Good Memories : Queen's Players Opening Video Winter 2008

In Winter 2008, I was lucky enough to play Karen Hitchcock (the now former and then current, Dean of Queen's University) in Queen's Players.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen's_Players

I joined Queen's Players Fall 2007 to play a loud, crass robot R2-mother f-ing - D2 in An Inconvenient Truth About Clark and Dog. Then Hitchcock, in Dial Whoopi For Murder (Winter 2008), and finally Jesus Christ Super Star Wars (Spring 2008). For two other years I have also done choreography for 4 shows.

‘Nationalism and Homophobia go together’: A struggle for Human Rights in Israel and Palestine (A Film Review of Citizen Nawi)

Citizen Nawi, directed by Nissim Mossek, is a documentary film released in 2007 that outlines the struggle to end apartheid in Israel and Palestine, centered around the life of an Israeli Human Rights and anti-apartheid activist, Ezra Nawi. Not only are Ezra’s anti-zionist politics reason for the scrutiny of his Israeli peers, but also his homosexuality, and furthermore his homosexual relationships with Palestinian men. This paper will consist of a film review of the documentary Citizen Nawi; first remarking on the current homophobia in Israel, experienced by Ezra, secondly attempting to summarize the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and then outline the current socio-political reality of Israel and Palestine, thirdly discussing Ezra’s homosexuality, anti-zionism, and the intersection of his political and personal sphere through his relationships with Palestinian men, and lastly, conclude by discussing the power of this film as an independent portrayal of the white homosexual man.

As with many religions, Judaism (the religion of Israel), is divided regarding it’s stance on homosexuality. However, the prevalent view among the varying denominations holds that homosexuality is sinful and that sexual acts between people of the same sex, is forbidden by the Torah. This division speaks true not only in Israeli society but down to their National Policy, which, since June 2009, recognizes same-sex marriages, only as a “state-recognized non-religious marriage”. When to be an Israeli, is to be Jewish, this exclusion from religious marriage is an exclusion from one’s society; most other citizen’s having non-religious marriages granted are non-nationals. Furthermore, “Queer uses of time and space develop in opposition to the institutions of family, heterosexuality and reproduction and queer subcultures develop as alternatives to kinship-based notions of community”. As such, LGBT sexual identity can be seen as ‘anti-Israel’, and thus can be seen as a threat to Israel and it’s people’s hopeful ‘victory’.

Israeli homophobia is documented in Citizen Nawi, as Ezra is ridiculed and threatened by his fellow Jews. Specifically, the Israeli Gay-Pride parade depicted in Citizen Nawi, is portrayed as a form of protest and resistance, rather than a celebration of the LGBT community; many Israeli’s came out to protest instead of support. Yet, Ezra embodies the spirit of the gay pride parade in his every day life and fight for human rights and racial equality. As a result of Ezra’s ‘radical’ political thought, sexuality and inter-racial partnerships, he has become a police target. In reality, Ezra is an ‘at-risk’ target of the prevalent homophobic culture in Israel; a culture given international attention this past August (2009), when an Israeli gunman killed two Israelis, wounding ten others, at a gay support center in Tel Aviv

The Israeli-Palestinian apartheid is a religious centered battle, both claiming religious right to the holy land of Jerusalem. The use of the word apartheid, is controversially used to describe the situation in Israel and Palestine. However, as the word apartheid means separation, specifically racial segregation through public policy, I believe this word exemplifies the relationship between Palestinians and Israelis. As Israel celebrated it’s creation and birth of a national identity in 1948, Palestine mourned it’s demise, as thousands of Palestinians were expelled from their homeland, suffering the Nakba (the catastrophe). Ezra and director Mossek show the extensive boarder checks and security measures to keep Palestinians out. Ezra states that “the root of the problem is racism”5, they justify it through religion and nationalism. In 2003, Israel even began the construction of a wall6 to act as a type a barrier along the West Bank dividing the occupied territories (Palestine) and Israel. The wall is also being built within the occupied territories diving the jewish settlements from Palestinian land.

These barriers and protection methods have been put in place as a form of protection from terrorism against the state of Israel, specifically from Hamas. Hamas is an Islamic Palestinian socio-political organization, with a Parliamentary sector that is currently the majority elected government of Palestine. Hamas are classified as a terrorist organization by countries such as Canada and the United States8, with their conception, a retaliation against the Israeli rule in Palestinian territories; It seems obvious that Israel should feel a need to protect itself. Cristina Gallach, the spokeswoman for EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana, said: “Hamas leaders know that if they reverse their position, renounce violence and enter the political process, they can come off the list.”. However, can we call this position justified when Israel has committed notable acts of ‘terrorism’ in the name of protectionism? A notable media case is that of Ezzeldeen Abu al-Aish, a Palestinian doctor who has worked for years at an Israeli Hospital in Gaza. While being interviewed live on Israel’s Channel 10 news network about the situation in Gaza, three of his daughters, of his eight children, were killed by an Israeli bomb that hit their home that evening, intended for an alleged sniper seen on the building. Although our history books teach us our side, our bias, in reality, a battle can only occur when it’s ‘justified’ on both sides.

Without a final conclusion to the Palestinian Israeli conflict, it is difficult not to question Ezra’s actions. However, at the base of this fight, lies human rights. The lives of thousands of Palestinians have been irreparably changed, and today, as a population of refugees, they struggle to maintain a livelihood.

Ezra and Mossek draw attention to Israel’s current participation and perpetuation of this societal dichotomy. By capturing the humanity and the cross-cultural commonalities such as children, life, family, surviving, and love, the documentary creates a feeling of senselessness in the audience, regarding the continual suffering. As the old saying goes, ‘with great power, comes great responsibility’. Since Israel holds more political, militaristic and economic power than Palestine, Ezra and Mossek are demanding for the state of Israel to take responsibility.

Ezra reminisces about his adolescence, longing to be part of the youth today, wishing he could have been an active conscientious objector (an Israeli that refuses mandatory conscription based on personal pacifist morality. “Selective refusal” on the other hand is punishable by law). Popular academic discourse discusses the transition of youth from victims to apt abdicators, because from ‘queer experience’ one is more likely to have a holistic view of an argument; as such, “when youth claim multiple subject positions, they are better able to identify, name and work against oppression.” as a result of Queer subcultures producing alternative temporalities, “ by allowing their participants to believe that their futures can be imagined according to logics that lie outside of the conventional forward-moving narrative of birth, marriage, reproduction and death”. It is no doubt, given Ezra’s current ‘radical’ actions and ‘subculture’ lifestyle, that he sees this ‘greener pasture’ in youth activism; “Precisely because many queers refuse and resist the heteronormative imperative of home and family, they also prolong the periods of their life devoted to subcultural participation.”

The documentary encapsulates the intersection of two marginalized communities in Israel, the Palestinian and homosexual, and aligns them through Ezra. As such this film brings into question the ‘gay international’ (or ‘global gay’ defined in Things which aren’t to be Given Names by Shana L. Calixte); the ‘gay international’, a term used to describe the hegemonic and neo-colonial international gay-rights (and human-rights) movement being forced upon the non-western world, specifically the Middle East. While Ezra is not western, European Jews formed the state of Israel, and the Israeli government has a strong political alliance with the United States; there is no doubting the western influence on Israeli society. Like the gay international seeks to “liberate Arab and Muslin ‘gays and lesbians’ from the oppression under which they allegedly live by transforming them from practitioners of same-sex contact into subjects who identify as homosexual and gay”, Ezra can be said to seek to liberate the Palestinian community in more ways than one.

Although the documentary is a short glimpse into the life of Ezra Nawi, he may maintain non-Palestinian gay-male friends, he only had relationships with Palestinian ones; there is a major intersection of his political and personal spheres. However, Western notions of sexuality do not resonate for Middle Eastern peoples because of inherent societal differences. “In the Muslim world male-male sexuality plays an important role. But in these societies there are no ‘homosexuals’ -- there is no word for homosexuality -- the concept is completely unfamiliar. There are no heterosexuals either.”

As Ezra judges his ex-partner, Fuad Mussa, saying ‘I pity him’, one can see this as a lack of understanding; Fuad left Ezra to return to Palestine and marry a woman. He cannot recognize the importance of his partner’s acceptance by his own Palestinian community and it outweighed his love for Ezra. “Those adult men who do not fit readily into prevailing notions of true manhood... are often looked down upon and despised”, referring to lifestyles of homosexuality. However, in this situation one must recognize the deep emotional upset that Ezra was experiencing at the time the comment was made. Ezra’s pride and commitment to what he believes, including being homosexual, is a huge part of Ezra’s character but is not necessarily the nature of his ex-partner.

With such inherent cultural differences, why does Ezra continue to pursue relationships with Palestinian men? “Sexual relations in Middle Eastern societies have historically articulated social hierarchies, that is, dominant and subordinate social positions: adult men on top; women, boys and slaves below” . However, it seems as those Ezra is portrayed in a more dominant, masculine role as the savior and protector of his submissive lovers. With the dominant presence of the Israeli state in the lives of Palestinians, another level exists in the hierarchy chain above the Arab man: the Israeli people; One could even question how he attracts such young and handsome partners.

As such, while this movie differs on many levels via race, culture, and even substance, Black Looks (specifically Chapter 9: Paris is Burning?) by Bell Hooks, contains a review of the documentary Paris is Burning directed by Jennie Livingston, offers loose insights and parallels that are noteworthy regarding the sexuality of Palestinian men. This is because the societies in both films (being American versus Israeli-Palestinian) are experiencing forms of white-supremacist, patriarchal cultural-hegemony. Being so, is it possible to attribute dressing up in drag, and taking on the role of a white-women, and Ezra’s young Palestinian men, taking a submissive, feminine role with him? As his partner, leaves him in the middle of the film to return to Palestine occupied territories and marry a woman, these parallels are potentially not so far fetched. Hooks also states, “if the class, race and gender aspirations expressed by the drag queens who share their deepest dreams is always the longing to be in the position of the ruling-class women then that means there is also the desire to act in partnership with the ruling-class white male”. “Many heterosexual black men in white supremacist patriarchal culture have acted as though the primary “evil” of racism has been the refusal of the dominant culture to allow them full access to patriarchal power, so that in sexist terms they are compelled to inhabit a sphere of powerlessness, deemed “feminine,” hence they have perceived themselves as emasculated”21. While to generalize cross-culturally based on similar levels of the communities’ marginalization is unfounded, it does pose questions of Ezra’s neo-colonial privilege.

While this movie offers an unseen (anti-Zionist and homosexual) perspective on the Israel and Palestine, one could question if the movie would have been as well received if Ezra were a Lesbian. This is another example of “Lesbian subcultures almost never appear at all... women’s involvement... has been left out of theoretical accounts and subcultural histories.”. That this movie is further removing society from being able to “address sexuality without fixed categories of lesbian and gay”, and be more accessible to a Queer community.

To even portray the ‘homosexual’ and ‘Palestinian’, in an Israeli independent documentary form is controversial. As such, this raises the question, ‘how would this film be received in Hollywood?’ As Hollywood’s primary audience is the American people, Ezra’s white-male background, despite his homosexuality, aids the film in being more relatable to the general public. As discussed previously, this stems from prevailing social hierarchies stemming from colonial influences. However these colonial influences could also create animosity, because of Ezra’s inter-racial relationships.

As surprising as it may sound, I believe this movie would be too controversial for Hollywood, not necessarily because of its portrayal of inter-racial homosexuality, but because of its portrayal of the political conflict. With a longstanding alliance with Israel, it is foreseeable that the majority of the American population would question the legitimacy of such an anti-Zionist outlook. It is still a struggle to have this opinion voiced (being that the Israeli conflict is an apartheid, as discussed previously) in ‘the land of freedoms’, where documents like the SHIT-list ( a list of ‘self-hating Israel-threatening’ Jews) are made, to protest and degrade all Jews who are anti-apartheid, and scold them for their hatred of their own people. American President Barack Obama is the first president to ever criticize the Israel government by saying there have been “ ‘years of distrust’ and said both sides needed to make a ‘sustained effort... to respect one another and seek common ground’… describing Palestinians' plight as ‘intolerable’ .”24. Yet, Obama’s actions, or more appropriately his lack of action, speaks louder than his words; Israel continues to receive aid while, as Hamas are still in power, no governments will lend their support; only NGO (Non-Government Organization) support is available.

I believe this film is a powerful portrayal of the struggle to end apartheid in Israel and Palestine. While Citizen Nawi raises concern regarding the narrow portrayal of ‘the homosexual’, in my opinion the director’s intention was to ‘normalize’ homosexuality. While Ezra is ostracized through the movie for his homosexuality, his role as an anti-Zionist takes the forefront. His homosexuality, and relationships with Palestinian men set a ‘human’ backdrop, allowing the audience to connect with the basic emotions of love and heartbreak themselves. In a sense, his homosexuality humanized Ezra, allowing the audience to empathize and relate.

Cori Hayden & The rise of Bioprospecting in Mexico lead by the U.S. National Institiute of Health and la Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico

After the Mexican revolution of 1910-1920, Mexico sees a rise of Indigenismo that would influence the “Mexican Miracle”(Clancy 2001): from 1930-1960, Mexico experienced political stability, combined with steady economic growth. The face of the economy started to shift from rural agriculture to urban industrialization, as Mexico attempted to become an industrialized country. However, with the rise of the financial crisis of the 1970s and 1980s, Mexico found itself threatening to default on debt payments in 1982. With this threat, came the emergence of neoliberal reforms and investment advised by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank (IBD). Among these changes, were “‘market mediated’ conservation and development initiatives that took root in the late 1980s and early 1990s” (Hayden, 361), threatened but not stopped by the Zapitista movement. Bioprospecting encompasses the ‘pharmaceutical companies’ use of plants and “traditional knowledge” as leads for developing new drugs” (Hayden, 359), and it gained momentum when western life-science companies saw this as a valuable shortcut for finding new leads. Then, in 1992, the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), redrew “jurisdiction over ‘genetic resources’ and ‘traditional knowledge’ by taking them out of the global commons and placing them squarely within the sovereignty of nation-states” (Hayden, 362). Hence, the CBD validated the International Property Right(IPR) of indigenous knowledge and furthermore mandated drug and biotechnology companies redistribute a portion of the profits derived from bioprospecting, to the source nations and communities: one can no longer ‘take’ without ‘giving’. Bioprospecting would be a fore-runner of these neoliberal initiatives in Mexico, as it seemed a convenient vehicle to drive pharmaceutical discovery and, simultaneously, sustainable development and ‘redistributive justice’ (Hayden, 359). Yet, these initiatives are entangled with idioms of community and market, that have shaped forms of inclusion and exclusion, and have ultimately ensured the failure of bioprospecting as mode for sustainable development and IPR ‘redistributive justice’.

Key players in shaping bioprospecting, particularly in Mexico, were the U.S. National Institute of Health (NIH) and the U.S. government International Cooperative Biodiversity Groups (ICBG) compared to la Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico (UNAM, Mexico’s National Autonomous University) run by lead ethnobotanist, Robert Bye. In bioprospecting, the real debate is not who benefits but how to choose who benefits and how benefit is distributed. Both the NIH and UNAM bioprospecting methods shaped these relationships differently, yet encountered a similar inability in properly redistributing benefits: “The point where these two models of benefit-sharing diverge is not, then, where they end up but, rather, where they begin” (Hayden, 367).

Marx and Mauss helped cement the idioms of market and community, defining “market as the site of abstraction, commodity transaction, rational actors, and disembedded and disentangled relations”, and, “community as the bearer of gift, home to barter, share values and embedded relations” (Hayden, 360). These ideas have shaped the way in which redistribution has taken place by compartmentalizing, essentializing and separating the idioms of market and community, thus having effect on the inclusion and exclusion of individuals and/or groups as benefit-recipients. Benefit-recipients in bioprospecting initiatives “are those people who can be rewarded for their identifiable input of labor and innovation into, and stewardship of nature”(Hayden, 362), but as discussed earlier, it is easily identifiable by definition and less so in reality.

The NIH invokes the idiom of community through their bioprospecting initiatives, or initiatives being carried out by groups like the ICGB who’s ‘industrial outlet’ (by that Hayden means the NIH that provides power, funding and even legitimacy) dictates their method and goals. The NIH’s focus on community in lieu of the market, is because it is believed that market plants are too far removed from their source. As a result, it is questioned if market plants “produce the right relationships between communities and biodiversity-derived benefits?” thus deeming the market, “an unsettling interruption”(Hayden, 364) in bioprospecting. With community regarded as “an idealized and necessary source or site of quasi-sovereignty, collective authorship and ethical capacity” (Hayden, 368), the NIH proposed community based prospecting to ensure legitimacy and provide a rout for reciprocity. Benefit-sharing contracts were to be used to provide legitimate claim as a benefit-recipient of the bioprospecting program. However, this theory was driven by the assumptions that plants, people and knowledge are found in a ‘package’ a ‘community’. Furthermore, community was limited to those with biodiversity-rich climates but could include privately held ranches, where scientist repeatedly chose to select specimens from. Shortcuts to specimen collection are the implications of the difficult, yet still essentialized, task that recognizes IPR of indigenous knowledge, while fulfilling guidelines, regulations and quotas to maintain project funding.

Robert Bye and the UNAM, on the other hand, first centered their bioprospecting initiatives through urban plant markets. The market replaces the need for benefit-sharing contracts as the contract and benefit is in the sale, mediated by the market forces of supply and demand, and allows for strategic essentialism in order to avoid long-term obligation. Furthermore, “popular plant names and uses, for example, are on vivid display, alongside other key dimensions of ethnobotanical inquiry such as which part of a given plant people consider most useful” (Hayden, 363). While market plants are seen as useful as a result of their industrial potential (their ability to mass-manufacture with their extracts), the potential influx of demand could strain the agricultural process and yields. Ideas of conservation are removed in this stage, as, from the market, each plant’s specific root of origin is too cumbersome to navigate. For this reason, Haden states, “it is impossible to trace this prehispanic-national legacy to particular individuals and communities they have made a bid for redefining the relationship between resource acquisition and benefit-sharing” (Hayden, 365) The UNAM decided to use middle men like NGOs and Indigenous Collectives with like-minded goals and/or projects, to change from direct exchange to a ‘wider’ benefit. However, these like-minded goals imply shared universals, that inhibit the success of sustainable development. Hence, UNAM strategies for prospecting fall short of a full-picture plant origin and ethnographic history, as both strategies continue to essentialize the plant, its significance and the people that grow it.

Both notion of redistribution and compensation from the NIH and Bye, “aim to find ways to enroll the proper kinds of subjects into longer-term projects of stewardship”(Hayden, 367). These idioms and neoliberal mechanism implemented by the NIH and Bye have blindly guided these bioprospecting initiatives into ineffective domains. Notions of ‘us’ and them’ allow bioprospecting initiatives to regard indigenous knowledge, agriculture and resources only so valuable as to identify what each herbal remedy is used for and what plant(s) and strain(s) are contained in said remedy. The hopes and end-goal of bioprospecting lie, instead, in the hands of the educated scientists, who’s work could lead scientific discovery.

Reference:
Clancy, Michael. 2001. Mexican Tourism: Export Growth and Structural Change. Texas: University of Texas Press.
Hayden, C. 2003. From Market to Market: Bioprospecting's Idioms of Inclusion. American Ethnologist. 30(3) August 2003:359-371.

The Mexican Tourist Industry: An Example of how Global Capitalism Hinders Development and Perpetuates Class Division between Nations

Mexico began its integration into the international market after World War II, and was one of the first countries to be subject to the Structural Adjustment Programs of the World Trade Organization (WTO). These liberal economic structures and policies have become globalized, creating a form of Global Capitalism. Global Capitalism has become the dominant global economic system, and unfortunately has perpetuated the dichotomy the developed and underdeveloped world. Mexico, like many underdeveloped states, is heavily reliant on Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in many business sectors. This is an example of the developed world's dominance and control over the Third World, and how they maintain their oligarchic control over the world's wealth. In particular, the shift in capitalist economic policy from Keynesian to liberal, neo-utilitarian and state-minimalist policy during the 1980s exacerbated this polarization.

With US Hegemony (or at least economic dominance, especially in regards to American Transnational Corporations), I thought it interesting to look to America's underdeveloped neighbour, Mexico. This essay will focus on Mexico's Tourist Industry, as its rise coincides with Mexico's changing economic policy, as they try to integrate the Mexican economy into the international system and shift development categories. This essay will first discuss capitalism as globalization, Mexico prior to liberalization, changes in capitalism during the process of liberalization, and conclude with the adverse affects liberalization had on Mexican development.

With approximately 20 million tourists annually that pump 8 billion dollars (USD) into the economy, the tourist industry is a major aspect of Mexican life (especially as it employs approximately 8 million Mexicans) (Clancy, 32). Despite these economic benefits, the country still remains classified as 'under-developed', as a result of the dominance of Global Capitalism as Globalization. “Globalization is...defined as a particular way of organizing social life across existing state borders” (Sklair, 8). Capitalism's “most palpable impact has been through the worldwide process of restructuring of states and economies, bringing diverse population and regions into the realm of a common dynamic.” (Roberts & Hite, 217). It is clear that the results of Globalization and capitalism synonymous. “This dynamic is not simply a quantitative extension of commodity relations. It is rather a qualitative shift in the mode of social organization that marks a historic transition in the capitalist world order” (Roberts & Hite, 217).

Unfortunately, “the relations between advanced capitalist countries and dependent nations leads rather to a 'marginalization” of the latter within the global system of economic development” (Roberts & Hite, 92). In our capitalist world the less developed countries are kept down because of their lack of infrastructure, and can therefore not provide the quality of life that is available to those in the developed world, but lack the necessary capital to create and maintain such infrastructures. (Sklair 1991, 87). As the Third world attempts to shift categories of development they further become tied to the system. Developing countries cannot properly compete on the market until they develop similar infrastructures to the first world, which requires capital that is only available through loans from institutions and developed nations. Just like Mexico, all “countries tied to international capitalism by that type of linkage (debt) remain economically dependent, insofar as the production of the means of production (technology) are concentrated in advanced capitalist economies (Roberts & Hite, 86). However, the developing nations are unable to break the cycle, as they stand no chance in competing in the same market with the wealthy, developed nations that they themselves are in debt to. The poor are gradually becoming poorer as the wealthy tighten their grasp over the global economy.

The current globalized International economy is “basically made up of transnational conglomerates, firms which operate simultaneously in various national markets, thus constituting an international economic system which penetrates and overlaps with the national economic system” (Kumar, 53-54). While the movements of money, goods, services, ideas and communications across state borders are just too fluid for states to be able to control them as a result of our current global liberal capitalists market (Lacher, 1), all capital is sitting in the hands of very few through the form of Transnational Corporations, and is thus unable to benefit the poorer nations. Since “The most important economic, political and culture-ideology good that circulate around the world tend to be owned and/or controlled by small group in a relatively small number of places, mainly in and around global cities” (Slaire, 8), giving the transnational corporations (TNCs) more economic weight, and overall political power than previously. This Globalized capitalism is reshaping the political sphere and the nature of international relations; unfortunately, with this globalization is coming a form of reverse democratization. “Capitalism...reshapes political units, the nature of international society, and its dominant process through the twin process of democratization and globalization” (Lacher, 5). This means our world is globalizing but losing democracy as it is no longer solely governments with political power, and because economics has become the focus of our political system rather than the collective good. This is why the transnational capitalist class has become the focus of our political practices (Sklair, 8). As we lose democracy, we lose the voice of the collective, the voice that is demanding for change in order to stop this polarization of development categories.

The final steps in insuring this integration of the world into a capitalist system began in the 1980s with the neo-liberal economic ideals of lassez-faire economics. The solidification as capitalism as the new world structure coincides with Mexico’s rise of the tourist industry.

“The present underdevelopment of Latin America is the result of its centuries-long participation in the process of world capitalist development” (Roberts & Hite, 78). However, prior to the mass liberalization of the global market commencing in the 1980s, Mexico seemed to be an excellent example of development. In the 1960s Mexico was known to few around the world as a vacation destination. Those to visit Mexico were primarily from the United States (US) who generally visited cities located along the border, like Mexico City and Tijuana (Clancy, 42). From 1930-1960, Mexico experienced a period of political stability, combined with steady economic growth; it was known as the “Mexican Miracle” (Clancy, 45). The face of the economy started to shift from rural agriculture to urban industrialization, as Mexico attempted to become an industrialized country. However, the country was still importing more than it exported. As a result the Banco De Mexico studied this issue and released a report that concluded the country needed to start 'exporting paradise'; in short they were to increase tourism opportunities through the creation of new resorts, refurbishing existing resorts and aggressively marketing the country as a vacation destination. Tourism made the shift from border-tourism to international tourism (Clancy, 63).

The state itself played a large role in the expansion of the tourist industry. Strategically they placed resorts in coastal regions and marketed them towards foreign, middle-class, mass tourism. As the areas chosen were lightly populated, the acquisition of land was simple and displaced few citizens (Clancy, 107). Cancun was the first project; it was completed in 1971 and started seeing results by 1974. The tourism industry became a quasi-governing power in the region because of its stronghold over local economies, giving the hotels and resorts a lot of political weight, to the region and the country. As mentioned previously, the TNCs are gaining more political weight as they increase their stronghold over the global economy.

Establishing these new vacation destinations required a plethora of start-up capital, which was gained through foreign and domestic investment. Surprisingly, the majority of capital came from within the country. However, to ensure the success of the resort, foreign hotel TNCs were sought out to invest or purchase the property. This allowed the resorts to be associated with the quality, reliability and amiable experience associated with popular, well-known names. However, “the fact that those who own and control the Mexican industry are made up of a fraction of international and domestic capital suggests that the benefit associated with tourism exports accrue mainly to the few” (Clancy, 123), being the “owners (mainly TNCs) and operators of motels, hotels, guest houses and other lodging facilities” (Clancy, 124). With the ease of selling the resorts to foreign TNCs, the majority owners of hotels are the foreign chains; Mexico ranks first among developing countries in foreign-affiliated hotels. This means high volumes of money do to stay in the country, but also that foreign TNCs are not familiar with the culture and day-to-day life and needs of the people which could make their impact harmful on the unfamiliar community. Furthermore, it solidifies the dominance of the first world over the third world.

As Mexico had strict regulations and tariffs on foreign investment and importing in “April 1971, new regulations allowed the title to land in the prohibited zones to be held in trust for foreign investors by an authorized Mexican bank; this was Mexico's first step towards a liberalized economy. The maximum length of the trust was established at 30 years, after which it could either be renewed for an additional 30 years or the property sold to a Mexican citizen”. With the more liberal economic regulations, capital started to go flood to the wealthy and leave the thrid world in a drought through unregulated FDI. “First signaled by the Mexican default in 1982, this frought was probably the signle most important factor in the overall deterioration of the economic performance of the third world in the 1980s” (Roberts & Hite, 327). The government did not truly liberalize the economy until Mexico had to suspend its debt payments after the oil crisis in 1982, but this did not bring benefits are rather perpetuate the division between the developed and developing worlds.

This period of structural change, through Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs) was established and monitored by the World Trade Organization (WTO) as a condition to the debt suspension (Kelly 1999).Shift from Keynesianism to neo-utilitarian state-minimalist economic policy began around 1981 thanks to political influence of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher (Roberts & Hite, 326). Unfortunately, with market liberalization is it “next to impossible for developing countries governments to protect their own service industries from competition from well-established foreign firms” (Roberts & Hite, 283). Structures imposed by the WTO tried to two contradictory things: accommodate the third world countries aspirations to catch up to the first world, while maintaining the first world oligarchic wealth (Roberts & Hite, 329); “The international structure of the system suffers fundamental transformations as a consequence of exogenous changes in the nature o the external links of the country. these exogenous changes are the product of the evolution of the system of international relations within which the country operates, and particularly of the evolution of the hegemonic power of that system of international relations” (Kumar, 52).
Allowing for further loans to service debt and keep the country afloat meant these countries were “tied to international capitalism by that type of linkage (debt) remain economically dependent, insofar as the production of the means of production (technology) are concentrated in advanced capitalist economies (Roberts & Hite, 86) . “The IMF assumed a de facto role of banker to the world, determining with the World Bank, conditions by which states could re-negotiate their outstanding loans and/or service their debt. these conditions were universally imposed and adopted, as state privatized public assets slashed social budgets, cut wages, devalues national currencies, and promoted exporting” (Roberts & Hite, 222).

Developing countries must adapt to the dominant economic structures in order to remain figures in the global economy. However, their adaptation and liberalization of their economies has led to the further polarization of development categories among countries. These structure mean that “developing countries as a group are being more tightly constrained in their national development strategies by proliferating regulations formulated and enforced by international organizations” (Roberts & Hite, 226), which “often jeopardized the delivery of essential collective goods like public health, education and sustainable environment and it has exacerbated inequality within and between nations to a degree that is destructive of the basic social solidarity” (Roberts & Hite, 422). Furthermore, “the multilateral and bilateral agreements actively prevent developing countries from procuring the kinds of industrial and technology policies... aimed at accelerating the 'internal' articulation of the economy” (Roberts & Hite, 227-228). Since the 1950s, the gap, in terms of the development of industrial sectors, has been narrowing between the developed and underdeveloped nations (Roberts & Hite, 126), but industrialization and development are not synonymous, as the developing nations are not experiencing the promised benefits that come with restructuring.

The “most dramatic case of state restructuring in recent is that of the Mexican dress rehearsal for the implementation of NAFTA in the 1990s” (Roberts & Hite, 222) . This is because NAFTA goes against Mexican constitution Article 27 established after 1910 revolution, as it opened up land for sale to both Mexican and foreign business with no representation from local communities. This led to a rise in Zapatista uprising, opposing the signing of NAFTA, but they were unsuccessful and NAFTA was signed (followed immediately by the peso crisis ) (Roberts & Hite, 299).

SAPs were intended to help stabilize the economy and stimulate growth to ensure the repayment of debt, through shifting from state-directed development to market-directed development. However, during this period of structural adjustment, poverty levels rose especially after the peso crisis in 1994 ( Merill and Miro, 56). “Although the government increased the minimum wage by 21 percent during 1995, the cost of living rose by more than 50 percent as a result of the currency collapse. In September 1995, the minimum wage was sufficient to cover only 35 percent of workers' basic necessities, compared to 94 percent in December 1987”(Merill and Miro, 33). This had no effect on the tourism industry as it flourished during these periods of crisis. However, this is just another example of how the profits generated remain in the hands of very few (Clancy 2001). Furthermore, the signing of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1994, ensured that by 2000 all regulations regarding FDI had been removed, leaving the Mexican market open and vulnerable to TNCs; especially as Mexico's neighbor, the US, is the clear front-runner for hotel TNCs (Adams, Gupta, and Mengisteab, 59).

As the country has had little to no success in alleviating poverty and increasing quality of living since the 1980s, it is clear that factors exist that perpetuate class division and inequality (Adams, Gupta, and Mengisteab, 23). As the rise of the Mexican tourist industry coincided with global economic market liberalization, what could have become a profitable venture and export for Mexico became another failed venture. In fact, with the industry being predominantly foreign owned, it further cements the control the developed world has over Mexico, cementing its label as underdeveloped. The evolution of the capitalist system increased the polarization between countries and within the countries themselves (Kumar, 52-53)

However, presently the global economy is going to be experiencing restructuring with the aparent recession that will be occuring the the US. As the US undergoes election, one maor topic is that of NAFTA and many of the candidates (notably from the Democratic Party) have proposed the abolition of NAFTA. It is uncertain what this could mean for Mexico who is dependent on FDI to expand their tourist industry as well as for paying off debt. If the world decreases the market's liberty, Mexico must follow, but in my opinion, it is safe to assume that prior acts of market liberalization will remain inhiberters to development.

References

Adams, Gupta, and Mengisteab. 1999. Economic reform and Political Turmoil in Mexico. Globalization and the Dilemmas of the State in the South, UK. Macmillan Press Limited.
Clancy, Michael. 2001. Mexican Tourism: Export Growth and Structural Change. Texas: University of Texas Press.
Hite, Amy B., and J. Timmons Roberts, ed. 2007. The Globaliztion and Development Reader: Perspectives on Development and Global Chance. MA, USA: Blackwell Publishing.
Kelly, Thomas j. 1999. The Effects of Economic Adjustment on Poverty in Mexico. UK: Ashgate Publishing Ltd.
Kumas, Krishna., ed. 1980. Transnational Enterprises: Their impact on the Third World Societies and Cultures. Boulder Colorado: Westview Press Inc.
Lacher, Hannes. 2006. Beyond Globalization: Capitalism, Territoriality and the International Relations of Modernity. New York, NY: Routledge (Taylor and Francis Group).
Merrill and Miró, ed. 1996. Mexico: A Country Study. Washington: GPO for the Library of Congress.
Sklair, Leslie. 1991. Sociology of the Global System. UK: Harvester Wheatsheaf.

World Bank Group. 2008. “MexicoData.” The World Bank Group, Retrieved on February
25, 2008. HYPERLINK "http://web.worldbank.org/"http://web.worldbank.org

The Socioeconomics of Prostitution in Canada: Prostitution as an Unregulated Labor Force Encourages Capitalist Gain

When one considers the act of prostitution the term capitalism is in all probability not the first word that comes to mind. However, Prostitution has an inherent link to capitalism. This paper’s purpose is to discuss prostitution’s relevance to the economy as it encourages capitalist profit through the exploitation of these illegal laborers. This paper will first outline the definitions of capitalism and prostitution, prostitution as a social construct, discuss the legality of prostitution in Canada, how the prostitutes constitute as an unregulated labor force and finally how unregulated labor encourage capitalist profit.

Capitalism is an economist theory heavily influenced by the work of Adam Smith and his ‘invisible hand’ theory discussed in his writing the Wealth of Nations. It emphasizes profit through private ownership, and a free market. An ideal capitalist society would have little to no regulation on companies; this includes taxes, and labor restrictions. Adam Smith was a firm believer that this type of society would benefit the whole through the trickle down effect; the wealthy gain more wealth and subsequently it trickles down through the classes helping the whole of society. Today however, we know this optimist view of capitalism to be false; the wealthier become more wealthy while the poor remain destitute.

Prostitution is defined as the selling of one’s sexual services for money, or as Kingsley Davis defines it, “the use of sexual stimulation in a system of dominance to attain non-sexual ends”. Despite the simplicity of this definition there are areas of uncertainty. Davis characterizes this uncertainty with his belief that “the employment of sex for non-sexual ends within a competitive-authoritarian system- characterizes not simply prostitution itself but all of our institutions in which sex is involved, notably courtship and wedlock. Prostitution therefore resembles, from one point of view, behavior found in out most respectable institutions.” Simply, types of prostitution are ever present in our most valued institution in society. This makes it difficult to create legislation with a clear definition of prostitution if it is morally acceptable in valued institution such as marriage.

In Canada criminal legislation regarding prostitution is bewildering. Sections 210-213 of the Criminal Code of Canada deal with aspects of prostitution: Bawdyhouses, prostitution of a person under the age of eighteen years, procuring, and other offences in relation to prostitution. The criminal code clearly sets a definition for bawdyhouses, forced prostitution and minors committing the act of prostitution, and that they are undoubtedly a criminal offence. Legislation regarding prostitutes that are willfully soliciting sexual acts for money does not make prostitution itself illegal but rather the solicitation itself. This means the only manner in which a prostitute can be prosecuted for solicitation is if one of the two parties mentions the exchange of money in correlation with sex.

As prostitution is not technically illegal, and is simultaneously not considered a legitimate career option as the profession is degraded by society, prostitutes are trapped in a type of limbo. This obscure position leaves prostitutes in a difficult situation where they are able to work as prostitutes, but their choice to do so can cause them undo hardship, exploitation and violation of their fundamental rights and freedoms; in short, prostitutes can be seen as an unregulated labor force in Canada. This lack of concrete legislation or lack of regulation (depending on one’s personal views towards the matter), infringes on the rights and freedoms of prostitutes set forth and guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. These infringements occur with regards to sections 1, 6.2 and 7.

Section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms states that it “guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society”. It cannot be justifiable in a free and democratic society to have prostitution in solicitation be in existance in many of our highly recognized institutions and be illegal for the career of prostitution. Although the charter further states that there are reasonable limits, when the definition of prostitution is so blurred reasonable ;limits cannot justifiably apply, as it would be applied differently to two situations with the base of both being inherently the same.

In Section 6.2 b of the charter says that “every citizen of Canada and every person who has the status of a permanent resident of Canada has the right to pursue the gaining of a livelihood in any province.” Although Canada likes to pride itself in being a country with plentiful jobs there are those who do not have the experience or ability to perform jobs at a income equivalent to that of a prostitute. Their livelihood is being hindered due to the fact their skill set may be in the career of prostitution. If we are hindering their livelihood, then we are denying prostitutes their fundamental rights as outlines is 6.2 b.

Moreover, Section 7 states that “everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.” One must ask what is fundamental justice. Since the legislation regarding prostitution is so bewildered, one could argue that that legislation is not fundamental to society. Therefore we can focus on the deprivation of the fundaments rights of liberty and security of the person with prostitutes. First liberty as they do not have the legal right to peruse their career of choice. More importantly security of the person is being hindered as our law does not make prostitution illegal but rather the solicitation and therefore as an unregulated labor force are subject to undue preventable harm. Denying one their personal freedoms is a type of exploitation.

Davis states “Capitalism like communism, has tried in the case of prostitution to negate the basic capitalistic principle”(16). Nevertheless, the legislation created to prevent prostitution has done the opposite and rather encouraged capitalist ideals. “There is no reason to believe that a change in the economic system will eliminate either side of demand” (17). Canada’s capitalism is not responsible for prostitution but rather the lack of legislation and concrete definition of prostitution. Capitalism is rather encouraged as a result of prostitutes being an unregulated labor force; they are able to continue soliciting sex for money, just in a more cautious manner.

With the lack of regulations for prostitution as a profession, prostitution is on a free market. As previously discussed a free market can generate more revenue but generally rests within the upper echelon of society. In this sense, prices are encouraged to be competitive. As the product itself can be viewed as substitute, it is easily competitive on the market; each product varies but roughly has the same purpose. This means that each prostitute must estimate her pricing in order to be competitive with other prostitutes, while keeping demand for his or her product in mind. This can drive the prices down in order to for the prostitute to stay competitive in his or her field.

With a free market we must look at the prostitute who willfully solicit sex for money, and further classify them into two categories: prostitutes who are sole proprietors and those with pimps.

Prostitutes that are sole proprietor, with the nature of competitive pricing on substitute products, are in risk of losing money if there is not an increase in supply and demand for the product (prostitution). In short the prostitute would have to be able to provide sexual services to an increasing amount of clientele.

Prostitutes that are managed by a pimp are often the more exploited of the prostitutes. Not only is the money from their soliciting supposed to ensure their livelihood, but also for the livelihood of their pimp. The pimp, as an unregulated boss is able to subject the prostitute to unfit working condition, abuse, and slave wage labor. As prostitution is able to continue, as there is a lack of legal legislation, but is technically not legal, the prostitute is unable to challenge the actions of the pimp and their unfit working condition through the Canadian legal system. This again is an example of the legal limbo prostitutes are faced through their exploitation.

The pimp and prostitute relationship is another example of how capitalism is able to flourish. The pimp is an example of the bourgeoisie while the prostitute is the proletariat. The bourgeoisie are the ones who profit immensely from the labor of the proletariat while the proletariat is exploited for their labor. As mentioned previously capitalism does not encourage the trickle down effect but rather further oppressed the poor and widens the gap between them and the wealthy. Unregulated labor benefits capitalists (especially the pimps), allowing them to exploit labor for their own profit. However, Davis is adamant that is not capitalism that is encouraging this in prostitution but rather our legislation (or lack there of).

As prostitutes are an unregulated labor force, they are exploited which leads to the encouragement of capitalism in Canada. It is interesting to regard this profession as part of the labor force as it raises questions abut the legality of prostitution but more importantly why prostitution itself is regarded as an immoral activity. While reading Davis’s journal article, “The Sociology of Prostitution” I gained a lot of perspective on how our institutions retain elements of prostitution in them. This made me think of the hiring of retail workers at local Abercrombie and Fitch stores. It is common knowledge that employees are hired based on their appearances. In a sense they are soliciting their body for money, they are using their ‘good looks’ into to retain revenue. Furthermore, institutions that offer adult entertainment like pornography and stripping, in many ways share the base fundamental principles that the definition of prostitution rests (although both activities are viewed as sleazy and barely acceptable in society). So I ask why is prostitution so unacceptable in society? I believe that it is because the purpose of sex is lost in the pleasure. The purpose of marriage, the purpose of sex is to create a new generation and to pass on one’s lineage. Sex with a prostitute, has no purpose but that of pleasure. In society there remains a stigma towards having sex without procreating, especially in certain religions. I believe that till this stigma leaves society sex for pleasure, whether it be premarital sex, prostitution, or masturbation, sex for pleasure will be viewed in a negative light.


References:

Beamish, Rob. 2006. Reading in Sociology’s Task and Promise. Canada: Mcgraw-Hill Ryerson Ltd.

Beamish, Rob. 2006. Sociology and the Classical Tradition: An Introduction. Canada: Mcgraw-Hill Ryerson Ltd.

Brock, R. Deborah. 1998. “Making work, making trouble : prostitution as a social problem.” University of Toronto Press.

Davis, Kingsley. 1937. “The Sociology of Prostitution.” American Sociological Review. Volume 2(issue 5): Pages 744-755

Larsen, E Nick. 1999. “Urban politics and prostitution control: a qualitative analysis of a controversial urban problem [Bill C-49 & Toronto].” Canadian Journal of Urban Research. Volume 8(Issue 1): page 28.

Little, B. Craig and Stuart H. Traub. c1999. Theories of Deviance 5th. Itasca, Illinois: F.E. Peacock Publishers

One Hundred Meters under the C.E.R.N.

“Geneva, 30 November 2009. CERN’s Large Hadron Collider has today become the world’s highest energy particle accelerator, having accelerated its twin beams of protons to an energy of 1.18 TeV in the early hours of the morning. This exceeds the previous world record of 0.98 TeV, which had been held by the US Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory’s Tevatron collider since 2001. It marks another important milestone on the road to first physics at the LHC in 2010.”

One-hundred meters below the Franco-Swiss Boarder lies the Large Hadron Collider (LHC): the world’s largest high-energy particle accelerator. Built by La Centre Européenne pour la Recherche Nucléaire (CERN) in hopes of proving, or consequently disproving, the existence of the Higgs Boson particle. This particle, predicted to exist by the Standard Model (of particle physics), is to explain the origin of mass; the recreation of conditions following the big bang. The possibilities that stem from this experiment are endless for modern science, but are they the end? This essay will discuss the possible failure or possible success of the LHC and, in both cases argue that although they both have the potential to create great change, modern science will live long and prosper.

In the first hypothesis, the project fails to give answers and as a result the scientific community feels disheartened in their fools errand. Trillions of dollars have been wasted and our reductionist attempts to solve the mystery of life, are far from solvable. The world has seen this before in Waxahachie, Texas with the commissioning of the Superconducting Super Collider (SSC). After 10 years and 8 billion dollars, the project had it’s funding cut, as the SSC was no longer connected enough to national policy. While the SSC is known to have driven wedges in the scientific community for various political and personal reasons, it certainly did not bring the collapse of modern science as even after this project’s failure, the LHC was still envisioned and constructed. As such, it can be concluded that the SCC’s failure had little impact on future science, and the same should happen if the LHC results in a failure.

Even if the LHC is a much larger and cumbersome project than that of the SSC. As the direct result of the labour of numerous european nations, the LHC has the world’s scientific community awaiting answers. Yet still, if the LHC fails, despite disappointment, science will forge on with further projects on the horizon, all trying to realize our grand narrative. While, the LHC could be seen as a failure, failures allow us to exclude possibilities and are still a step in the direction to scientific progress.

In the second hypothesis, the LHC reveals a secret to us about our creation, our beginning. To recreate the Higgs Bison could have a mass impact on modern science, and be the catalyst to many pending discoveries, and even changes to our approach towards modern science as we know it. However, since the word science encompasses progression through discovery, who is it to say that “modern science” has ended when it has merely changed.

Furthermore, as we get closer to the answers we see the questions to start asking. In an expanding universe of dark matter, black holes and galaxies unknown, it is certain that there is a lot more to learn through scientific exploration. To understand the Higgs Bison is only to gain part of the puzzle, slowly reducing the problem size. However, as we discover more about our world, we have also started to ask questions and the problem does not seems to be reducing in size but growing exponentially larger.

This self-perpetuating cycle of learning more to have more questions is what propels scientific exploration to continue, and will keep science continuing no matter what the result of the Higgs Bison experiment with the LHC. It is when we think about ourselves in the context of the universe, or a multiverse that we understand how infinitely far there is to go in science.

In conclusion, the Hadron Collider is not presenting us with the end of science, but offers potential for a new beginning. No matter what the result, something will be learned by the scientific community and they can change or adapt their science adequately. Science is about experimenting and hypothesizing with an excellent scientific method, the LHC, no matter what the outcome will have positive effects. We are reminded with how far we have to go in science when we see the earth in context of the universe or multiverses. Yet we still too tackle those questions through projects like Laser Interferometer Space Antenna. A satellite to look for gravitational waves and, just like the LHC, hopefully explain more of our complex physical world.

Mexico's Tourist Industry & SAPs

With approximately 20 million tourists annually that pump 8 billion dollars (USD) into the economy, the tourist industry is a major aspect of Mexican life, especially as it employs approximately 8 million Mexicans (Clancy 2001). Despite the economic benefits, the country still remains classified as 'under-developed'. While there may be economic factors that explain why this country remains underdeveloped, it is unfortunate that little to no information is available for how this industry affects Mexican culture. As development does not solely include economics, but also other variables like culture it is important not to ignore these variable when trying to institute positive change. First this will discuss Mexico's historical development of it's tourist industry and it's shift from government driven development to market driven development, and conclude that although poverty, under-development and inequality involve economic factors (like liberalization and industry development), positive change cannot aptly be instituted without knowledge of the individuals, their communities and how they are affected by the tourism industry

In the 1960s Mexico was known to few around the world as a vacation destination. Those to visit Mexico were primarily from the United States (US) who generally visited cities located along the border, like Mexico City and Tijuana (Clancy 2001). From 1930-1960, Mexico experienced a period of political stability, combined with steady economic growth; it was known as the “Mexican Miracle” (Clancy 2001). The face of the economy started to shift from rural agriculture to urban industrialization. However, the country was still importing more than it exported. As a result the Banco De Mexico studied this issue and released a report that concluded the country needed to start 'exporting paradise'; in short they were to increase tourism opportunities through the creation of new resorts, refurbishing existing resorts and aggressively marketing the country as a vacation destination . Tourism made the shift from border-tourism to international tourism (Clancy 2001).

The state itself played a large role in the expansion of the tourist industry. They were essential in the execution of development. Strategically they placed resorts in coastal regions and marketed them towards foreign, middle-class, mass tourism. As the areas chosen were lightly populated, the acquisition of land was simple and displaced few citizens (Clancy 2001). Cancun was the first project; it was completed in 1971 and started seeing results by 1974. The tourism industry became a quasi-governing power in the region because of its stronghold over local economies, giving the hotels and resorts a lot of political weight, to the region and the country.

Establishing these new vacation destinations required a plethora of start-up capital, which was gained through foreign and domestic investment. Surprisingly, the majority of capital came from within the country. However, to ensure the success of the resort, foreign hotel TNCs were sought out to invest r purchase the property. This allowed the resorts to be associated with the quality, reliability and amiable experience associated with popular, well-known names. However, “the fact that those who own and control the Mexican industry are made up of a fraction of international and domestic capital suggests that the benefit associated with tourism exports accrue mainly to the few” (Clancy 2001), being the “owners and operators of motels, hotels, guest houses and other lodging facilities” (Clancy 2001), as they are the “primary beneficiaries from tourism” (Clancy 2001). With the ease of selling the resorts to foreign TNCs, the majority owners of the majority of hotels are the foreign chains; Mexico ranks first among developing countries in foreign-affiliated hotels. This means high volumes of money do to stay in the country, but also that foreign TNCs are not familiar with the culture and day-to-day life and needs of the people which could make their impact harmful on the unfamiliar community.

As Mexico had strict regulations and tariffs on foreign investment and importing in “April 1971, new regulations allowed the title to land in the prohibited zones to be held in trust for foreign investors by an authorized Mexican bank. The maximum length of the trust was established at 30 years, after which it could either be renewed for an additional 30 years or the property sold to a Mexican citizen”. However, the government did not truly liberalize the economy until Mexico had to suspend its debt payments after the oil crisis in 1982 . This period of structural change, through Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs) was established and monitored by the World Trade Organization (WTO) as a condition to the debt suspension (Kelly 1999).

SAPs were intended to help stabilize the economy and stimulate growth to ensure the repayment of debt, through shifting from state-directed development to market-directed development. However, during this period of structural adjustment, poverty levels rose especially after the peso crisis in 1994 ( Merill and Miro 1996). “Although the government increased the minimum wage by 21 percent during 1995, the cost of living rose by more than 50 percent as a result of the currency collapse. In September 1995, the minimum wage was sufficient to cover only 35 percent of workers' basic necessities, compared to 94 percent in December 1987”( Merill and Miro 1996). This had no effect on the tourism industry as it flourished during these periods of crisis. However, this is just another example of how the profits generated remain in the hands of very few (Clancy 2001). Furthermore, the signing of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1994, ensured that by 2000 all regulations regarding FDI had been removed, leaving the Mexican market open and vulnerable to TNCs; especially as Mexico's neighbour, the US, is the clear front-runner for hotel TNCs (Adams, Gupta, and Mengisteab 1999).

As the country has had little to no success in alleviating poverty and increasing quality of living since the 1980s, it is clear that factors exist that perpetuate class division and inequality (Adams, Gupta, and Mengisteab 1999). As such it is important to look at the industries within the country and the role they play in development. It is thus integral to look at this billion dollar industry of tourism and discover how it affects the culture and economy of the country.

Previous studies regarding FDI in tourism have been conducted but focus their research on the economic aspects and factors surrounding issues of inequality and development, and the impact on the local economy. However, it is important not to ignore the cultural aspects and changes that come with institutional change through the establishment of resorts and resort cities. Little to no research information is available regarding the cultural affects of these hotels, including similar studies done in other developing countries. While looking at economics may help create a direction for proposed policy making, it focuses too heavily on the big picture and necessitates the inclusion of the needs and hopes for the individual and their community; without understanding the social inequality we cannot presume to create change.


Adams, Gupta, and Mengisteab. 1999. Economic reform and Political Turmoil in Mexico. Globalization and the Dilemmas of the State in the South, UK. Macmillan Press Limited.
Clancy, Michael. 2001. Mexican Tourism: Export Growth and Structural Change. Texas: University of Texas Press.
Kelly, Thomas j. 1999. The Effects of Economic Adjustment on Poverty in Mexico. UK: Ashgate Publishing Ltd.
Merrill and Miró, editors. 1996. Mexico: A Country Study. Washington: GPO for the Library of Congress.