Anfetamina Tóxica

by Anfetamina Tóxica

Opinion Essay about The Labyrinth of Solitude by Octavio Paz

Mexico and United States are two different worlds. Each one of them is product of their own society history. However, the great differences between those two civilizations aren’t because of the society history only. The facts that divide Mexico from United States and viceverse are economic and psychic differences. Then, it is obvious that the present and future of each nation will be determined by its entire historical development. That´s why I certainly agree with Octavio Paz when he says that Mexico is an inclusive society, while United States is an exclusive society. Those terms applied to the past are part of the present definition of both nations.

Since the begging of its history, Mexico society was divided in a hierarchical society. Today, it might not be the same, but social classes are still present (by definition: the rich, the medium class, and the poor). Actually, segregation of the indivual from the society can´t be conceived in Mexico. Individuals will move in groups for the good of the society. Mexicans have acquired this tradition because of what they were taught to do or what they saw. Take for example the way Mexicans think about the body. They think that the body is the container of the soul. Without soul inside, the body is empty. This theory came from the Aztecs and is very different from what Americans think (the body is nothing).

Lets take the case of United States. While Mexico is inclusive because of the hierarchical society and its group ideals, United States is exclusive because there is not a certain hierarchical society and its individual ideals. Equality and freedom for all, no division of classes, that´s United States way of thinking since it became independent and conflicts between racial classes started to happen abruptly. Nowadays, the conflict for the legal equality of rights between men and women still happens. There are millions of solutions, some of them are applied, but finally rejected because someone didn ´t agreed with them.

Individualism is the key factor that purpose one of the main differences between the two nations. Today, an American believes in segregation and by his own can achieve everything. In contrast to Americans, Mexicans don ´t have the bases to work on their own, everyday they need the help of their group. Here is a good question: What is worst, being individual or being part of a group? Certainly, both can be worst and worthy. The individualism of Americans help them to be self-sufficient, but individualism might get worse and turn into non-positive ethnocentrism. This “non-positive ethnocentrism” is the guilty of thousands of misunderstandings between the two nations. On the other case, group work is the most perfect way to achieve good for your country. Nevertheless, group work without confidence and respect between the members won´t achieve its objectives. That´s why Mexico might be focused on group work, but it don´t reach its goals because confidence and respect are missing today.

What I want to bring now is the fact that inclusive and exclusive are not the only factors that can describe the actual situation of both nations. Recalling to the third paragraph about United States, the situation of a nation is also decided by the conflicts and functions. In both cases, you can apply both theories: Evolutionary Theory and Conflict Theory. That´s why I “certainly agree” with Octavio Paz. I think that both ways of defining the actual situation of the nations is correct. Although, they treat different aspects. While exclusiveness and inclusiveness treat hierarchical terms, conflict and function theories contribute to change and make good to the society.

Mexico and the United States are great examples of conflict and function theories. Mexico´s Independence, the War of Reform, Mexico´s Revolution, United States´ Civil War, and the Civil Rights Movement are some examples of conflicts which their only purpose was to bring changes for the society. However, the term “conflict” can be applied with more efficiency to the United States situation. Americans, as individuals, compete for the constant change of their society. The individuals of both societies have their functions, and each one of the will contribute for the good of their society. However, the term “function” might be applied with more efficiency to Mexico´s situation. Mexicans, according to previous paragraphs, tend to work in group. In the group, each one of them has his own function so the society structure can develop correctly. What it might be similar between them is the fact that their history is composed of conflicts. These conflicts might not be of the same kind, but both nations had experienced them during all their history.

In conclusion, United States is a exclusive society formed of individuals which are equal, where the Conflict Theory could be applied because of their constant desire of competition. Nevertheless, you may also apply the Function Theory because Unites States society is formed by individuals with certain level of ethnocentrism which will bring good to their society. Unites States says they have equality and freedom. Right now, according to recent facts such as the hardships committed against Afghan U.S. citizens, I can hardly believe equality and freedom reside there. Then, United States have a hierarchical society and might be inclusive too. On the other hand, Mexico is a in inclusive society formed of individuals which tend to work on group and has a hierarchical society. Also, you have to apply the Functional conflict because each one of the Mexicans work for a goal in common. Nevertheless, you might also include the Conflict Theory because Mexico´s history is full of constant fights to change its society and nation.

Bibliography

PAZ, Octavio. (1979). The Labyrinth of Solitude. Mexico and the United States. USA : New Yorker Magazine.

Posted by Anfetamina Tóxica on 8.25.2007 at 12:33 p.m. | Permalink