The feedback was helpful and constructive for my article. Of the suggestions I plan to include a lot of links to make my page more accessible in hopes that it will receive more attention from more seasoned wikipedia scholars. One of my peer reviewers suggested making new sections entirely for my article as the existing sections are small and not necessarily detailed. I will fo sure take this into consideration as I further construct my wikipedia page.
This article is about the Escambray Rebellion which was year rebellion based in the Escambray mountains. The Rebellion began in 1959 after Castro took power and was a movement to remove him from power in favor of a new government. The group was comprised of both former members of the 26th of July movement as well as Batista loyalists. This group is significant to this class as it demonstrates the division amongst Cubans immediately following the revolution as well as examining the idea of a tolerant world as the United States was an ally of the Rebellion up until the failure of the Bay of Pigs invasion. The article portrays the rebellion through an American lens as it describes the defeat of the Rebellion taking place immediately after the Bay of Pigs invasion when in actuality the rebellion carried on for three more years. This American bias is seen in the source list as many sources are American in origin and are heavily focused on the CIA involvement with the Rebellion. If I were to improve this article I would examine non-CIA related operations or issues that the Rebellion was a part of and look to dive into the details of their stance beyond being an anti-Castro movement. In other words I am interested in their endgame/goals.
This article is about the Directorio Revolucionario Estudiantil (DRE), the student led opposition party that was involved in the Cuban Revolution against Batista. While the article appears to be written by a neutral source, the article tends to focus on the DRE and its post-revolution opposition to Castro and involvement with the United States. This is derived from the fact that the sources of the article all focus on the Kennedy administration and its involvement with the group. From clicking on a few links within the article I was able to find out that Lee Harvey Oswald had been in contact with the group and the CIA was in touch with the group prior to the Bay of Pigs invasion. These connection are what have drawn the Cubans into the Kennedy Assassination conspiracy theory. From examining the sources and links within the page the sources were from both political science and history journals however, the lack of content and relatively few number of sources on the page suggest that there is room for improvement. For the purposes of this class the area of focus would be to increase the involvement in the time leading up to the revolution as well as its actual involvement. I think these additions would increase its start rating within the two groups that the article is a part of (Terrorism and Cuba). This lack of detailed information could have potentially led to why their is not a dialogue amongst wikipedia authors. In all this is a well written article that falls short when talking about the actual role of the DRE in the revolution and needs a little more detail (attention) to be a strong article.
Argentian corn field last harvest season. Photo by Augustin Marcarian
This article out Buenos Aires explains the recent move by the Argentinian government to have farmers switch from primarily corn exports to soybeans. This shift in crop export is unexpected and unusually late as the planting season in Argentina is already underway and this switch puts Argentinian farmers behind in the planting process. This decision stems from the fact that the Argentinian economy has been stagnating causing turmoil in larger cities such as Buenos Aires. The President of Argentina, Mauricio Macri, has been under fire for the economic struggles of Argentina and this year is an election year in which he is struggling in the polls. This is ultimately what has caused for this action. Macri, is looking for a way to jump start the Argentinian economy temporarily to score cheap political points to maintain his job.
The question then becomes will this sudden change be effective. From a cost standpoint, soy is much cheaper to grow than corn as seeds cost less, it requires fewer resources and is easier to manage. From this base knowledge it seems that Argentina will able to make up some ground by having higher profits. However, this is not the case as soy yields a dramatically lower price per capita due to the ongoing trade-war between the United States and China. The hope of Macri is that Argentinian soy will be unaffected by the trade war and will result in some economic gains. However, economists believe that this policy change may be the final nail in the coffin for Macri as the trade war is only expected to continue thus skewing the price of soy.
Apart from potentially costing Macri his presidency the Argentinian switch may cause food challenges abroad as Argentina is the worlds third largest exporter of corn in the world. This sudden lack of corn will cause the price of corn around the world to rise and given that corn is a highly valued grain around the world this will have a ripple effect around the world. The effect will start in other corn producing nations as they are able to increase their revenue due to higher prices while corn importers will struggle to buy corn due to the price increase. This does not account for the trade war with between the US and China as the Chinese economy is difficult to predict.
In the United States this will hurt American farmers the most as soybeans are an essential crop to many farming co-ops and the influx of Argentinian soy will only add salt to the wound as the price of soy will continue to plummet from its already low point.
This is a timely article as we just finished discussing the Mexican revolution which was based on agrarian land reform. This is precisely what is transpiring in Argentina, the government is facing pressure from the working class and from that pressure a quick fix is being prescribed. The question becomes will this fix the issues or just proliferate the problem leading to radical reform.
SUMMARY/QUESTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION: After completing the Map Quiz at the beginning of class we were given a brief presentation about the widespread death of bees (500 million in three months) in Brazil due to less strict pesticide laws within the country. We then broke into groups to discuss the following questions that are likely to be on an exam. The answers that follow the questions are some talking points that my group discussed.
What were the main causes of the Mexican Revolution?
Landowners and peasants alike were upset with the structure of Government. Demands like more voting/democratic rights or resource reallocation were brought front and center and the election of 1910 cascaded into war.
How did the leaders’ goals reflect regional differences in Mexico?
Although typically discussed as north vs south it was more urban vs rural as auto/technocratic elite of urban areas had different needs than those of landowners. The rural group wanted more extreme change while the urban group wanted lawful changes.
How does Wasserman’s interpretation of the Mexican revolution fit with Defronzo’s criteria for revolutions?
- Mass Frustration: Diaz is hated universally due to corrupt political system.
- Divisions among the elite: cientificos vs landowners
- Unifying Motive: All sides agree reform must occur for resource/wealth distribution
- Severe Political Crisis: Diaz ousted from power/Madero assassination.
- Tolerant World Context: The world had no response due to tensions in Europe and the eventual outbreak of WWI
Our time in groups was shorter than usual as we moved on to discuss the people behind the revolution in great detail in order to understand (people discussed are found in key terms).
Porfirio Diaz: Long time ruler of Mexico who was forced out of office in 1910 due to revolution. Surrounded himself with cientificos, the technocratic elite who Diaz used to modernize and control Mexico.
Francisco Madero: Educated elite from the north who sought to reform Mexico by restoring democracy. Was a revolutionary who believed change could only come through a lawful process.
Emiliano Zapata: Leader of a small village in southern Mexico where plantation agriculture was practiced and the people were mainly indigenous and poor. Fought for a more radical change in the redistribution of land.
Francisco “Pancho” Villa: Revolutionary raider from the north who was a member of the Conventionalist movement who called for radical change. Best known revolutionary in the US due to the US military chasing him in the desert.
- For better understanding of the people involved and the timeline of the revolution https://www.mexconnect.com/articles/2824-the-mexican-revolution-1910
- Better understanding of the causes of the Revolution https://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~kennyk/Project/New/Revolution
- Video Link for visual and audio aid https://study.com/academy/lesson/the-mexican-revolution-causes-effects.html
- What was the difference between the goals of the Constitutionalist and Conventionalist revolutionaries and how were those goals considered when drafting the 1917 constitution?
- What role did Madero’s assassination have in the revolution?
- If this revolution occurred after the success of the Bolshevik Revolution in October 1917 would the outside world considered the revolution a marxist revolution due to land/resource redistribution?