Latin America

Eric Paul Roorda’s The Dictator Next Door is an insightful and incisive work of diplomatic history, studying the United States’ dealings from 1930 to 1945 with Dominican dictator Rafael Trujillo, for years a foreign policy problem unto himself. It also demonstrates how the Good Neighbor Policy, which claimed to promote solidarity and peace among western hemisphere nations, came to allow dictators in Latin America “to run their countries however they pleased, so long as they maintained common enemies with the United States: first the fascists, then the communists” (1).

The book is essentially a study of how the democratic United States tolerated and even supported military dictatorships in other nations, despite some diplomats’ desire to shun dictators and promote democracy abroad. Roorda’s main argument centers on how the despotic Trujillo presented the Hoover and Roosevelt administrations with problems, because he was no pliable puppet.

Difficult to control and a frequent embarrassment to the United States, Trujillo had few friends in the State Department, but the United States military and presidents backed him because he was neither fascist nor communist, and because the Good Neighbor policy called for supporting standing rulers, regardless of their methods. Roorda traces the history of Dominican-American relations and demonstrates how American influence on the region built for years before Trujillo’s rise.

A former Spanish colony, the Dominican Republic was ruled by Haiti until its independence in 1844, after which the military assumed long-lasting control and foreign powers jockeyed for influence there. The United States’ influence increased steadily between 1860 and 1904, and culminated in the United States Marine Corps’ takeover in 1915. During this period, the American military trained Dominican men to serve in its constabulary and army, thus establishing a sort of school for dictators in which Rafael Trujillo was its best student.

Trujillo received training from the Marine Corps and earned an Army commission during this time, despite a history of criminal activity, including rape and extortion (for which he escaped punishment), and rose to the rank of general. Not the United States’ first choice as the Dominican Republic’s leader, he rallied the army to stage a coup in 1930, three years before the Good Neighbor policy was introduced, and was helped by the Hoover administration’s nonintervention policy, which preferred commerce over militarism as a means of promoting good will.

Roorda explains the process in great detail in chapter two and does not spare the American government from sharp criticism. He maintains that Hoover’s desire to redeem the United States’ image in Latin America, as well as the administration’s unwillingness to back his ambassador (who distrusted Trujillo and refused to recognize him), helped Trujillo maintain his control.

Wary of Theodore Roosevelt’s and Woodrow Wilson’s use of “gunboat diplomacy,” the Hoover administration recognized Trujillo because he seemed likely to protect American commercial interests and it was more politically expedient to recognize de facto regimes, dictatorships or otherwise. He even states plainly that the savvy Trujillo was able to play the American legation against the American military, which trained and obviously respected Trujillo.

Clearly critical of American behavior in Latin America, Roorda states that “in the history of U. S. relations with its closest neighbors . . . the rhetoric of solidarity and protection against European aggression ran counter to the brutal logic and increasing momentum of U. S. territorial expansion and imperial ambitions” (23). He deems the policy paradoxical from the outset; while it promoted friendship with Latin America (which filtered into popular culture during the 1930s and ‘40s), Latin American intellectuals were less than enthusiastic because it relied on American authority and kept authoritarian regimes in power, Trujillo’s being the most egregious.

During the Depression, Trujillo consolidated his power even further despite the Dominican economy’s near-collapse, receiving additional American economic aid, mainly because of his promises to protect American business interests. However, he soon became “the greatest source of instability in U. S. -Dominican relations. . . . As U. S. officials found out, the benefits of a ‘stabilizing’ dictatorship could be canceled out by an unreliable dictator” (87).

Roorda maintains that the Good Neighbor policy itself was an empty, nebulous policy created by Franklin Roosevelt, whom he characterizes as “a master of innuendo, ambiguity, paradox, and the manipulation of disparate personalities” (91). In chapter four, Roorda characterizes Trujillo as a shrewd, image-conscious manipulator of public opinion on a par with FDR, but with total control of an intimidating military that crushed any opposition.

Trujillo flouted his authority, renaming geographical features, parks, and even the capital city for himself, surrounding his rule with public spectacle, and assuming total control of the Dominican press in order to glorify his regime and even deify himself. One telling newspaper quote deemed him “so necessary that [the people] give him permanent power” and somehow dubbed his regime “super-democracy” (95).

The American government, meanwhile, was aware of Trujillo’s transgressions yet played into his hands, even assisting his censorship campaign and public-relations efforts. While the United States was not fooled, Roorda implies, it played along in an effort to heed the Good Neighbor policy’s claim to support national sovereignty and thus allowed Trujillo a free hand. The entire book centers on a single recurring theme: the folly of a democracy supporting dictators.

Roorda maintains that “the reliance on dictators to attain the traditional U. S. goals of stability and cooperation in Latin America meant having to ignore those instances when the strongmen themselves incited unrest and conflict” (147). The American military is partly to blame, since it trained Trujillo and treated him as a favored protégé, while diplomats saw through the dictator’s pageantry and disapproved of his methods (Trujillo returned their disdain).

Roorda casts a good deal of the blame at the Roosevelt administration, which, in its efforts to avoid heavy-handed intervention, allowed Trujillo to remain in power because he seemed to represent stability even while disrupting Dominican-American relations (with his conduct at home and his occasional bloody attacks against neighboring Haiti). In describing American logic vis-à-vis Trujillo, “Dominican stability made him practical to deal with,” even if that meant turning a blind eye to the questionable ethics of backing brutal regimes that did not threaten American dominance or prosperity.

At times, he argues, this meant that Trujillo was the proverbial tail wagging the American dog, getting his way because Roosevelt lacked the will or the political clout to intervene against him. The book uses ample detail and careful research in describing the United States’ paradoxical relationship with Trujillo, relying heavily on government documents, personal papers, the contemporary press, and a large number of secondary sources.

While its assertions are not groundbreaking (recent diplomatic history is harshly critical of American support for brutal dictators), it is well-written, with concise prose and well-constructed arguments, on the whole an excellent diplomatic history. For scholars seeking an explanation of American relations with Latin America, and who do not mind its sharp criticisms of American foreign policy’s ethical lapses and oversights, The Dictator Next Door is well worth one’s while.

IR364 Study Guide for Mid-term Exam You will answer three questions on the exam worth 10 points each 1) Populism was a prevalent response to the Great Depression in Latin America. Define this term, and discuss the political and economic strategies of either the Vargas government in Brazil or the Cardenas government in Mexico. 2) By the end of World War II income inequality had already become deeply ingrained in Latin America. What are the main causes of income inequality in the region, and why has it been so difficult to eradicate highly polarized patterns in the distribution of wealth? ) Was import-substitution-industrialization an unmitigated failure in Latin America? Define this development strategy and offer a balanced critique of it. 4) Compare and contrast the economic impact of the three big shocks that hit Latin America between 1900-1950. 5) What are the main factors of endowment and key features of these factors that are considered to contribute most favorably to economic development? 6) What were the main features of Peronism in post-World War II Argentina? Despite Peron’s downfall in the coup of 1955, the Peronist movement is still alive and well in Argentina.

How would you explain the lasting hold of Peronism on the Argentine public? 7) The period 1900-1914 has frequently been referred to as the “good times” for Latin America because the region was thriving on primary exports to Britain, Europe and the U. S. What are the advantages and disadvantages of a development model based primarily on raw material production for export? You will answer 5 ID questions, for 1 point each: Capital Scarcity Commodity Lottery Economic Populism Enclave Development Exchange Rate Export pessimism Import substitution industrialization Structuralism Eva Peron

Taran Swan at Nickelodeon Latin America (A) Case Study Background and Scope In 1979, Nickelodeon, “a cable channel for kids 2-11 years old, was launched in the United States”. Nickelodeon provided a wide-range of programming which including “live-action, comedy, drama, animation, music and sports and game shows”. By 1995, Nickelodeon was the highest rated basic cable network and international expansion was very realistic and just getting started. To successfully transition internationally Nickelodeon allowed the channel to have its own “on-air identity and slogan” for each endeavor.

Nickelodeon used an “International Swat Team” to launch the network into other countries and once established turned it over for local personnel to operate. By 1998, Nickelodeon had already expanded and operating on 30 countries. However, back in 1993, Ms. Taran Swan, then Director of Business Development for Nickelodeon, initially entertained the opportunity to expand in Latin America. Latin American TV did not cater to children. Due to the economic conditions programs were outdated and stagnant. This would be an opportunity for Nickelodeon to introduce programs that “gave kids a voice” while still embracing their culture.

The steps required to meet this goal would not be easy. Swan recognized the task at hand and the need to “prove her business plan by securing minimum distribution” (at least 2 million households). Swan believed in a “big bets” strategy and keeping the “bottom line” at the forefront of her thought process. This paper will present obstacles that Swan and her team had to deal with, not just in selling the channel, attracting advertisers but also managing each other. Swan’s style and dedication allowed her to hand-pick her team to ensure deadlines were met and meeting expectations of the network.

Swan was known for her “smart and strategic business directives”. In addition issues addressing personal work/life balance, succession/transition plans will be explored. Finally, recommendations not only for Swan but for Nickelodeon as a company will be presented to attempt to mitigate issues that arose while expanding Nickelodeon internationally in Latin America. Swan being so involved in every step from conception to implementation would prove to be more challenging than she anticipated both in personal and professional management ways. Current Situation

At the end of the second year of operations at Nickelodeon Latin America (NLA), Swan prepared for a Town Hall with MTV. She prepared a speech in which she wanted to promote the advancements that NLA had realized for the previous year. Days before the Town Hall, however, Swan was informed by her doctor that she was unable to continue traveling for work as her four month pregnancy showed signs of high risk. Though Swan planned to leave after the Town Hall, she was hospitalized the day of the meeting. As she left to go back home, she considered the many challenges that still lay ahead of her.

After leading the NLA project from research to launch, there remained additional tasks that needed to be completed before the project could be turned over to local management. NLA was on the verge of two crucially important deals. The first deal was with Argentina’s largest provider, Cablevision/TCI, which would add 1. 5 million subscribers. A second deal would give them access to the Brazilian marketplace through a Portuguese feed. These issues were exacerbated by currency volatility, marketing problems and advertising issues. Swan had a significant hand in resolving each of these issues.

Now Swan is faced with a decision on what to do about continuing operations during her leave. Her experience showed that her team needed consistent direction but that they were able to communicate with her remotely. Thus, she considered how she may continue to lead the project from her home. Another option she faced was installing an interim manager who would be charged with leading the station forward. She further considered installing multiple leaders for different functions. She understood that regardless of what decision she made, she would have to adapt her management style and skills.

Situation Analysis Due to Swan’s medical situation, there are three critical activities that must be managed effectively in her absence: increasing advertising sales, increasing affiliate sales, and the executing the Brazil-specific feed. Advertising sales was a key concern for NLA. They had missed their goal by 11% last year. Though the overall bottom-line goal was met, this lack of revenues did not make for a sustainable business model. In addition, the Latin American economy was very rocky, and Brazil was undergoing a currency devaluation.

In order for the company to continue on its path to success, the sales team was going to need to land more advertising accounts, and take advantage of the upcoming World Cup to drive much-needed revenues. Increasing affiliate sales was also key. In particular, the deals with Cablevision/TCI in Argentina and Telemundo in the United States were very important. These deals would expand the viewership by 1. 5 million people in Latin America and millions more in the United States. In turn, this increased viewership would help increase advertising sales, and would also strengthen NLA’s foothold within the region.

It was also help to show the corporation that the NLA project was succeeding. This could lead to a larger budget and more dedicated resources from the corporation. Finally, getting the Brazil-specific feed up and running was critical. Brazil has the largest population and the largest market in all of Latin America. Though NLA had secured carriage on major Brazilian networks, they still had to develop programming for the feed. This would require a significant amount of work as the company would need to customize the programming for the Brazilian culture, as it differed from other Latin American countries.

Creating a successful feed in Brazil would open up new advertising opportunities and new affiliate sales opportunities and would solidify NLA as a major brand in Latin America. Swan knew that she would need to manage all three of these critical activities from New York to make sure that NLA continued to progress. However, she was unsure how to do so. Recommendations Taran Swan has become pregnant at an important time in her company’s progress, when there are still several challenges to complete. Among these include attracting profitable advertisers, closing a deal with Cablevision/TCI and broadcasting to Brazil.

There is no simple way to achieve these goals, and they all fall under problems that need to be addressed over time with the proper management. There are options that Swan has as it relates to the management of Nickelodeon while she is away on pregnancy. 1. Swan could give the responsibility of managing the company to a single person. 2. Swan could have two or more people share her responsibilities. 3. Swan could manage her team remotely and possibly appoint another lower manager to handle the day-to-day tasks.

If Swan decides to take option 1, she will need to carefully evaluate the candidates and select the best one, and get Viacom’s approval. The best candidates that come to mind include Donna Friedman, Valerie McCarty and Stephen Grieder. All of these candidates joined within the first few months after Nickelodeon’s project to expand into Latin America began. Stephen Grieder has had the most experience with Nickelodeon out of the three, was familiar with the Latin American culture, and was described as a creative genius. Valerie McCarty was energetic and had good communication skills.

Like Grieder, she was familiar with the Latin American culture. She also had taken charge of tasks, even when they weren’t completely her responsibility. However, she was relatively new to the company. Donna Friedman was particularly known for her creativity. For example, she developed the “Grow Down” campaign, and thought of making the Jornadas party which attracted thousands of people. Swan felt that Donna didn’t yet have “multidimensional strategic thinking” needed to take on a more managerial role at the moment, but that Donna could be taught these skills.

Swan could decide to take option 2 and have the responsibilities shared by two or more people. This method seemed to work out when Swan divided the marketing roles between McCarty and Friedman. It might help reduce the amount of work each individual has to do. It could also help give the team more diverse views and skillsets. In the last option, Swan could operate the facility remotely. Most of the people working in her team already have experience communicating and working with people from different countries. Swan has already been shown to be an effective leader, and doing it this way would result in the least amount of change.

The team would not need to take a risk on an unproven leader. Our recommendation is that Swan operates the facility remotely, while having another “second in command,” or day to day manager. In the event Swan was unable to run the project for any reason, the person second in command would take over. This would allow Swan to continue to run the project for as long as she was able to, and potentially throughout the entire time she was needed. She should train another person to be in charge of the project, without putting the full responsibility onto them.

This would lower the chance of conflicting orders or conflicting goals that could result from shared leadership and mitigate any potential damage that might occur if Swan were suddenly unable to run the plant. Alternatives / Potential Problems Donna Friedman, Valerie McCarty and Stephen Grieder all seem like they could be great potential leaders on their own. However, they are not yet tested in such a position. Putting one of them in charge at such a crucial point in the company could jeopardize their progress, and puts a large risk on the company. If the responsibilities were shared, it could help mitigate that risk.

However, it could result in misunderstandings, communication problems and overall confusion about the direction of the company if the managers did not always agree. The leaders would need to be careful that they maintained a consistent and clear message. Additionally, it could result social loafing. Social loafing is the phenomenon where people tend to work less in collaborative efforts than in on their own because they expect the other person to fill in the work, and also because they will not get full credit for their work (Latane, Williams & Harkins, 1979).

Lastly, there is the option for Swan to operate the company remotely. She is the safest leader, since she has already proven herself. Though the risk is that due to her pregnancy, or a medical complication, she would be unable to manage the business remotely. Additionally, there might be times when it is difficult to contact her or convey all the needed information to her without her being there in person. This would leave the project without a leader. Conclusion

We learn that Taran Swan might have some team trust issues because of her uncertainty of who to leave in charge during her absence. Every relationship among team members depends on trust. Swan feels her situation has a high level of risk and she is unsure of the best option for her team to succeed while she is gone. Working remotely will allow Swan to have some control over the situation, but that stress might further her complications and prevent her from working all together.

Swan needs to trust her team and give them the tools they need to development their team roles through team building exercises. If Swan communicates effectively to the team members and passes on all training information, she should be able to manage the company remotely without caring too much stress during her medical absence. References McShane, S. & Von Glinow, M. 2011. Organizational Behavior, New York, NY: McGraw-Hill/Irwin Latane, B. , Williams, K. , & Harkins, S. (1979). Journal of personality and social psychology. Retrieved from http://psycnet. apa. org/journals/psp/37/6/822/

Tenochtitlan was the main city and capital of the Aztec empire. The city was founded in 1325 when the Aztec emperor told some of his tribes to look for a spot for their new capital city. He told them that the spot for the city would be found when they saw an eagle eating a snake on top of a cactus. This symbol is now on the Mexican coat of arms and on the Mexican flag (King). The tribes wondered around in what is now present day Mexico City, looking for this strange site. They finally came to the spot where they saw the scene.

It happened on a small island in the middle of Lake Texacco. All of the surrounding area of the lake was all swamp land, but because they saw the eagle there, that’s where the city was to be built. The construction of Tenochtitlan took place under the rule of four different Aztec kings. They laid out the construction plans for the city on a grid, making the building of the city much easier and run smoother. The city was linked to the mainland by three raised causeways; the three different causeways pointed north, west, and south.

The raised causeways had bridges in the middle of them to allow canoes and other traffic underneath; the bridges could also be raised up in case of an attack. The city had two aqueducts that were 2. 5 miles long to supply fresh water from the springs of Chapultepec, though most of this water was used for bathing, washing dishes, and other various reasons (Stearns). Most of the Tenochtitlan population bathed twice every day, but ruler Montezuma was rumored to bathe as many as 4 times a day.

The people preferred their drinking water from the nearby mountain springs, as it was much cleaner. When it was at its biggest point, Tenochtitlan covered a little more than five square miles. And at the height of its existence, Tenochtitlan’s population was approximately 150,000 people (closely comparable to the size of the population of the city of Cordoba). Tenochtitlan was the largest city in Mesoamerica, but also one of the largest in the world (Tenochtitlan). The only two cities larger than this at the time were Paris and Constantinople which had populations of 300,000.

The language of the city was Nahuatl, it was spoken throughout the Aztec empire. The people also practiced Aztec religion, the religion consisted of human sacrifice and religious festivals. Gods of different elements were worshiped and given sacrifices. Human sacrifices were given to the sun god in fear that the sun might not rise the next morning (Stearns). Templo Mayor was the largest temple in Tenochtitlan, it was rebuilt 6 different times (King). The temple first went under construction in 1325, in succession with the rest of the city.

Each time it was rebuilt, it grew slightly larger. The temple was dedicated to 2 different gods, Tlaloc, god of rain and agriculture, and Huitzilopochtli, god of war. Each god had its own separate temple at the top. In 1427 Aztec emperor Ahuitzotl sacrificed tens of thousands of people in the p of 4 days in honor of the temple.. The organization of the city was that of a city-state, with an organized central region. Agriculture was a thriving practice in Tenochtitlan. Because there was no room for it in the city, chinampas were developed.

Chinampas were fields created on floating platforms on the lake’s surface. Spanish conquistador Hernan Cortes visited the city in 1519 and was amazed. Cortes and his men were in awe at the sight of the city. They were greeted by the Aztecs with gifts and food. Despite the hospitality, Cortes challenged the Aztecs and took emperor Montezuma hostage. The Aztecs declared war and drove the Spaniards out in 1520. Cortes led later attacks on the city but most of the population was wiped by diseases that the Spaniards had brought. The city finally fell to the Spaniards in 1521. The city was demolished and rebuilt to what is now Mexico City. There are still ruins of Tenochtitlan that can still be seen today in central Mexico City.

Works Cited

1. Stearns, Peter et al. World Civilizations. 3rd ed. New York. Pearson Longman, 2000. “Tenochtitlan. ” Retrieved from https://www. courses. psu. edu/anth/anth008_cmg149/aten. html
2. King, Heidi. “Tenochtitlan”. The Metropolitan Museum of Art. (October 2004) Retrieved from http://www. metmuseum. org/toah/hd/teno_1/hd_teno_1. htm (October 2004)