Jungle Laboratories: Mexican Peasants, National Projects, and the Making of the Pill (2009) by Gabriel Soto Laveaga presents an argument of national identity and ownership, all of which is surrounded by the barbasco yam. It is a dance between ownership that invvolves the Mexican government (especially the Echeverria government of the 1970s) and its accompanying scientific community, its pharmaceutical company Proquivemex, and the transnational pharmaceutical corporations. These players further fight for who will sway the decision for the Mexican compesinos, or the Mexican peasant class. The Mexican government wants the compesinos to understand that the commodity they are digging up in Southeast Mexico is of the benefit for the Mexican people. The government wanted to cultivate a sense of national awareness of the importance of the barbasco, as well as its contributions to Mexican leadership in hormone-progesterone pharmaceutical market. Laveaga aruges, "So, why were urban Mexicans suddenly interested in barbasco and its pickers in 1974? After decades of virtual obscurity, domestic and international forces led the government to shift its focus from the science of the yam to the men and women known as barbasqueros, pickers of barbasco... the price of medications, Mexico's technological dependence on pharmaceutical companies, growing urban unrest, increasing concern with overpopulation, and expanding rural discontent. Taken together they lay bare an attempt by the Mexican government to gain control over a recalcitrant citizenry while outmaneuvering a strategically powerful foe: pharmaceutical companies" (115). The Mexican government wanted to bring the peasant barbasco pickers at the forefront of a national debate in order to turn the tide against outside agents, namely the transnational pharmaceuticals. The Echeverria government utilized populism to gain favor of its citizenry, especially the barbasqueros in placing the barbasco market specifically under Mexican identity and ownership. Lacheaga further writes, "...Echeverria became an ardent supporter of peasants, workers, and students. His behavior, often described as megalomaniacal or mercurial--he publicly and openly embraced peasants and bowed his head in support at stories of land-tenure abuse--confounded political colleagues and angered investors, but it charmed Mexico's unemployed and landless" (118). Echeverria wanted to engage the public openly in support of their situation while at the same time locking in support for nationalistic awareness, identity, ownership for a product that held importance to the Mexican economy, with the lower classes being those that picked it.
But what of Proquivemex, Mexico's answer to the intrusion of Transnational pharmaceutical markets? The Mexican company wanted to assist the compesinos by educating them the importance of their role in the broader schemes of how the commodity and its later synthetics worked. Laceaga states, "The guiding principle for Proquivemex's social goals was that pickers had to understand the uses for barbasco before they could have complete autonomy over their labor process. In the words of Proquivemex's first administration, transnational pharmaceutical companies took advantage of barbasqueros ignorance to pay them less than they deserved... Teaching campesinos about barbasco would be a grassroots movement of social mobilization--ironically propelled by the government--to empower campesinos against middlemen and, ultimately, pharmaceutical companies" (144). They wanted to enlighten and uplift the compesino's for better wages for their effort in producing a product that would benefit the Mexican people and their relationship/identity as well as ownership with barbasco. The efforts in education would curtail the use of 'middlemen' and outside factors, namely transnational companies. The sources deployed by Lacheaga, beyond her extensive interviews and archival research, displays the use of training pamphlets distributed by Proquivemex to demonstrate that, such as Figure 22 on page 145, that Mexico was in first place and leader in the hormone production. This signifies that they wanted to empower them to assist in Mexico's goals with the commodity and by extension nationalizing barbasco, as well as giving control, ownership, and national identity to Mexico. Where Proquivemex rises, it does fall, primarily in the prices it quotes. Lacheaga notes that to solve the problem, they had to lower prices as to increase demand, breaking off from buying barbasco from peasants during peak seasons, or require loans (154). Evaluation of the price was a considerable problem for Proquivemex, especially in its attempts (with hints from the government) to raise the price to assist Mexican citizenry. Moreover, despite the praises of the government to assist the peasant compesinos, the monograph is more top-down in methodology and agency in that the main players (or actors) are still centered in government and the pharmaceutical companies in having the primary say in what happens with barbasco--the peasantry simply need to be swayed or more-so motivated as to assist in the greater demands of the government and Mexican-branded pharmaceutical businesses. Yet, something I am tackling is where then does this compare or contrast with, say, the narrative of cocaine with Gootenberg in terms of agency? The agency still falls with those lower class persons within the Andean region, despite the outside forces and actors such as middlemen, cartels, and transnational governments. The monograph from Lacheaga gives ample support for the peasants but it is the Mexican government and their medical entities (pharmaceutical company) and the transnational companies that have more authority, although the peasants have a rather strong role. It is my hope and intent that this can be better addressed and clarified during class discussion.
No comments:
Post a Comment