conjured narrative, but that is not what is happening here.
pjc50 6y ago
Oh, the wording is all mine, inferred from this fairly thin set of news reports. But: - radical: doesn't get much more radical than an armed uprising - indigenous: they're Purepecha. This is very important. While they're Mexican nationals, and would be called Mexican by Americans, they're not of Spanish descent. They're descendents of a tribe unconquered by the Aztecs. Racial discrimination against people of indigenous descent is common all over Latin America. - feminist: all the news coverage points out that the initial uprising was initiated by women. - anti-colonial: outsiders of a different ethnic background coming onto traditional tribal land to steal natural resources? With the collusion of the police? Sounds pretty colonial to me. - self-organising: found a bit more on this; https://elenemigocomun.net/2018/08/cheran-names-government/ https://elenemigocomun.net/2018/08/cheran-names-government/ ; https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/after-long-fight-self-government-indigenous-town-cher-n-mexico-n906171 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/after-long-fight-self-go... It's crucial to being exempted from normal politics such as elections. "arguing before the courts that there were provisions in Mexican law that permit indigenous communities a form of self-government based on their customs"; sounds analogous to the semi-autonomy of Indian reservations in the US. >> "set of family relationships embedded in the matriarchy running the town" So it looks like I overstated this a lot, but if you refer to the NBCnews article above it's a "council of elders". And they don't have parties? Family is a party you're born into. It's more or less the default arrangement of pre-bureaucratic politics. It's hard to avoid even in modern states. Add up all someone's in-laws and second cousins and it's easy to get to hundreds of people, which goes a long way in a community of 20,000. BBC: "Most people who live in Cheran are from the town. Social mores dictate that locals marry locals - there are very few outsiders here. Families are large, and they are close. Everyone knows everyone else. And that is the foundation of the town's unity." NBC: "Patricia Hernández, a taco vendor and mother of four, accepted the challenge to be part of their government when her neighbors chose her to represent their fogata. She is now one of four women who will govern Cherán for the next three years as part of the twelve-person council known as K'eri Jánaskakua. "Before the government didn't take us [women] into account, until we were the ones who started this new government seven years ago," said Hernández to NBC News. "We said 'Ya Basta!', (Enough!) to put an end to this violence." (more feminism! with machetes!) It doesn't "suddenly occur", it was always there, it just took a lot of adversity to mobilize it to the level of armed self-government.

joshuaissac 6y ago

>According to the BBC's laughable propaganda. Not according to any of the people actually involved. Also not according to the BBC, since the article does not contain any of the words you attributed to its propaganda, except "indigenous".

asdkjh345fd 6y ago
It doesn't need to contain the words. It clearly and repeatedly portrays this as some kind of women's movement, when it is not.
- joshuaissac 6y ago
  That the uprising was started by women is corroborated by other, older sources as well,[1] and is not a misportrayal by the BBC. That Cheran is populated by the indigenous Purépecha people is also supported by other sources, including the Mexican legal system that upheld the town's autonomy. I cannot find anything else in the article that would support what you are saying. Can you provide some quotations? 1. https://www.wired.com/2013/05/cheran-uprising/ https://www.wired.com/2013/05/cheran-uprising/
  - asdkjh345fd 6y ago
    Look at the photos in the article. See how it is mostly men but they focus on the one woman in the big group of men? You have to be very suggestible to buy such an obviously conjured narrative.
    - joshuaissac 6y ago
      There are 8 photos in the article (not including the map); women are shown in 4 of those; there is exactly 1 photo where they focus on one woman at the front of a line in a parade (with multiple lines). To put that in perspective, there is also 1 photo that focuses on a man surrounded by men and women. There are also 2 photos of one woman each, but they were just two of the people who were interviewed (and one of them was an instigator of the revolt). There no conjured narrative here that I can see. If every other source were saying that there were no women involved in the revolt, and the BBC were inserting women into the story, then it would be a conjured narrative, but that is not what is happening here.

pjc50 6y ago

Oh, the wording is all mine, inferred from this fairly thin set of news reports. But: - radical: doesn't get much more radical than an armed uprising - indigenous: they're Purepecha. This is very important. While they're Mexican nationals, and would be called Mexican by Americans, they're not of Spanish descent. They're descendents of a tribe unconquered by the Aztecs. Racial discrimination against people of indigenous descent is common all over Latin America. - feminist: all the news coverage points out that the initial uprising was initiated by women. - anti-colonial: outsiders of a different ethnic background coming onto traditional tribal land to steal natural resources? With the collusion of the police? Sounds pretty colonial to me. - self-organising: found a bit more on this; https://elenemigocomun.net/2018/08/cheran-names-government/ https://elenemigocomun.net/2018/08/cheran-names-government/ ; https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/after-long-fight-self-government-indigenous-town-cher-n-mexico-n906171 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/after-long-fight-self-go... It's crucial to being exempted from normal politics such as elections. "arguing before the courts that there were provisions in Mexican law that permit indigenous communities a form of self-government based on their customs"; sounds analogous to the semi-autonomy of Indian reservations in the US. >> "set of family relationships embedded in the matriarchy running the town" So it looks like I overstated this a lot, but if you refer to the NBCnews article above it's a "council of elders". And they don't have parties? Family is a party you're born into. It's more or less the default arrangement of pre-bureaucratic politics. It's hard to avoid even in modern states. Add up all someone's in-laws and second cousins and it's easy to get to hundreds of people, which goes a long way in a community of 20,000. BBC: "Most people who live in Cheran are from the town. Social mores dictate that locals marry locals - there are very few outsiders here. Families are large, and they are close. Everyone knows everyone else. And that is the foundation of the town's unity." NBC: "Patricia Hernández, a taco vendor and mother of four, accepted the challenge to be part of their government when her neighbors chose her to represent their fogata. She is now one of four women who will govern Cherán for the next three years as part of the twelve-person council known as K'eri Jánaskakua. "Before the government didn't take us [women] into account, until we were the ones who started this new government seven years ago," said Hernández to NBC News. "We said 'Ya Basta!', (Enough!) to put an end to this violence." (more feminism! with machetes!) It doesn't "suddenly occur", it was always there, it just took a lot of adversity to mobilize it to the level of armed self-government.