Mexico`s Megalopolis` by Jonathan Kandell

Nowadays, the city of Mexico is one of the largest megalopolises, with enourmopus population density and industrialization rates. Jonathan Kandell in his book ‘I Saw a City Invincible’ provides a wonderful historical excurse in terms of urban, technological and social development in the city. The issue of migration was particularly obvious between the 1940s and the 1970s, when the inhabitants of small towns and rural areas suddenly began to move into the city, searching for their fortunes at factories and plants. As Kandell notes, â€Å"Factories, commerce, and service jobs sucked in hordes of rural migrants who swelled Mexico City’s population from 1. 5 million in 1940 to 8. 5 million in 1970† (Kandell, p. 183). Furthermore, the author describes the stuggle between time-honored Latin American values and globalization trends, brought by the country’s nearest neighbor, the United States. The phenomenon of tourist infrastructure also emerged under American influence: the new cafes and traditional cuisine restaurants were being adjusted to ‘American demands’ and standards (p. 184). In sociopolitical meaning, the country in that period was literally obsessed with social radical views: â€Å"Revolutionary slogans continued to exalt the ideals of land for the rural dispossessed, living wages for the proletariat, and a determinant voice for the state of economic affairs† (ibid). The ambitiousness of Mexican politicians enjoyed stable and sustainable growth between the 1940s and the 1970s, parallel to the growth of ordinary Mexicans’ aspirations, as increasingly more citizens sought rapid career and social protection in the capital. In reality, the needs of majorities were satisfied: there was a plenty of work, due to the development of service and mass-communications spheres, in which females, traditionally marginalized as reliable employees, got an opportunity to find themselves. Due to the fact that by the 1960s, the average Mexican urban family contained no unemployed members (except children), household incomes were growing proportionally to the overall economic and political progress. Nevertheless, the metropolis also experienced certain problems, such as housing crisis: â€Å"In the 1940s and 1950s most migrants settled first in the old downtown tenements [the so-called’ vecindadez] abandoned generations before by the middle class† (p. 185). These quarters seemed completely distinct dimension that in the course of time obtained a kind of autonomy, as such miniature settlements had their local factories, shopping malls, saloons and bars and, certainly, their own markets, which appeared the centers of social life, peculiar ‘offspring’ of Ancient Roman forum or Greek agora. Kandall provides a description of the typical vecindad: â€Å"†¦Tepito was now populated mainly by artisans, vendors, factory laborers, unskilled workers, waiters, office clerks, messengers and porters†, who earned about $20 per month (p. 85). Notwithstanding the rapid economic development, the migrants’ well-being had been very limited up to the 1960s: due to the fact that flat rent was unjustifiably high, the families huddled together in small windowless apartments and could afford meet only once a week. Another apparent trend in urban development was the gradual growth of small enterprises, to which local governments de legated their responsibilities for food, health facilities and education. Nevertheless, the main institutions remained bureaucratic and centralized, so private capital hadn’t enjoyed considerable flow until the end of the 1970s. Due to the fact that the factories of Mexico City were controlled by local authorities, so the working-class suffered from poverty and lack of dwelling conveniences: â€Å"[only] In 1977 Jaras’ dwelling [situated in the typical working-class ‘reservation’] was legally connected to the municipal electricity grid and water system† (p. 90). The present-day ecological catastrophe, notable in Mexico City, is rooted in the negligence, demonstrated by government as well as local enterprises: â€Å"The primitive recycling of garbage, often carried out illegally by small businesses that are unsupervised by the municipal authorities, poses serious health hazards to the population at large† (p. 192). The author notes that the ‘garbage problem’ had remained extremely sharp up to the end of the 1980s. In addition, Kandall addresses the progress of charity and human services: affluent urban entrepreneurs contributed to the development of local communities in the best Mexican traditions: ‘He sponsored local soccer teams, supplied the uniforms and built for playing fields, which he named Rafael Sports center† (p. 194). On Gutierez’ example the author shows businessmen’s [caciques] bourgeois ambitions: after the establishment of the enterprise, they normally tried to penetrate into the city’s or national political arena, so their charity was nothing more than well-planned PR. Human services, although popular in Mexican culture, were institutionalized only in the 1970s, since the religious traditions prescribed that urban dwellers helped their neighbors and compatriots on the voluntary basis, Mexican cultural collectivism was extremely noticeable in the working-class quarters. With beginning of the 1980s, the country was paralyzed by environmental accidents like earthquakes, but the government appeared incapable of handling the resulting problems in a proper way: â€Å"The small parties of left and right were unable to claim the loyalty of potential dissidents†, whereas the young volunteers seemed the major rescuers, which means, Mexican urban citizens were always ready to support each other, and in spite of the pessimistic ending of the article: â€Å"Throughout its existence the city has been scourged by war, social upheaval. Plague, flood, earthquake† (p. 201), its overall context shows that social problems and emergencies haven’t managed to separate the city dwellers, but rather have united them and created a powerful humanistic basis for the reinforcement of Mexico City.