vigorous application of modern scientific and technical knowledge’’ (Truman
1964).
As suggested by several authors (Escobar 2012; Frenkel 1953; Cardoso and
Faletto 1979), Truman’s speech defined the path and the logic of the economic
policy of the United States and of the world, while also determining the characteristics linked with backwardness, underdevelopment, and the invention of the
third world (Escobar 1999) as territorialized problems, the amelioration of which
was feasibly done from the capital. From that moment on, concepts such as
poverty and hunger were seen as social ills, the modification and transformation of
which were based on knowledge, planning, and design, and also the economic
interventions of global development aid entities such as the World Bank and later
the International Monetary Fund.
Thus, the Latin American Governments, given the need to expand their markets, accepted the model of economic development promoted by the World Bank
and they also accepted loans from the World Bank so that they could implant the
idea of modernity and development, understood as the increase in the gross
domestic product and increased foreign investment in the country. In general
terms, this constituted a need for planning and administration of the territory with a
development-based approach; ‘‘perhaps the most important antecedent in the
documentation of the territorial intervention by the Mexican Government is the
regional focus on water basins that began in 1947’’ (Aguilar-Robledo 1995, p. 15).
The Tennessee Valley Authority model was exported from the North to the South
of the continent, with a vision of modernization, industrialization, production, and
foreign investment in development; ‘‘in the 1950s, agricultural development policies sought to transform indigenous rural societies into competitively productive
and commercial agricultural societies, in order to supply the cities and nascent
industry’’ (Lazos 2011, p. 256).
In the case of the peasant populations, it was thought that once they had become
integrated into market society, and at the instant they set aside their conditions of
cultural origin, they would no longer demonstrate the barbarism and savagery
attributed to their origin and community activities. It was thought that the peasants
and the rural sector would then be able to enter into the great civilization offered by
the modern nation and the free market.
Based on the above, the institutions of the Government constructed a system of
ideas, practices, and logics that defined the components ‘‘to be developed’’ within
national territory. Hence, throughout the various administrations, different
‘‘development’’ strategies were built in order to encourage economic growth in the
various regions of the country, especially those with rural characteristics; in addition
to the basin planning approach, there were ‘‘declarations of national parks and
industrial parks (1953), the national border program (1961), the national commission for arid zones (1970), and the comprehensive program for rural development
(1973)’’ (Aguilar-Robledo 1995, p. 15). Also, starting in the 1950s, ‘‘government
institutions were created for scientific research, for agricultural credit, for the
development of seeds and fertilizers, and also so that they might act as channels
forthe marketing and distribution of agricultural products’’ (Lazos 2011, p. 265).
16 When Modernity is Not Enough
459
1964).
As suggested by several authors (Escobar 2012; Frenkel 1953; Cardoso and
Faletto 1979), Truman’s speech defined the path and the logic of the economic
policy of the United States and of the world, while also determining the characteristics linked with backwardness, underdevelopment, and the invention of the
third world (Escobar 1999) as territorialized problems, the amelioration of which
was feasibly done from the capital. From that moment on, concepts such as
poverty and hunger were seen as social ills, the modification and transformation of
which were based on knowledge, planning, and design, and also the economic
interventions of global development aid entities such as the World Bank and later
the International Monetary Fund.
Thus, the Latin American Governments, given the need to expand their markets, accepted the model of economic development promoted by the World Bank
and they also accepted loans from the World Bank so that they could implant the
idea of modernity and development, understood as the increase in the gross
domestic product and increased foreign investment in the country. In general
terms, this constituted a need for planning and administration of the territory with a
development-based approach; ‘‘perhaps the most important antecedent in the
documentation of the territorial intervention by the Mexican Government is the
regional focus on water basins that began in 1947’’ (Aguilar-Robledo 1995, p. 15).
The Tennessee Valley Authority model was exported from the North to the South
of the continent, with a vision of modernization, industrialization, production, and
foreign investment in development; ‘‘in the 1950s, agricultural development policies sought to transform indigenous rural societies into competitively productive
and commercial agricultural societies, in order to supply the cities and nascent
industry’’ (Lazos 2011, p. 256).
In the case of the peasant populations, it was thought that once they had become
integrated into market society, and at the instant they set aside their conditions of
cultural origin, they would no longer demonstrate the barbarism and savagery
attributed to their origin and community activities. It was thought that the peasants
and the rural sector would then be able to enter into the great civilization offered by
the modern nation and the free market.
Based on the above, the institutions of the Government constructed a system of
ideas, practices, and logics that defined the components ‘‘to be developed’’ within
national territory. Hence, throughout the various administrations, different
‘‘development’’ strategies were built in order to encourage economic growth in the
various regions of the country, especially those with rural characteristics; in addition
to the basin planning approach, there were ‘‘declarations of national parks and
industrial parks (1953), the national border program (1961), the national commission for arid zones (1970), and the comprehensive program for rural development
(1973)’’ (Aguilar-Robledo 1995, p. 15). Also, starting in the 1950s, ‘‘government
institutions were created for scientific research, for agricultural credit, for the
development of seeds and fertilizers, and also so that they might act as channels
forthe marketing and distribution of agricultural products’’ (Lazos 2011, p. 265).
16 When Modernity is Not Enough
459