Portuguese colonies in Soth America (by Andrea Mariño)

First steps on the territory

Vicente Yáñez Pinzón, a Spanish navigator, was the first European to be known in the region of the territory today known as Brazil. By 1500, as he advanced northwards to the mouth of the Orinoco River, he found a territory which had been assigned to Portugal in 1494 by the Treaty of Tordesillas, signed by both the Spanish and the Portuguese Ambassadors at Tordesillas (in Northwest Spain),to mark by an imaginary line down through the Atlantic 370 leagues west of Cape Verde, Portugal´s most westerly possession, the division of the territory. According to this treaty, the land on the west side belonged to Spain and the land on the east side belonged to Portugal. Later the same year, a Portuguese navigator Pedro Álvares Cabral, reached the coast of present Brazil and named it Terra da Vera Cruz (Land of the True Cross). The following year, he Italian navigator, Amerigo Vespucci, was sent to Terra da Vera Cruz by the Portuguese government and when he returned with a cargo of the valuable red wood known as brazilwood, the government changed the name of the territory from Terra da Vera Cruz to Brazil.

King John III and the captaincies

In 1530, the Portuguese king John III, divided the colony into 15 districts or captaincies and granted them to 15 donatarios, whose heirs could found cities, grant land and even levy taxes over their territories. In 1549, Thomé de Souza, the first governor general of Brazil, made his headquarters at Bahia (today Salvador), which remained its capital city for over two centuries. He also brought large numbers of slaves to overcome the shortage of laborers, what led to the foundation of Sao Paulo in 1554. In 1555, the French founded a colony on the shores of the Rio de Janeiro Bay. However, the Portuguese destroyed it and in 1567 established on its site the city of Rio de Janeiro.

Brazil´s economy

During the First two centuries, Brazil´s economy was mainly based on the sugar trade but it was changed after the discovery of diamonds and other minerals in the region of Minas Gerais, in the north part of the colony. The mineral trade through the port of Rio de Janeiro gave this city prosperity and sophistication. These facts made Pombal, the chief minister of Portugal, move the capital, Bahia, to Rio de Janeiro in 1763.

Brazil becomes a Republic

A military revolt in November 1889, led by General Manuel Deodoro da Fonseca, forced Pedro II to abdicate the Regengy of Brazil. A republic was was proclaimed and Fonseca was elected head of the provisional government. The drafting of a constitution based on the American one was completed in June 1890 but it was not adopted until February 1891. Now, Brazil became a federal republic officially named United States of Brazil with Fonseca elected its first president.

Montréal’s Historical Summary (by Robert Quinteros)

In 1535, a French navigator, Jacques Cartier, arrived at Hochelaga. It was a village inhabited by St. Lawrence Iroquoians but he claimed the territory for France and gave the name Mont Royal to the mountain.

It is said that there was a supernatural flavor in the beginnings of the city. two religious gentlemen of France, the priest Jean Jacques Olier and the layman Jerome leRoyer de la Dauversiere, had at the same moment a dream in which they saw the configuration of the island, although they had not known of it before, and heard an inner voice convincing them to establish a new colony for the glory of God. The two men met and joint efforts to form a society called ‘La Compagnie de Notre Dame de Montreal’. On May 18, 1642, those men together with Paul de Chomedy De Maisonneuve, who was the first governor of the city, found Ville-Marie with about 60 settlers.

People were constantly attacked by natives, until in 1665, Carignan Regiment was order by New France to suppress the Iroquoians and ease tensions between both sides. At the end of the 17th century, the French gained permanent peace after the treaty La Grande Paix between the French and the Iroquois. At this time, Montréal began to prosper, it became the center of fur trade. The population was about 1,000 and they had the advantage of having inland navigation.

In 1775, Montréal was in war against the British and the city surrendered to British rule. They gave a new impetus to the life of the community, and at the end of the 18th century, Montréal had already taken the lead over the city of Quebec in population as well as in importance.

During the following years, there were fundamental improvements in transportation and industries. For instance, the expansion of the St. Lawrence canal system that made Montréal the principal seaport. The Railway construction made the city the hub of the railway system. Finally, Montréal was becoming a major industrial centre around the middle of the 19th century.

In the mid of 20th century, great projects took place in Montréal, such as the International World Exposition or EXPO 67 and the 1976 Summer Olympic games which gave status to the city.

After the 70s, there was high rate of unemployment, but Montréal regained a strong vitality from the mid-1990s and entered the 21st century with a modernized and buoyant economy based on international trade in basic products and on the distribution of manufactured goods.

Wrong (by Rojas, Pachame and Mallemaci)

Wrong

(Review by Carolina Rojas, Daniela Pachame and Marisol Mallemaci)

“Wrong” appears in Depeche Mode’s new album which is “Sounds of the Universe”. The electro pop band continues with their characteristic dark style, writing about love, lust and death.

Depeche Mode’s lyrics express a feeling of negation and this English group uses negative words and phrases such as: “wrong”, “born in the wrong place” and “I was born in the wrong side”. Throughout the song, the word “Wrong” is repeated with emphasis in order to demonstrate the singer’s feeling about living a hated life.

Apart from the fact that we consider “wrong” a negative song, we would recommend this track to people who like Depeche Mode’s characteristic style but we would not do so if the listener does not like Depeche Mode’s characteristic style.

Listen to the song here:

Wrong - Depeche Mode

Democratic Initiatives (by Néstor Cevasco)

Whenever there is an important national soccer match broadcasted on TV, some people are stupefied in front of their TV screens waiting for their favourite teams. But in spite of the fact that these people pay regularly for their cable service, some of them cannot enjoy this TV spectacle whatsoever. On the contrary, they are only permitted to watch mere images of stadium seats crowded with the faces of fanatics or spectators, instead of the match. The reason for this seems to be that these viewers, so to speak clients of a cable service as well, do not wish to pay for an extra charge to watch these especial soccer matches, so they are not allowed to watch them. At least, there is some benevolent person working on the other side of the TV screen offering them the possibility of watching either the benches of the stadium, or the faces of fanatics, but not the match…

This situation leads some people to ask themselves three questions; are some sport programmes becoming less egalitarian? Could there be something like a monopoly either of sport programmes, or TV cable broadcasting? First, the fact that to a particular audience the access of these spectacles of public concern is permitted whereas to others restricted may have nothing to do with egalitarianism. On the contrary, making available these soccer tournaments of popular interest for a group of people, on the grounds that they can afford paying for this extra fee to watch these especial soccer matches, may have much more of elitism rather than a gesture of egalitarianism or equality. Second, there not seem to be neither the presence of a hegemonic power like a monopoly controlling all the existing sport programmes, nor something comparable to an economical group setting up to lobby a great part of the media as in the case of a few newspapers and TV programmes on behalf of screwing into everybody’s head their political perspectives or their distorted version of the present reality. However, there may be something like millions of Argentines trying to watch a soccer event of public interest on TV, but cannot do it since they have not paid for this special charge to watch relevant soccer matches.

The third remaining question is: Is there any law defending the rights of people who for some reason or other cannot watch these public sport spectacles on TV? For the time being, there is an old law of TV and Radio transmission created during the last dictatorship, but apparently falls on deaf ears on the abuses committed on some part of the audience. Fortunately, there is a proposal of a new law called ‘Nueva Ley de Radio Difusión’ that is being discussed in the congress and promises radical changes. For instance, the Art. 65 proposes so far a democratic initiative that is somewhat connected with everything that has been exposed in this paper.

ARTÍCULO 65

La presente ley tiene por objeto crear las medidas necesarias para garantizar el derecho al acceso universal -a través de los medios de comunicación social audiovisuales o sonoros-a los contenidos informativos de interés relevante y de acontecimientos deportivos de encuentros futbolísticos u otro género o especialidad.

La SECRETARÍA DE MEDIOS DE COMUNICACIÓN de la JEFATURA DE GABINETE DE MINISTROS adoptará medidas para que el ejercicio de los derechos exclusivos para la retransmisión o emisión televisiva de determinados acontecimientos de interés general de cualquier naturaleza, como los deportivos, no perjudique el derecho de los ciudadanos a seguir dichos acontecimientos en directo y de manera gratuita, en todo el territorio nacional. En el cumplimiento de estas previsiones, deberá elaborar un listado anual de acontecimientos de interés general para la retransmisión o emisión televisiva, respecto de los cuales el ejercicio de derechos exclusivos deberá ser justo, razonable y no discriminatorio.

[‘PROPUESTA DE PROYECTO DE LEY SERVICIOS DE COMUNICACIÓN AUDIOVISUAL’, pag. 103, 104, http://www.uba.ar/radiodifusion/download/proyecto_ejecutivo.pdf ]

Friends will Be Friends (by Susana Guaglianone)

“When you're through with life an all hope is lost, hold out

your hands cos right till the end friends will be friends”

(Freddy Mercury and Jhon Deacon)

On July 20, 1969 humanity achieved one of the greatest technological accomplisment when a man first stepped on the Moon. Everybody was peacefully interested in the three earthmen who travelled to the natural satellite.

Apollo 11 was the spaceship that transported the American astronauts Neil Amstrog, Michael Collins and Edwin Aldrins. They set off on July 16 in order to attempt this audacious mission.

As Amstrong put his feet down on the surface of the Moon, he declared his now famous line: “That's one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind”. The crew performed a variety of experiments on the lunar territory and collected soil samples to return to Earth. They needed to wear special space suits with a back mounted portable life support system to control the oxygen, the temperature and pressure inside the suit.

They hoisted the American flag and unveiled a plaque bearing President's Nixon signature and an engraving reading: “Here men from the planet Earth first set foot upon the Moon on July 1969 AD. We came in peace for all mankind.”

People all over the world watched the moonlanding on TV. Because of the reduced gravity, the astronauts could jump very high compared to Earth, and those images were very funny!

In Argentina all the inhabitants were concentrated on the heroic deed. Every spectator lived the experience as if they were the protagonists. There was a man among them, Dr Enrique Febbraro, teacher, dentist, philosopher and musician, from Lomas de Zamora.He wrote one thousand letters to one hundred countries after the event. He proposed July 20 as the date when the whole world had been friends of the three astronauts. Since then, 1969, the international Friend's day is celebrated in many countries, such as Spain and Brazil on July 20. Originally, this celebration was born in Argentina.

Colony of Asunción (by Martín Leardy)

To begin with the history of the Colony of Asunción we have to mention the discovery of the Rio de La Plata by Juan Díaz de Solís, which took place in 1515. It was not up to 1524 that Paraguay was discovered, when Alejo García, coming from Brazil, arrived. For eight years Alejo Garcia mustered men and began a trip to the interior of Paraguay. He marched west and discovered Iguazu Falls crossed the Rio Parana, and arrived at Asuncion, thirteen years before it was founded. Another important fact occurred in 1537, when the expedition of Gonzalo de Mendoza and Juan de Salazar, trying to find a route to the famous goldfields in Perú, resulted in the foundation of the fort Our Lady of Asunción.

Asunción began to stand as a commercial and administrative centre at the very beginning of this settlement. It had been given the character of “mother city,” because from Asunción commercial expeditions left and found numerous towns and cities in the region, such as Santa Fe and Buenos Aires. Little by little, The city became the centre from which La Plata section of South America was administered.

A very important landmark in Paraguay and in Asunción as well was the Jesuit Missions which spred the gospel among the natives. They began in 1604 and finished with the expulsion of the Jesuits from Asunción in 1767. There were many things that the Jesuits did in the “reducciones”. One of them was to pay attention to the different languages which existed among the aboriginal inhabitants and composed kinds of diccionaries to get a better understanding of those languages. Another thing was to settle natives down into colonies to achieve a better organization and to carry the Christian faith to the tribes. Each reduction was organized as a miniature republic with its own governors, who were elected among the aboriginal inhabitants themselves. The reducciones were built by the Guarani. The indigenous created the altars, sculptures, and much of the art that can be seen the churches and museums of Paraguay. Nowadays, we may observe the Jesuits´work, as regards knowledge, technology, art, social organization, politics and religion, in the ruins in some places in the southern part of Paraguay.

When the flourishing early days of Asunción passed, its began to be less and less important as a commercial centre, though remaining important as an administrative one. Buenos Aires became more relevant than Asunción as regard commercial matters.

To finish, we have to mention that Paraguay proclaimed its independence of Spain on May 14, 1811.

Conclusions to Forum 5: Do we live in a democracy?

Is ours a real democracy? This was the question around which our second forum this year was organised. The question, we must admit, had at a first sight an apparently obvious answer. However, as we were able to see through all our comments, obviousness is far from being the more consistent attribute of this topic. Just considering the main possible answers given during this debate could account for this. Although simplifying the nature of most of your comments, it is possible to identify three clear stances:

• Some people answered affirmatively to the question at the beginning, considering that there’s no doubt we live in a democracy.
• Some others, on the contrary, doubted whether ours is a real democracy, and carefully proposed that we live in a false democracy.
• Others, however, defended arguments from both previous stances, arriving at the conclusion that although we live in democracy, this is not a full one.

In reality, each different alternative appears equally valid and it would not be serious to say any of them is wrong. But we still have a difference; how can we account for it then? I think what makes these three options differ is perhaps the fact that each of them implies a different conception of what democracy is. For those adhering to the first option, democracy seems to be characterized by popular sovereignty, which implies that people is the source of any political power. For those who agree that we live in a democracy, the fact that we have the right to vote our representatives would be proof enough of our political power as citizens.

Those taking part for the second option, however, seem to interpret that democracy goes beyond the right to vote. For these people, democracy needs some preconditions without which open elections are no more than a form without content. Some common preconditions are equality of rights, equality of education, similar access to the media and to campaign funds for all political parties, direct participation in political decisions by means of popular consultations and, perhaps more importantly, actual limits and control over those chosen as representatives. Honestly, none of these preconditions has ever been effective in our country, which has not only limited the political options to the preponderance of a few changing and contradictory parties, but has also scared youth off from politics in the last decades. Then it looks quite natural for those who think participation, plurality and the discussion of ideas are essential to democracy, to doubt in calling this a real one.

Democracy Index (The Economist, 2007). More democratic nations in paler blue.

Finally, the third group could be read as a combination of the former two. They seem to look at democracy not as a definite political fact, but as a gradient, where a wide spectrum of forms that are still democratic in nature can take place. For these people, although we vote and have laws that orientate our nation in a democratic fashion, this is an incomplete democracy that can be improved with time and participation.

As I said before, all perceptions are valid. There’s no agreed definition of what democracy is. This should tell us something about the complexity of the term. But also about its malleability. In a way, we can make democracy look the way we want it. Because each nation creates its own image of what democracy is. Some countries tolerate corruption, some others not; some countries tolerate class differences, some others not; some tolerate poverty, and some not. Democracy means a different thing in each of these countries, just as it means different things among ourselves. Perhaps, better than asking about whether or not we live in a democracy, we should have asked what do we want our democracy to look like. Do you think we would have agreed?

In green, nations claiming themselves as democratic.

Villa de San Antonio del Camino (by Susana Guaglianone)

Villa de San Antonio del Camino was the original name of the City of Merlo. It was founded by Francisco de Merlo y Barbosa. He was born in Sevilla, Spain, in 1693 and died in Buenos Aires, in 1758. He served as a notary public in the Cabildo (town hall) of Buenos Aires and he started acquiring lands in the western countryside in the area called at that time Pago de las Conchas. It was surrounded by the rivers De las Conchas (now Reconquista) and Luxan (now Luján).

By 1727 Merlo had bought a large number of ranches, and his estate extended along the cities now known as Merlo, Libertad, Pontevedra, San Antonio de Padua, Mariano Acosta, Ituzaingó, Castelar, Villa Ariza, Villa General Zapiola, Moreno, Rafael Castilo, Isidro Casanova, González Catán, important sections of Morón and an ample portion of Partido de la Matanza.

According to the Spanish laws, the lands belonged to Francisco de Merlo, however, the territory was inhabited by indigenous tribes called Querandíes and Araucanos, whose recurrent raids led Merlo to build a small hamlet around his ranch as a refuge for many families. Don Francisco also erected a private chapel in the place, near the “Royal Road”, a road that linked Buenos Aires with Lima, the capital of the Viceroyalty of Perú. The chapel was consecrated to Nuestra Señora del Camino and to San Antonio de Padua. In 1742 fifteen families resided in the village.

After several unsuccessful attempts, Merlo wrote a letter to the King Felipe V of Spain in order to request permission for the legal foundation of the town. On August 7th, 1755 the authorization to found the town was conceded. Twenty days later -August 28th- the prosperous village received the name of Villa de San Antonio del Camino. Don Francisco de Merlo y Barbosa died on April 4th, 1778. His vaste estate was divided among his descendants (twelve children) and the Mercedarian Order.

In 1859, the architect Pedro Benoit was assigned to rebuild the church and to draw the map of the town including the thirteen squares that belonged to the church and eighty seven squares else donated by Manuela Calderón, widow of Pearson, and by her son Juan Dillon, who were the landowners of the lands in those days. Dillon was Jhon Dillon´s son, first husband of

Manuela. Juan Dillon is considered as the second founder of the village, he encouraged its development and he was its first mayor. In Dillon´s days the town started to be called Merlo. Benoit traced the basic structure of the city, which is known nowadays as the City of Merlo, and that once was named Villa de San Antonio del Camino.

Bibliography:

• Rotary Club, San Antonio de Padua´s site, 2005. www.paduaweb.com.ar/historia
• Schreiber, César, “Contribución al Conocimiento de la Naturaleza y el Hombre de la Región-Moreno- Provincia de Buenos Aires”, 1995. www.moreno.gov.ar/partidodemoreno/historiademoreno4aspx
• Portal Oficial de la Provincia de Buenos Aires, 2009. www.gob.gba.gov.ar/cdi/

Two Continents in America (by Yanina Helvig)

As many of us were probably taught at school, the continents in the world are six. However, this idea is not longer sustained by most native English-speaking countries, such as the United States, Canada and Australia. In Wikipedia it is explained that for those countries, America is divided into two separate continents: North America and South America. The following map illustrates the seven continents in the world, mainly for English-speaking countries. Each color stands for a different continent: Africa, Europe, Asia, Australia, Antarctica, North America and South America.

But the most curious thing is that the assumption that there are seven continents in the world does not appeal to Latin America and some countries in Europe like Spain and Italy. This means that the model of America as a single continent still remains for inhabitants in South America.

Probably, the division of America into two may be attributed to ideology, and therefore, to a sense of superiority. If this is not… why is it that English-speaking countries do not consider America as a single continent?