Latin America
1
nah that would be super weird here. Argentina is very different to Brazil in this regard. For example most of my friends (8/10) have italian surnames but nobody talks about italy or feels italian or whatever. Some even have italian grandparents. Me too i rarely talk about italy IRL. I do it here because this is an european cultural comunity and people ask about those things.Originally Posted by Tobi
I still think it has to do with the amount of foreigners and the need to argentinize them
http://samples.sainsburysebooks.co.u...ple_579715.pdfThe modern Argentine state came into being by articulating a particular model of capital accumulation and a certain social image regarding Argentina’s place in the world that has lasted until the present time: Argentina as “breadbasket of the world.”
But, as is the case for the key dates to follow, different migratory processes must also be taken into account when constructing a generally accepted national narrative. During this first period, it was the shiploads of Europeans disembarking in Buenos Aires. The process was certainly not smooth: union and political leaders and anarchists from abroad were persecuted, their presence as foreigners on Argentine soil being contrasted unfavorably to the nationalistic depiction of criollos and gauchos. This occurred in a context in which 70 percent of the workforce in Buenos Aires was foreign born. But during this period, and especially after mass migration from abroad had ceased, history books viewed the European immigrant as indispensable for progress and modernization (see Rofman and Romero 1973). Indeed, immigration had the dual objective of rapidly increasing the population and, above all, “consolidating Europe’s civilizing influence” (Halperín Donghi 1987, 201). Many xenophobic characteristics were reworked when incorporated into the definitive narrative of the birth of the Argentine nation: the immigrants became an integral part of the modern nation-state; the need for a workforce became translated into the slogans “settle the desert” and “to govern is to settle”1 (expressed in the 1853 Constitution, which guaranteed basic rights to “all men—and not just citizens—in the world who want to live on Argentine soil”). This led to one of the largest mass migrations in modern history, in proportional terms. Argentina was a country that, in comparison to its native population, received one of the largest contingents of European immigrants ever recorded. It is also the country that, of the immigrants who came, retained the least number: between 1870 and 1929, the percentage of immigrants staying on was 54 percent, a considerably lower percentage than the 66 percent retained by the United States during the same period (Torrado 2003, 94). This is the framework within which the modern state developed its nation-building strategy of “Argentinization.” Along with public education, the army (which employed universal conscription) became one of the key bulwarks against cosmopolitan tendencies (see Rouquié 1981). This Argentinization of European immigrants became part of the progress promised by the nation. In spite of its conflicts and contradictions, then, the immigrant process was an integral part of the story of how the Argentine nation was born. The public school is a condensed version of the national equation according to which cultural homogenization carries with it the implicit promise of social mobility. Spreading quickly, public education became a source of new historical narratives whose protagonists were national heroes; it was also a source of citizenship and a mechanism for social mobility. That these narratives were credible and became fixed in the public mind is owing to the existence of other rights and opportunities that were becoming increasingly available. And this positive image of public education has lasted: even in the worst moments of the crises to come, the student population continued to grow, the poorest sectors of the population entering the educational system and doing everything possible to stay there. As a result of the significance education has in Argentina, research shows that, unlike the case in other Latin American countries, even among the most marginalized sectors of society in the 1990s, education was seen as the most important path to social mobility and respect; in other words, in spite of being in crisis, faith in public schools has been maintained
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks