GT

Wednesday, 8 January 2014

GINS - Mexico's Consitution


     
Mexico has a constitution that includes individual rights, but it says that only "every man has a right to enter the Republic, exit it, travel through its territory, and change his residence without the need of a security card, passport, or any similar device." Is this just older wording or is it discriminating? Article 1 of their Constitution mentions that every individual has this right. Everyone gets full protection of the law, bias-free education, protection of health, guaranteed housing, and children's rights. There are many more, but for convenience (both yours and mine), I will not mention them (their constitution is rather long).
     In their constitution, it has a few awkward phrases that mentions the indigenous people, including the Tarahumara. In those phrases, it mentions that that dispositions can be applied to them. When used in this context, I believe it means to move or rearrange. To me, this indicates that as long as they have considered their "indigenous identity" as "fundamental criteria", they can move them for convenience. Maybe I interpret that wrong, but looking at the Tarahumara, I notice that they have basically become a tourist attraction because of the government in the area. I know that this isn't moving them, but it never mentions having to consult their indigenous populations when making decisions. The only requirement is that of taking into account their indigenous identity.
    I think that the issue would be totally different with the Canadian Charter applied. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think that the Tarahumara would definitely have been consulted on whether or not they want to basically become a tourist attraction. That could mean, depending on the state of modernization they were in when the plans were approved, that they could still be true ultrarunners. As you've probably read in my previous posts regarding them, they now drink soda, and money matters now. Before, their economy was based entirely on corn-beer and random acts of kindness. I think that the General section of our charter would effect them the most. They would have land claims and thus be able to stop the government from making them into an effective tourist attraction. It is technically their land. I do acknowledge that it is not only the government making them a tourist attraction, but the publicity given to them by foreigners, including through my GINS novel. It is also logical to the government to make money from the Tarahumara. I mean, why not?

8 comments:

  1. Kellan, I think some of connections you made here are extremely evident in the novel!! But, if I may ask, what constitutional act are you referring to? When I was searching through the Constitution of the United Mexican States (1824), I saw no sections that referred to indigenous affairs. Maybe it's just a simple mix-up on my part, but I think that the evidence you have provided above just shows how well you read the book and the constitution :)

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The connections that you made are quite strong with how the Tarahumara are treated but in canada our first nations get little rights compared to the average citizen in canada. they till do get more power than the Tarahumara but the had to fight for those rights and the Tarahumara can do that to!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Sorry i forgot a point so I'm reposting :) I can see your point clearly but one thing I would like to say is that Mexico has a different culture and a different sociology within it, meaning that the rules and what people are used to are different. In the country that I looked up for my GINS post was Rwanda, who had been living with different countries rules for a long time. It may have worked for the foreigners to the county, but Rwanda was better off in the end writing its own constitution. Maybe Mexico is the same. But then again you could be right and maybe they would be better off with Canada's constitution. The rights of the aboriginals are important and Canada has those rights. The question is now; do you think that it would be better to use the charter, or for them to write a new set of human rights to fit their country? Great Job by the way.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I believe that making indigenous people a tourist attraction is just plain wrong. It's like considering the Tsuu T'ina people a potential source of income just to make some more money. They are still people too! With the Canadian charter though, things may improve slightly because it was written with our First Nations in mind. It would improve, but not by much. What do you think the Canadian charter would change in Mexico if it were applied there?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hey Kellan, your Global Issues Novel Study topic is unique and it could lead to many conflicts in the future and you described this very well in your posts. After reading this post, I am just curious if the Tarahumara got a say in the development of modernized infrastructure. Does the constitution in Mexico mention that the people living on the land must be informed? Have you considered maybe the Tarahumara prefers the modern environment over their traditional ways of life? Your posts are very interesting and describe your topic really well. Keep up the awesome work!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hi Kellan! I liked your posts throughout all aspects of the project. They were very clear with your ideas and speaking of your ideas, they are all very strong. In a previous post you talk about how you would be different if you were there and you explain how your basic needs wouldn't be met. Interesting philosophy and fantastically written. Secondly this post is also quite awesome. I like how you say it would be different if the Canadian Constitution is applied. For example in the Canadian Constitution it says something about aboriginal rights, which I feel would change the situation completely. I also enjoy how you found it said "every man" and I agree with you. Is this discrimination or just poor wording? Anyhow awesome job. I enjoy

    ReplyDelete
  8. Hey Kellan,
    Your posts throughout the whole blog are quite interesting, and it is well written. One thing I would thing I would ask is, if we applied the Charter and made everyone, equal in a sense, but would that change the amount of tourism? Let's take Niagra Falls for example. It was beautiful, and that's why people started going there. There wasn't a guy who just, made Niagra falls, but it still is a tourist attraction. What would the Tarahumara people do if the Charter was applied? Would they just leave and go somewhere else? Anyways, good job

    ReplyDelete