Monthly Archives: February 2022

State of Mexico

State in Tuxtla Gutirrez, Mexico

Chiapas

Coat of arms

State of Chiapas within Mexico

2930

Chiapas (Spanish pronunciation:[tjapas] (listen); Tzotzil and Tzeltal: Chyapas [tjapas]), officially the Free and Sovereign State of Chiapas (Spanish: Estado Libre y Soberano de Chiapas), is one of the states that make up the 32 federal entities of Mexico. It comprises 124 municipalities as of September 2017[update][9][10] and its capital city is Tuxtla Gutirrez. Other important population centers in Chiapas include Ocosingo, Tapachula, San Cristbal de las Casas, Comitn, and Arriaga. It is the southernmost state in Mexico, and it borders the states of Oaxaca to the west, Veracruz to the northwest, and Tabasco to the north,[11] and the Petn, Quich, Huehuetenango, and San Marcos departments of Guatemala to the east and southeast. Chiapas has a coastline on the Pacific Ocean to the southwest.

In general, Chiapas has a humid, tropical climate. In the north, in the area bordering Tabasco, near Teapa, rainfall can average more than 3,000mm (120in) per year. In the past, natural vegetation in this region was lowland, tall perennial rainforest, but this vegetation has been almost completely cleared to allow agriculture and ranching. Rainfall decreases moving towards the Pacific Ocean, but it is still abundant enough to allow the farming of bananas and many other tropical crops near Tapachula. On the several parallel sierras or mountain ranges running along the center of Chiapas, the climate can be quite moderate and foggy, allowing the development of cloud forests like those of Reserva de la Biosfera El Triunfo, home to a handful of horned guans, resplendent quetzals, and azure-rumped tanagers.

Chiapas is home to the ancient Mayan ruins of Palenque, Yaxchiln, Bonampak, Chinkultic and Tonin. It is also home to one of the largest indigenous populations in the country, with twelve federally recognized ethnicities.[citation needed]

The official name of the state is Chiapas. It is believed to have come from the ancient city of Chiapan, which in Nhuatl means "the place where the chia sage grows."[12] After the Spanish arrived (1522), they established two cities called Chiapas delos Indios and Chiapas delos Espaoles (1528), with the name of Provincia de Chiapas for the area around the cities. The first coat of arms of the region dates from 1535 as that of the Ciudad Real (San Cristbal de las Casas). Chiapas painter Javier Vargas Ballinas designed the modern coat of arms.[13][need quotation to verify]

Hunter gatherers began to occupy the central valley of the state around 7000 BCE, but little is known about them. The oldest archaeological remains in the seat are located at the Santa Elena Ranch in Ocozocoautla whose finds include tools and weapons made of stone and bone. It also includes burials.[14] In the pre Classic period from 1800 BCE to 300 CE, agricultural villages appeared all over the state although hunter gather groups would persist for long after the era.[15]

Recent excavations in the Soconusco region of the state indicate that the oldest civilization to appear in what is now modern Chiapas is that of the Mokaya, which were cultivating corn and living in houses as early as 1500 BCE, making them one of the oldest in Mesoamerica.[15][16] There is speculation that these were the forefathers of the Olmec, migrating across the Grijalva Valley and onto the coastal plain of the Gulf of Mexico to the north, which was Olmec territory. One of these people's ancient cities is now the archeological site of Chiapa de Corzo, in which was found the oldest calendar known on a piece of ceramic with a date of 36 BCE. This is three hundred years before the Mayans developed their calendar. The descendants of Mokaya are the Mixe-Zoque.[15]

During the pre Classic era, it is known that most of Chiapas was not Olmec, but had close relations with them, especially the Olmecs of the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. Olmec-influenced sculpture can be found in Chiapas and products from the state including amber, magnetite, and ilmenite were exported to Olmec lands. The Olmecs came to what is now the northwest of the state looking for amber with one of the main pieces of evidence for this called the Simojovel Ax.[17]

Mayan civilization began in the pre-Classic period as well, but did not come into prominence until the Classic period (300900CE). Development of this culture was agricultural villages during the pre-Classic period with city building during the Classic as social stratification became more complex. The Mayans built cities on the Yucatn Peninsula and west into Guatemala. In Chiapas, Mayan sites are concentrated along the state's borders with Tabasco and Guatemala, near Mayan sites in those entities. Most of this area belongs to the Lacandon Jungle.[18]

Mayan civilization in the Lacandon area is marked by rising exploitation of rain forest resources, rigid social stratification, fervent local identity, waging war against neighboring peoples.[15] At its height, it had large cities, a writing system, and development of scientific knowledge, such as mathematics and astronomy. Cities were centered on large political and ceremonial structures elaborately decorated with murals and inscriptions. Among these cities are Palenque, Bonampak, Yaxchilan, Chinkultic, Tonin and Tenn. The Mayan civilization had extensive trade networks and large markets trading in goods such as animal skins, indigo, amber, vanilla and quetzal feathers.[18] It is not known what ended the civilization but theories range from over population size, natural disasters, disease, and loss of natural resources through over exploitation or climate change.

Nearly all Mayan cities collapsed around the same time, 900CE. From then until 1500 CE, social organization of the region fragmented into much smaller units and social structure became much less complex. There was some influence from the rising powers of central Mexico but two main indigenous groups emerged during this time, the Zoques and the various Mayan descendants. The Chiapans, for whom the state is named, migrated into the center of the state during this time and settled around Chiapa de Corzo, the old MixeZoque stronghold.[15] There is evidence that the Aztecs appeared in the center of the state around Chiapa de Corza in the 15thcentury, but were unable to displace the native Chiapa tribe. However, they had enough influence so that the name of this area and of the state would come from Nahuatl.[19]

When the Spanish arrived in the 16th century, they found the indigenous peoples divided into Mayan and non-Mayan, with the latter dominated by the Zoques and Chiapa.[15] The first contact between Spaniards and the people of Chiapas came in 1522, when Hernn Corts sent tax collectors to the area after Aztec Empire was subdued. The first military incursion was headed by Luis Marn, who arrived in 1523. After three years, Marn was able to subjugate a number of the local peoples, but met with fierce resistance from the Tzotzils in the highlands. The Spanish colonial government then sent a new expedition under Diego de Mazariegos. Mazariegos had more success than his predecessor, but many natives preferred to commit suicide rather than submit to the Spanish. One famous example of this is the Battle of Tepetchia, where many jumped to their deaths in the Sumidero Canyon.[20][21]

Indigenous resistance was weakened by continual warfare with the Spaniards and disease. By 1530 almost all of the indigenous peoples of the area had been subdued with the exception of the Lacandons in the deep jungles who actively resisted until 1695.[15][19][20] However, the main two groups, the Tzotzils and Tzeltals of the central highlands were subdued enough to establish the first Spanish city, today called San Cristbal de las Casas, in 1528. It was one of two settlements initially called Villa Real de Chiapa de los Espaoles and the other called Chiapa de los Indios.[20][21]

Soon after, the encomienda system was introduced, which reduced most of the indigenous population to serfdom and many even as slaves as a form of tribute and way of locking in a labor supply for tax payments. The conquistadors brought previously unknown diseases. This, as well as overwork on plantations, dramatically decreased the indigenous population.[15] The Spanish also established missions, mostly under the Dominicans, with the Diocese of Chiapas established in 1538 by Pope Paul III.[21] The Dominican evangelizers became early advocates of the indigenous' people's plight, with Bartolom de las Casas winning a battle with the passing of a law in 1542 for their protection. This order also worked to make sure that communities would keep their indigenous name with a saint's prefix leading to names such as San Juan Chamula and San Lorenzo Zinacantn. He also advocated adapting the teaching of Christianity to indigenous language and culture. The encomienda system that had perpetrated much of the abuse of the indigenous peoples declined by the end of the 16th century, and was replaced by haciendas. However, the use and misuse of Indian labor remained a large part of Chiapas politics into modern times.[15][20][21] Maltreatment and tribute payments created an undercurrent of resentment in the indigenous population that passed on from generation to generation. One uprising against high tribute payments occurred in the Tzeltal communities in the Los Alto region in 1712. Soon, the Tzoltzils and Ch'ols joined the Tzeltales in rebellion, but within a year the government was able to extinguish the rebellion.[20]

As of 1778, Thomas Kitchin described Chiapas as "the metropolis of the original Mexicans," with a population of approximately 20,000, and consisting mainly of indigenous peoples.[22] The Spanish introduced new crops such as sugar cane, wheat, barley and indigo as main economic staples along native ones such as corn, cotton, cacao and beans. Livestock such as cattle, horses and sheep were introduced as well. Regions would specialize in certain crops and animals depending on local conditions and for many of these regions, communication and travel were difficult.[15] Most Europeans and their descendants tended to concentrate in cities such as Ciudad Real, Comitn, Chiapa and Tuxtla. Intermixing of the races was prohibited by colonial law but by the end of the 17th century there was a significant mestizo population. Added to this was a population of African slaves brought in by the Spanish in the middle of the 16th century due to the loss of native workforce.[15][23]

Initially, "Chiapas" referred to the first two cities established by the Spanish in what is now the center of the state and the area surrounding them. Two other regions were also established, the Soconusco and Tuxtla, all under the regional colonial government of Guatemala. Chiapas, Soconusco and Tuxla regions were united to the first time as an intendencia during the Bourbon Reforms in 1790 as an administrative region under the name of Chiapas. However, within this intendencia, the division between Chiapas and Soconusco regions would remain strong and have consequences at the end of the colonial period.[15][16]

From the colonial period Chiapas was relatively isolated from the colonial authorities in Mexico City and regional authorities in Guatemala. One reason for this was the rugged terrain. Another was that much of Chiapas was not attractive to the Spanish. It lacked mineral wealth, large areas of arable land, and easy access to markets.[15] This isolation spared it from battles related to Independence. Jos Mara Morelos y Pavn did enter the city of Tonal but incurred no resistance. The only other insurgent activity was the publication of a newspaper called El Pararrayos by Matas de Crdova in San Cristbal de las Casas.[24]

Following the end of Spanish rule in New Spain, it was unclear what new political arrangements would emerge. The isolation of Chiapas from centers of power, along with the strong internal divisions in the intendencia caused a political crisis after royal government collapsed in Mexico City in 1821, ending the Mexican War of Independence.[15] During this war, a group of influential Chiapas merchants and ranchers sought the establishment of the Free State of Chiapas. This group became known as the La Familia Chiapaneca. However, this alliance did not last with the lowlands preferring inclusion among the new republics of Central America and the highlands annexation to Mexico.[25] In 1821, a number of cities in Chiapas, starting in Comitn, declared the state's separation from the Spanish empire. In 1823, Guatemala became part of the United Provinces of Central America, which united to form a federal republic that would last from 1823 to 1839. With the exception of the pro-Mexican Ciudad Real (San Cristbal) and some others, many Chiapanecan towns and villages favored a Chiapas independent of Mexico and some favored unification with Guatemala.

Elites in highland cities pushed for incorporation into Mexico.[15][20] In 1822, then-Emperor Agustn de Iturbide decreed that Chiapas was part of Mexico. In 1823, the Junta General de Gobierno was held and Chiapas declared independence again.[15] In July 1824, the Soconusco District of southwestern Chiapas split off from Chiapas, announcing that it would join the Central American Federation.[20] In September of the same year, a referendum was held on whether the intendencia would join Central America or Mexico, with many of the elite endorsing union with Mexico. This referendum ended in favor of incorporation with Mexico (allegedly through manipulation of the elite in the highlands), but the Soconusco region maintained a neutral status until 1842, when Oaxacans under General Antonio Lpez de Santa Anna occupied the area, and declared it reincorporated into Mexico. Elites of the area would not accept this until 1844.[15][25][26] Guatemala would not recognize Mexico's annexation of the Soconusco region until 1895 even though a final border between Chiapas and the country was finalized until 1882.[20][26] The State of Chiapas was officially declared in 1824, with its first constitution in 1826. Ciudad Real was renamed San Cristbal de las Casas in 1828.[16]

In the decades after the official end of the war, the provinces of Chiapas and Soconusco unified, with power concentrated in San Cristbal de las Casas. The state's society evolved into three distinct spheres: indigenous peoples, mestizos from the farms and haciendas and the Spanish colonial cities. Most of the political struggles were between the last two groups especially over who would control the indigenous labor force. Economically, the state lost one of its main crops, indigo, to synthetic dyes. There was a small experiment with democracy in the form of "open city councils" but it was shortlived because voting was heavily rigged.[15]

The Universidad Pontificia y Literaria de Chiapas was founded in 1826, with Mexico's second teacher's college founded in the state in 1828.[15]

With the ouster of conservative Antonio Lpez de Santa Anna, Mexican liberals came to power. The Reform War (18581861) fought between Liberals, who favored federalism and sought economic development, decreased power of the Roman Catholic Church, and Mexican army, and Conservatives, who favored centralized autocratic government, retention of elite privileges, did not lead to any military battles in the state. Despite that it strongly affected Chiapas politics.[15] In Chiapas, the Liberal-Conservative division had its own twist. Much of the division between the highland and lowland ruling families was for whom the Indians should work for and for how long as the main shortage was of labor.[27] These families split into Liberals in the lowlands, who wanted further reform and Conservatives in the highlands who still wanted to keep some of the traditional colonial and church privileges.[28] For most of the early and mid 19th century, Conservatives held most of the power and were concentrated in the larger cities of San Cristbal de las Casas, Chiapa (de Corzo), Tuxtla and Comitn. As Liberals gained the upper hand nationally in the mid-19th century, one Liberal politician ngel Albino Corzo gained control of the state. Corzo became the primary exponent of Liberal ideas in the southeast of Mexico and defended the Palenque and Pichucalco areas from annexation by Tabasco. However, Corzo's rule would end in 1875, when he opposed the regime of Porfirio Daz.[15]

Liberal land reforms would have negative effects on the state's indigenous population unlike in other areas of the country. Liberal governments expropriated lands that were previously held by the Spanish Crown and Catholic Church in order to sell them into private hands. This was not only motivated by ideology, but also due to the need to raise money. However, many of these lands had been in a kind of "trust" with the local indigenous populations, who worked them. Liberal reforms took away this arrangement and many of these lands fell into the hands of large landholders who when made the local Indian population work for three to five days a week just for the right to continue to cultivate the lands. This requirement caused many to leave and look for employment elsewhere. Most became "free" workers on other farms, but they were often paid only with food and basic necessities from the farm shop. If this was not enough, these workers became indebted to these same shops and then unable to leave.[29]

The opening up of these lands also allowed many whites and mestizos (often called Ladinos in Chiapas) to encroach on what had been exclusively indigenous communities in the state. These communities had had almost no contact with the Ladino world, except for a priest. The new Ladino landowners occupied their acquired lands as well as others, such as shopkeepers, opened up businesses in the center of Indian communities. In 1848, a group of Tzeltals plotted to kill the new mestizos in their midst, but this plan was discovered, and was punished by the removal of large number of the community's male members. The changing social order had severe negative effects on the indigenous population with alcoholism spreading, leading to more debts as it was expensive.[27] The struggles between Conservatives and Liberals nationally disrupted commerce and confused power relations between Indian communities and Ladino authorities. It also resulted in some brief respites for Indians during times when the instability led to uncollected taxes.[30]

One other effect that Liberal land reforms had was the start of coffee plantations, especially in the Soconusco region. One reason for this push in this area was that Mexico was still working to strengthen its claim on the area against Guatemala's claims on the region. The land reforms brought colonists from other areas of the country as well as foreigners from England, the United States and France. These foreign immigrants would introduce coffee production to the areas, as well as modern machinery and professional administration of coffee plantations. Eventually, this production of coffee would become the state's most important crop.[31]

Although the Liberals had mostly triumphed in the state and the rest of the country by the 1860s, Conservatives still held considerable power in Chiapas. Liberal politicians sought to solidify their power among the indigenous groups by weakening the Roman Catholic Church. The more radical of these even allowed indigenous groups the religious freedoms to return to a number of native rituals and beliefs such as pilgrimages to natural shrines such as mountains and waterfalls.[32]

This culminated in the Chiapas "caste war", which was an uprising of Tzotzils beginning in 1868.[20][33] The basis of the uprising was the establishment of the "three stones cult" in Tzajahemal.[33] Agustina Gmez Checheb was a girl tending her father's sheep when three stones fell from the sky. Collecting them, she put them on her father's altar and soon claimed that the stone communicated with her. Word of this soon spread and the "talking stones" of Tzajahemel soon became a local indigenous pilgrimage site. The cult was taken over by one pilgrim, Pedro Daz Cuzcat, who also claimed to be able to communicate with the stones, and had knowledge of Catholic ritual, becoming a kind of priest. However, this challenged the traditional Catholic faith and non Indians began to denounce the cult.[34] Stories about the cult include embellishments such as the crucifixion of a young Indian boy.[25]

This led to the arrest of Checheb and Cuzcat in December 1868. This caused resentment among the Tzotzils. Although the Liberals had earlier supported the cult, Liberal landowners had also lost control of much of their Indian labor and Liberal politicians were having a harder time collecting taxes from indigenous communities.[35] An Indian army gathered at Zontehuitz then attacked various villages and haciendas.[26] By the following June the city of San Cristbal was surrounded by several thousand Indians, who offered the exchanged of several Ladino captives for their religious leaders and stones.[36] Chiapas governor Dominguz came to San Cristbal with about three hundred heavily armed men, who then attacked the Indian force armed only with sticks and machetes.[37] The indigenous force was quickly dispersed and routed with government troops pursuing pockets of guerrilla resistance in the mountains until 1870. The event effectively returned control of the indigenous workforce back to the highland elite.[26][38]

The Porfirio Daz era at the end of the 19th century and beginning of the 20th was initially thwarted by regional bosses called caciques, bolstered by a wave of Spanish and mestizo farmers who migrated to the state and added to the elite group of wealthy landowning families.[15][20] There was some technological progress such as a highway from San Cristbal to the Oaxaca border and the first telephone line in the 1880s, but Porfirian era economic reforms would not begin until 1891 with Governor Emilio Rabasa.[15][26] This governor took on the local and regional caciques and centralized power into the state capital, which he moved from San Cristbal de las Casas to Tuxtla in 1892.[26][39] He modernized public administration, transportation and promoted education.[15] Rabasa also introduced the telegraph, limited public schooling, sanitation and road construction, including a route from San Cristbal to Tuxtla then Oaxaca, which signaled the beginning of favoritism of development in the central valley over the highlands.[40] He also changed state policies to favor foreign investment, favored large land mass consolidation for the production of cash crops such as henequen, rubber, guayule, cochineal and coffee.[15][41] Agricultural production boomed, especially coffee, which induced the construction of port facilities in Tonal. The economic expansion and investment in roads also increased access to tropical commodities such as hardwoods, rubber and chicle.[40]

These still required cheap and steady labor to be provided by the indigenous population.[40] By the end of the 19th century, the four main indigenous groups, Tzeltals, Tzotzils, Tojolabals and Chols were living in "reducciones" or reservations, isolated from one another.[42] Conditions on the farms of the Porfirian era was serfdom, as bad if not worse than for other indigenous and mestizo populations leading to the Mexican Revolution. While this coming event would affect the state, Chiapas did not follow the uprisings in other areas that would end the Porfirian era.[43]

Japanese immigration to Mexico began in 1897 when the first thirty five migrants arrived in Chiapas to work on coffee farms, so that Mexico was the first Latin American country to receive organized Japanese immigration.[44] Although this colony ultimately failed, there remains a small Japanese community in Acacoyagua, Chiapas.

In the early 20th century and into the Mexican Revolution, the production of coffee was particularly important but labor-intensive. This would lead to a practice called enganche (hook), where recruiters would lure workers with advanced pay and other incentives such as alcohol and then trap them with debts for travel and other items to be worked off. This practice would lead to a kind of indentured servitude and uprisings in areas of the state, although they never led to large rebel armies as in other parts of Mexico.[31]

A small war broke out between Tuxtla Gutirrez and San Cristobal in 1911. San Cristbal, allied with San Juan Chamula, tried to regain the state's capital but the effort failed. San Cristbal de las Casas, which had a very limited budget, to the extent that it had to ally with San Juan Chamula challenged Tuxtla Gutierrez which, with only a small ragtag army overwhelmingly defeated the army helped by chamulas from San Cristbal. There were three years of peace after that until troops allied with the "First Chief" of the revolutionary Constitutionalist forces, Venustiano Carranza, entered in 1914 taking over the government, with the aim of imposing the Ley de Obreros (Workers' Law) to address injustices against the state's mostly indigenous workers. Conservatives responded violently months later when they were certain the Carranza forces would take their lands. This was mostly by way of guerrilla actions headed by farm owners who called themselves the Mapaches. This action continued for six years, until President Carranza was assassinated in 1920 and revolutionary general lvaro Obregn became president of Mexico. This allowed the Mapaches to gain political power in the state and effectively stop many of the social reforms occurring in other parts of Mexico.

The Mapaches continued to fight against socialists and communists in Mexico from 1920 to 1936, to maintain their control over the state.[16] In general, elite landowners also allied with the nationally dominant party founded by Plutarco Elas Calles following the assassination of president-elect Obregn in 1928; that party was renamed the Institutional Revolutionary Party in 1946. Through that alliance, they could block land reform in this way as well.[19] The Mapaches were first defeated in 1925 when an alliance of socialists and former Carranza loyalists had Carlos A. Vidal selected as governor, although he was assassinated two years later. The last of the Mapache resistance was overcome in the early 1930s by Governor Victorico Grajales, who pursued President Lzaro Crdenas' social and economic policies including persecution of the Catholic Church. These policies would have some success in redistributing lands and organizing indigenous workers but the state would remain relatively isolated for the rest of the 20thcentury.[15][16] The territory was reorganized into municipalities in 1916. The current state constitution was written in 1921.[15]

There was political stability from the 1940s to the early 1970s; however, regionalism regained with people thinking of themselves as from their local city or municipality over the state. This regionalism impeded the economy as local authorities restrained outside goods. For this reason, construction of highways and communications were pushed to help with economic development. Most of the work was done around Tuxtla Gutirrez and Tapachula. This included the Sureste railroad connecting northern municipalities such as Pichucalco, Salto de Agua, Palenque, Catazaj and La Libertad. The Cristobal Colon highway linked Tuxtla to the Guatemalan border. Other highways included El Escopetazo to Pichucalco, a highway between San Cristbal and Palenque with branches to Cuxtepeques and LaFrailesca. This helped to integrate the state's economy, but it also permitted the political rise of communal land owners called ejidatarios.[15]

In the mid-20th century, the state experienced a significant rise in population, which outstripped local resources, especially land in the highland areas.[45] Since the 1930s, many indigenous and mestizos have migrated from the highland areas into the Lacandon Jungle with the populations of Altamirano, Las Margaritas, Ocosingo and Palenque rising from less than 11,000 in 1920 to over 376,000 in 2000. These migrants came to the jungle area to clear forest and grow crops and raise livestock, especially cattle.[15][46] Economic development in general raised the output of the state, especially in agriculture, but it had the effect of deforesting many areas, especially the Lacandon. Added to this was there were still serf like conditions for many workers and insufficient educational infrastructure. Population continued to increase faster than the economy could absorb.[15] There were some attempts to resettle peasant farmers onto non cultivated lands, but they were met with resistance. President Gustavo Daz Ordaz awarded a land grant to the town of Venustiano Carranza in 1967, but that land was already being used by cattle-ranchers who refused to leave. The peasants tried to take over the land anyway, but when violence broke out, they were forcibly removed.[47] In Chiapas poor farmland and severe poverty afflict the Mayan Indians which led to unsuccessful non violent protests and eventually armed struggle started by the Zapatista National Liberation Army in January 1994.[48]

These events began to lead to political crises in the 1970s, with more frequent land invasions and takeovers of municipal halls.[15][47] This was the beginning of a process that would lead to the emergence of the Zapatista movement in the 1990s. Another important factor to this movement would be the role of the Catholic Church from the 1960s to the 1980s. In 1960, Samuel Ruiz became the bishop of the Diocese of Chiapas, centered in San Cristbal. He supported and worked with Marist priests and nuns following an ideology called liberation theology. In 1974, he organized a statewide "Indian Congress" with representatives from the Tzeltal, Tzotzil, Tojolabal and Ch'ol peoples from 327 communities as well as Marists and the Maoist People's Union. This congress was the first of its kind with the goal of uniting the indigenous peoples politically. These efforts were also supported by leftist organizations from outside Mexico, especially to form unions of ejido organizations. These unions would later form the base of the EZLN organization.[45] One reason for the Church's efforts to reach out to the indigenous population was that starting in the 1970s, a shift began from traditional Catholic affiliation to Protestant, Evangelical and other Christian sects.[49]

The 1980s saw a large wave of refugees coming into the state from Central America as a number of these countries, especially Guatemala, were in the midst of violent political turmoil. The Chiapas/Guatemala border had been relatively porous with people traveling back and forth easily in the 19th and 20thcenturies, much like the Mexico/U.S. border around the same time. This is in spite of tensions caused by Mexico's annexation of the Soconusco region in the 19thcentury. The border between Mexico and Guatemala had been traditionally poorly guarded, due to diplomatic considerations, lack of resources and pressure from landowners who need cheap labor sources.[50]

The arrival of thousands of refugees from Central America stressed Mexico's relationship with Guatemala, at one point coming close to war as well as a politically destabilized Chiapas. Although Mexico is not a signatory to the UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, international pressure forced the government to grant official protection to at least some of the refugees. Camps were established in Chiapas and other southern states, and mostly housed Mayan peoples. However, most Central American refugees from that time never received any official status, estimated by church and charity groups at about half a million from El Salvador alone.[51] The Mexican government resisted direct international intervention in the camps, but eventually relented somewhat because of finances.[52] By 1984, there were 92 camps with 46,000 refugees in Chiapas, concentrated in three areas, mostly near the Guatemalan border.[53] To make matters worse, the Guatemalan army conducted raids into camps on Mexican territories with significant casualties, terrifying the refugees and local populations.[54] From within Mexico, refugees faced threats by local governments who threatened to deport them, legally or not, and local paramilitary groups funded by those worried about the political situation in Central American spilling over into the state.[55] The official government response was to militarize the areas around the camps, which limited international access and migration into Mexico from Central America was restricted.[56] By 1990, it was estimated that there were over 200,000 Guatemalans and half a million from El Salvador, almost all peasant farmers and most under age twenty.[57]

In the 1980s, the politization of the indigenous and rural populations of the state that began in the 1960s and 1970s continued. In 1980, several ejido (communal land organizations) joined to form the Union of Ejidal Unions and United Peasants of Chiapas, generally called the Union of Unions, or UU. It had a membership of 12,000 families from over 180 communities. By 1988, this organization joined with other to form the ARIC-Union of Unions (ARIC-UU) and took over much of the Lacandon Jungle portion of the state.[45] Most of the members of these organization were from Protestant and Evangelical sects as well as "Word of God" Catholics affiliated with the political movements of the Diocese of Chiapas. What they held in common was indigenous identity vis--vis the non-indigenous, using the old 19th century "caste war" word "Ladino" for them.[25][45][49]

The adoption of liberal economic reforms by the Mexican federal government clashed with the leftist political ideals of these groups, notably as the reforms were believed to have begun to have negative economic effects on poor farmers, especially small-scale indigenous coffee-growers. Opposition would coalesce into the Zapatista movement in the 1990s.[45] Although the Zapatista movement couched its demands and cast its role in response to contemporary issues, especially in its opposition to neoliberalism, it operates in the tradition of a long line of peasant and indigenous uprisings that have occurred in the state since the colonial era. This is reflected in its indigenous vs. Mestizo character.[25][58] However, the movement was an economic one as well. Although the area has extensive resources, much of the local population of the state, especially in rural areas, did not benefit from this bounty. In the 1990s, two thirds of the state's residents did not have sewage service, only a third had electricity and half did not have potable water. Over half of the schools offered education only to the third grade and most pupils dropped out by the end of first grade.[55] Grievances, strongest in the San Cristbal and Lacandon Jungle areas, were taken up by a small leftist guerrilla band led by a man called only "Subcomandante Marcos."[59]

This small band, called the Zapatista Army of National Liberation (Ejrcito Zapatista de Liberacin Nacional, EZLN), came to the world's attention when on January 1, 1994 (the day the NAFTA treaty went into effect) EZLN forces occupied and took over the towns of San Cristobal de las Casas, Las Margaritas, Altamirano, Ocosingo and three others. They read their proclamation of revolt to the world and then laid siege to a nearby military base, capturing weapons and releasing many prisoners from the jails.[20] This action followed previous protests in the state in opposition to neoliberal economic policies.[60]

Although it has been estimated[by whom?] as having no more than 300 armed guerrilla members, the EZLN paralyzed the Mexican government, which balked at the political risks of direct confrontation.[58] The major reason for this was that the rebellion caught the attention of the national and world press, as Marcos made full use of the then-new Internet to get the group's message out, putting the spotlight on indigenous issues in Mexico in general. Furthermore, the opposition press in Mexico City, especially La Jornada, actively supported the rebels. These factors encouraged the rebellion to go national.[61] Many[quantify] blamed the unrest on infiltration of leftists among the large Central American refugee population in Chiapas,[62] and the rebellion opened up splits in the countryside between those supporting and opposing the EZLN.[58] Zapatista sympathizers have included mostly Protestants and Word of God Catholics, opposing those "traditionalist" Catholics who practiced a syncretic form of Catholicism and indigenous beliefs. This split had existed in Chiapas since the 1970s, with the latter group supported by the caciques and others in the traditional power-structure. Protestants and Word of God Catholics (allied directly with the bishopric in San Cristbal) tended to oppose traditional power structures.[60]

The Bishop of Chiapas, Samuel Ruiz, and the Diocese of Chiapas reacted by offering to mediate between the rebels and authorities. However, because of this diocese's activism since the 1960s, authorities[which?] accused the clergy of being involved with the rebels.[63] There was some ambiguity about the relationship between Ruiz and Marcos and it was a constant feature of news coverage, with many in official circles using such to discredit Ruiz. Eventually, the activities of the Zapatistas began to worry the Roman Catholic Church in general and to upstage the diocese's attempts to re establish itself among Chiapan indigenous communities against Protestant evangelization. This would lead to a breach between the Church and the Zapatistas.[64]

The Zapatista story remained in headlines for a number[quantify] of years. One reason for this was the December 1997 massacre of forty-five unarmed Tzotzil peasants, mostly women and children, in the Zapatista-controlled village of Acteal in the Chenhal municipality just north of San Cristbal. This allowed many media outlets in Mexico to step up their criticisms of the government.

Despite this, the armed conflict was brief, mostly because the Zapatistas, unlike many other guerilla movements, did not try to gain traditional political power. It focused more on trying to manipulate public opinion in order to obtain concessions from the government. This has linked the Zapatistas to other indigenous and identity-politics movements that arose in the late-20th century.[65] The main concession that the group received was the San Andrs Accords (1996), also known as the Law on Indian Rights and Culture.[21] The Accords appear to grant certain indigenous zones autonomy, but this is against the Mexican constitution,[citation needed] so its legitimacy has been questioned. Zapatista declarations since the mid-1990s have called for a new constitution.[66] As of 1999[update] the government had not found a solution to this problem.[58] The revolt also pressed the government to institute anti-poverty programs such as "Progresa" (later called "Oportunidades") and the "Puebla-Panama Plan" aiming to increase trade between southern Mexico and Central America.[67]

As of the first decade of the 2000s the Zapatista movement remained popular in many indigenous communities.[67] The uprising gave indigenous peoples a more active role in the state's politics.[15] However, it did not solve the economic issues that many peasant farmers face, especially the lack of land to cultivate. This problem has been at crisis proportions since the 1970s, and the government's reaction has been to encourage peasant farmersmostly indigenousto migrate into the sparsely populated Lacandon Jungle, a trend since earlier in the century.[58]

From the 1970s on, some 100,000 people set up homes in this rainforest area, with many being recognized as ejidos, or communal land-holding organizations.[58] These migrants included Tzeltals, Tojolabals, Ch'ols and mestizos, mostly farming corn and beans and raising livestock. However, the government changed policies in the late 1980s with the establishment of the Montes Azules Biosphere Reserve, as much of the Lacandon Jungle had been destroyed or severely damaged.[31][68] While armed resistance has wound down, the Zapatistas have remained a strong political force, especially around San Cristbal and the Lacandon Jungle, its traditional bases. Since the Accords, they have shifted focus in gaining autonomy for the communities they control.[19][69]

Since the 1994 uprising, migration into the Lacandon Jungle has significantly increased, involving illegal settlements and cutting in the protected biosphere reserve. The Zapatistas support these actions as part of indigenous rights, but that has put them in conflict with international environmental groups and with the indigenous inhabitants of the rainforest area, the Lacandons. Environmental groups state that the settlements pose grave risks to what remains of the Lacandon, while the Zapatistas accuse them of being fronts for the government, which wants to open the rainforest up to multinational corporations.[68][70] Added to this is the possibility that significant oil and gas deposits exist under this area.[31]

The Zapatista movement has had some successes. The agricultural sector of the economy now favors ejidos and other commonly-owned land.[15] There have been some other gains economically as well. In the last decades of the 20th century, Chiapas's traditional agricultural economy has diversified somewhat with the construction of more roads and better infrastructure by the federal and state governments. Tourism has become important in some areas of the state, especially in San Cristbal de las Casas and Palenque.[71] Its economy is important to Mexico as a whole as well, producing coffee, corn, cacao, tobacco, sugar, fruit, vegetables and honey for export. It is also a key state for the nation's petrochemical and hydroelectric industries. A significant percentage of PEMEX's drilling and refining takes place in Chiapas and Tabasco, and Chiapas produces fifty-five percent of Mexico's hydroelectric energy.[55]

However, Chiapas remains one of the poorest states in Mexico. Ninety-four of its 111 municipalities have a large percentage of the population living in poverty. In areas such as Ocosingo, Altamirano and Las Margaritas, the towns where the Zapatistas first came into prominence in 1994, 48% of the adults were illiterate.[72] Chiapas is still considered[by whom?] isolated and distant from the rest of Mexico, both culturally and geographically. It has significantly underdeveloped infrastructure compared to the rest of the country, and its significant indigenous population with isolationist tendencies keep the state distinct culturally.[71] Cultural stratification, neglect and lack of investment by the Mexican federal government has exacerbated this problem.[citation needed]

Chiapas is located in the south east of Mexico, bordering the states of Tabasco, Veracruz and Oaxaca with the Pacific Ocean to the south and Guatemala to the east. It has a territory of 74,415km2, the eighth largest state in Mexico. The state consists of 118 municipalities organized into nine political regions called Center, Altos, Fronteriza, Frailesca, Norte, Selva, Sierra, Soconusco and Istmo-Costa. There are 18 cities, twelve towns (villas) and 111 pueblos (villages).[73][74] Major cities include Tuxtla Gutirrez, San Cristbal de las Casas, Tapachula, Palenque, Comitn, and Chiapa de Corzo.[19][74]

The state has a complex geography with seven distinct regions according to the Mullerried classification system. These include the Pacific Coast Plains, the Sierra Madre de Chiapas, the Central Depression, the Central Highlands, the Eastern Mountains, the Northern Mountains and the Gulf Coast Plains. The Pacific Coast Plains is a strip of land parallel to the ocean. It is composed mostly of sediment from the mountains that border it on the northern side. It is uniformly flat, and stretches from the Bernal Mountain south to Tonal. It has deep salty soils due to its proximity to the sea. It has mostly deciduous rainforest although most has been converted to pasture for cattle and fields for crops. It has numerous estuaries with mangroves and other aquatic vegetation.[75]

The Sierra Madre de Chiapas runs parallel to the Pacific coastline of the state, northwest to southeast as a continuation of the Sierra Madre del Sur. This area has the highest altitudes in Chiapas including the Tacan Volcano, which rises 4,093m (13,428ft) above sea level. Most of these mountains are volcanic in origin although the nucleus is metamorphic rock. It has a wide range of climates but little arable land. It is mostly covered in middle altitude rainforest, high altitude rainforest, and forests of oaks and pines.[75] The mountains partially block rain clouds from the Pacific, a process known as Orographic lift, which creates a particularly rich coastal region called the Soconusco.[76] The main commercial center of the sierra is the town of Motozintla, also near the Guatemalan border.[31]

The Central Depression is in the center of the state. It is an extensive semi flat area bordered by the Sierra Madre de Chiapas, the Central Highlands and the Northern Mountains. Within the depression there are a number of distinct valleys. The climate here can be very hot and humid in the summer, especially due to the large volume of rain received in July and August. The original vegetation was lowland deciduous forest with some rainforest of middle altitudes and some oaks above 1,500m (4,900ft) above sea level.[75]

The Central Highlands, also referred to as Los Altos, are mountains oriented from northwest to southeast with altitudes ranging from one thousand two hundred to one thousand six hundred metres (3,900 to 5,200ft) above sea level. The western highlands are displaced faults, while the eastern highlands are mainly folds of sedimentary formations mainly limestone, shale, and sandstone.[31] These mountains, along the Sierra Madre of Chiapas become the Cuchumatanes where they extend over the border into Guatemala. Its topography is mountainous with many narrow valleys and karst formations called uvalas or poljs, depending on the size. Most of the rock is limestone allowing for a number of formations such as caves and sinkholes. There are also some isolated pockets of volcanic rock with the tallest peaks being the Tzontehuitz and Huitepec volcanos. There are no significant surface water systems as they are almost all underground. The original vegetation was forest of oak and pine but these have been heavily damaged.[75] The highlands climate in the Koeppen modified classification system for Mexico is humid temperate C(m) and subhumid temperate C (w 2 ) (w). This climate exhibits a summer rainy season and a dry winter, with possibilities of frost from December to March.[31] The Central Highlands have been the population center of Chiapas since the Conquest. European epidemics were hindered by the tierra fra climate, allowing the indigenous peoples in the highlands to retain their large numbers.[77]

The Eastern Mountains (Montaas del Oriente) are in the east of the state, formed by various parallel mountain chains mostly made of limestone and sandstone. Its altitude varies from 500 to 1,500m (1,600 to 4,900ft). This area receives moisture from the Gulf of Mexico with abundant rainfall and exuberant vegetation, which creates the Lacandon Jungle, one of the most important rainforests in Mexico. The Northern Mountains (Montaas del Norte) are in the north of the state. They separate the flatlands of the Gulf Coast Plains from the Central Depression. Its rock is mostly limestone. These mountains also receive large amounts of rainfall with moisture from the Gulf of Mexico giving it a mostly hot and humid climate with rains year round. In the highest elevations around 1,800m (5,900ft), temperatures are somewhat cooler and do experience a winter. The terrain is rugged with small valleys whose natural vegetation is high altitude rainforest.[75]

The Gulf Coast Plains (Llanura Costera del Golfo) stretch into Chiapas from the state of Tabasco, which gives it the alternate name of the Tabasquea Plains. These plains are found only in the extreme north of the state. The terrain is flat and prone to flooding during the rainy season as it was built by sediments deposited by rivers and streams heading to the Gulf.[75]

The Lacandon Jungle is situated in north eastern Chiapas, centered on a series of canyonlike valleys called the Caadas, between smaller mountain ridges oriented from northwest to southeast.[31][78] The ecosystem covers an area of approximately 1.9106 hectares (4.7106 acres) extending from Chiapas into northern Guatemala and southern Yucatn Peninsula and into Belize. This area contains as much as 25% of Mexico's total species diversity,[79] most of which has not been researched.[80] It has a predominantly hot and humid climate (Am w" i g) with most rain falling from summer to part of fall, with an average of between 2300 and 2600mm per year. There is a short dry season from March to May. The predominate wild vegetation is perennial high rainforest.[78] The Lacandon comprises a biosphere reserve (Montes Azules); four natural protected areas (Bonampak, Yaxchilan, Chan Kin, and Lacantum); and the communal reserve (La Cojolita), which functions as a biological corridor with the area of Petn in Guatemala. Flowing within the Rainforest is the Usumacinta River, considered to be one of the largest rivers in Mexico and seventh largest in the world based on volume of water.[81][dubious discuss]

During the 20th century, the Lacandon has had a dramatic increase in population and along with it, severe deforestation. The population of municipalities in this area, Altamirano, Las Margaritas, Ocosingo and Palenque have risen from 11,000 in 1920 to over 376,000 in 2000.[46] Migrants include Ch'ol, Tzeltal, Tzotzil, Tojolabal indigenous peoples along with mestizos, Guatemalan refugees and others.[82] Most of these migrants are peasant farmers, who cut forest to plant crops. However, the soil of this area cannot support annual crop farming for more than three or four harvests.[31] The increase in population and the need to move on to new lands has pitted migrants against each other, the native Lacandon people, and the various ecological reserves for land.[68][70][82] It is estimated that only ten percent of the original Lacandon rainforest in Mexico remains, with the rest strip-mined, logged and farmed. It once stretched over a large part of eastern Chiapas but all that remains is along the northern edge of the Guatemalan border.[83] Of this remaining portion, Mexico is losing over five percent each year.[84]

The best preserved portion of the Lacandon is within the Montes Azules Biosphere Reserve.[85] It is centered on what was a commercial logging grant by the Porfirio Daz government, which the government later nationalized. However, this nationalization and conversion into a reserve has made it one of the most contested lands in Chiapas, with the already existing ejidos and other settlements within the park along with new arrivals squatting on the land.[31][68]

The Soconusco region encompasses a coastal plain and a mountain range with elevations of up to 2,000 metres (6,600ft) above sea levels paralleling the Pacific Coast.[31][86] The highest peak in Chiapas is the Tacan Volcano at 4,800 metres (15,700ft) above sea level.[87] In accordance with an 1882 treaty, the dividing line between Mexico and Guatemala goes right over the summit of this volcano.[80] The climate is tropical, with a number of rivers and evergreen forests in the mountains. This is Chiapas major coffee-producing area, as it has the best soils and climate for coffee.[31] Before the arrival of the Spanish, this area was the principal source of cocoa seeds in the Aztec empire, which they used as currency, and for the highly prized quetzal feathers used by the nobility. It would become the first area to produce coffee, introduced by an Italian entrepreneur on the La Chacara farm.[31] Coffee is cultivated on the slopes of these mountains mostly between 600 and 1,200m (2,000 and 3,900ft) asl. Mexico produces about 4million sacks of green coffee each year, fifth in the world behind Brazil, Colombia, Indonesia and Vietnam. Most producers are small with plots of land under five hectares (12 acres). From November to January, the annual crop is harvested and processed employing thousands of seasonal workers. Lately, a number of coffee haciendas have been developing tourism infrastructure as well.[86]

Chiapas is located in the tropical belt of the planet, but the climate is moderated in many areas by altitude. For this reason, there are hot, semi-hot, temperate and even cold climates. Some areas have abundant rainfall year-round and others receive most of their rain between May and October, with a dry season from November to April. The mountain areas affect wind and moisture flow over the state, concentrating moisture in certain areas of the state. They also are responsible for some cloud-covered rainforest areas in the Sierra Madre.[75]

Chiapas' rainforests are home to thousands of animals and plants, some of which cannot be found anywhere else in the world.[19] Natural vegetation varies from lowland to highland tropical forest, pine and oak forests in the highest altitudes and plains area with some grassland. Chiapas is ranked second in forest resources in Mexico with valued woods such as pine, cypress, Liquidambar, oak, cedar, mahogany and more. The Lacandon Jungle is one of the last major tropical rainforests in the northern hemisphere with an extension of 600,000 hectares (1,500,000 acres). It contains about sixty percent of Mexico's tropical tree species, 3,500 species of plants, 1,157 species of invertebrates and over 500 of vertebrate species. Chiapas has one of the greatest diversities in wildlife in the Americas. There are more than 100 species of amphibians, 700 species of birds, fifty of mammals and just over 200 species of reptiles. In the hot lowlands, there are armadillos, monkeys, pelicans, wild boar, jaguars, crocodiles, iguanas and many others. In the temperate regions there are species such as bobcats, salamanders, a large red lizard Abronia lythrochila, weasels, opossums, deer, ocelots and bats. The coastal areas have large quantities of fish, turtles, and crustaceans, with many species in danger of extinction or endangered as they are endemic only to this area. The total biodiversity of the state is estimated at over 50,000 species of plants and animals. The diversity of species is not limited to the hot lowlands. The higher altitudes also have mesophile forests, oak/pine forests in the Los Altos, Northern Mountains and Sierra Madre and the extensive estuaries and mangrove wetlands along the coast.[75]

Chiapas has about thirty percent of Mexico's fresh water resources. The Sierra Madre divides them into those that flow to the Pacific and those that flow to the Gulf of Mexico. Most of the first are short rivers and streams; most longer ones flow to the Gulf. Most Pacific side rivers do not drain directly into this ocean but into lagoons and estuaries. The two largest rivers are the Grijalva and the Usumacinta, with both part of the same system. The Grijalva has four dams built on it the Belisario Dominguez (La Angostura); Manuel Moreno Torres (Chicoasn); Nezahualcyotl (Malpaso); and Angel Albino Corzo (Peitas). The Usumacinta divides the state from Guatemala and is the longest river in Central America. In total, the state has 110,000 hectares (270,000 acres) of surface waters, 260km (160mi) of coastline, control of 96,000km2 (37,000sqmi) of ocean, 75,230 hectares (185,900 acres) of estuaries and ten lake systems.[75] Laguna Miramar is a lake in the Montes Azules reserve and the largest in the Lacandon Jungle at 40km in diameter. The color of its waters varies from indigo to emerald green and in ancient times, there were settlements on its islands and its caves on the shoreline. The Catazaj Lake is 28km north of the city of Palenque. It is formed by rainwater captured as it makes it way to the Usumacinta River. It contains wildlife such as manatees and iguanas and it is surrounded by rainforest. Fishing on this lake is an ancient tradition and the lake has an annual bass fishing tournament. The Welib J Waterfall is located on the road between Palenque and Bonampak.[85]

The state has thirty-six protected areas at the state and federal levels along with 67 areas protected by various municipalities. The Sumidero Canyon National Park was decreed in 1980 with an extension of 21,789 hectares (53,840 acres). It extends over two of the regions of the state, the Central Depression and the Central Highlands over the municipalities of Tuxtla Gutirrez, Nuevo Usumacinta, Chiapa de Corzo and San Fernando. The canyon has steep and vertical sides that rise to up to 1000 meters from the river below with mostly tropical rainforest but some areas with xerophile vegetation such as cactus can be found. The river below, which has cut the canyon over the course of twelve million years, is called the Grijalva. The canyon is emblematic for the state as it is featured in the state seal.[75][88] The Sumidero Canyon was once the site of a battle between the Spaniards and Chiapanecan Indians. Many Chiapanecans chose to throw themselves from the high edges of the canyon rather than be defeated by Spanish forces. Today, the canyon is a popular destination for ecotourism. Visitors can take boat trips down the river that runs through the canyon and see the area's many birds and abundant vegetation.[19]

The Montes Azules Biosphere Reserve was decreed in 1978. It is located in the northeast of the state in the Lacandon Jungle. It covers 331,200 hectares (818,000 acres) in the municipalities of Maravilla Tenejapa, Ocosingo and Las Margaritas. It conserves highland perennial rainforest. The jungle is in the Usumacinta River basin east of the Chiapas Highlands. It is recognized by the United Nations Environment Programme for its global biological and cultural significance. In 1992, the 61,874-hectare (152,890-acre) Lacantun Reserve, which includes the Classic Maya archaeological sites of Yaxchilan and Bonampak, was added to the biosphere reserve.[70][75]

Agua Azul Waterfall Protection Area is in the Northern Mountains in the municipality of Tumbal. It covers an area of 2,580 hectares (6,400 acres) of rainforest and pine-oak forest, centered on the waterfalls it is named after.[75] It is located in an area locally called the "Mountains of Water", as many rivers flow through there on their way to the Gulf of Mexico. The rugged terrain encourages waterfalls with large pools at the bottom, that the falling water has carved into the sedimentary rock and limestone. Agua Azul is one of the best known in the state. The waters of the Agua Azul River emerge from a cave that forms a natural bridge of thirty meters and five small waterfalls in succession, all with pools of water at the bottom. In addition to Agua Azul, the area has other attractionssuch as the Shumulj River, which contains rapids and waterfalls, the Misol H Waterfall with a thirty-meter drop, the Boln Ajau Waterfall with a fourteen-meter drop, the Gallito Copetn rapids, the Blacquiazules Waterfalls, and a section of calm water called the Agua Clara.[89]

The El Ocote Biosphere Reserve was decreed in 1982 located in the Northern Mountains at the boundary with the Sierra Madre del Sur in the municipalities of Ocozocoautla, Cintalapa and Tecpatn. It has a surface area of 101,288.15 hectares (250,288.5 acres) and preserves a rainforest area with karst formations. The Lagunas de Montebello National Park was decreed in 1959 and consists of 7,371 hectares (18,210 acres) near the Guatemalan border in the municipalities of La Independencia and La Trinitaria. It contains two of the most threatened ecosystems in Mexico the "cloud rainforest" and the Soconusco rainforest. The El Triunfo Biosphere Reserve, decreed in 1990, is located in the Sierra Madre de Chiapas in the municipalities of Acacoyagua, ngel Albino Corzo, Montecristo de Guerrero, La Concordia, Mapastepec, Pijijiapan, Siltepec and Villa Corzo near the Pacific Ocean with 119,177.29 hectares (294,493.5 acres). It conserves areas of tropical rainforest and many freshwater systems endemic to Central America.[75] It is home to around 400 species of birds including several rare species such as the horned guan, the quetzal and the azure-rumped tanager.[19] The Palenque National Forest is centered on the archaeological site of the same name and was decreed in 1981. It is located in the municipality of Palenque where the Northern Mountains meet the Gulf Coast Plain. It extends over 1,381 hectares (3,410 acres) of tropical rainforest. The Laguna Blgica Conservation Zone is located in the north west of the state in the municipality of Ocozocoautla. It covers forty-two hectares centered on the Blgica Lake. The El Zapotal Ecological Center was established in 1980.[75] NahMetzabok is an area in the Lacandon Forest whose name means "place of the black lord" in Nahuatl. It extends over 617.49km2 (238.41sqmi) and in 2010, it was included in the World Network of Biosphere Reserves. Two main communities in the area are called Nah and Metzabok. They were established in the 1940s, but the oldest communities in the area belong to the Lacandon people. The area has large numbers of wildlife including endangered species such as eagles, quetzals and jaguars.[90]

As of 2010, the population is 4,796,580, the eighth most populous state in Mexico.[92] The 20th century saw large population growth in Chiapas. From fewer than one million inhabitants in 1940, the state had about two million in 1980, and over 4million in 2005.[77][93] Overcrowded land in the highlands was relieved when the rainforest to the east was subject to land reform. Cattle ranchers, loggers, and subsistence farmers migrated to the rain forest area. The population of the Lacandon was only one thousand people in 1950, but by the mid-1990s this had increased to 200 thousand.[94] As of 2010, 78% lives in urban communities with 22% in rural communities.[95] While birthrates are still high in the state, they have come down in recent decades from 7.4 per woman in 1950. However, these rates still mean significant population growth in raw numbers. About half of the state's population is under age 20, with an average age of 19.[96] In 2005, there were 924,967 households, 81% headed by men and the rest by women. Most households were nuclear families (70.7%) with 22.1% consisting of extended families.[97]

More migrate out of Chiapas than migrate in, with emigrants leaving for Tabasco, Oaxaca, Veracruz, State of Mexico and the Federal District primarily.[96]

While Catholics remain the majority, their numbers have dropped as many have converted to Protestant denominations in recent decades. Islam is also a small but growing religion due to the Indigenous Muslims as well as Muslim immigrants from Africa continuously rising in numbers. [96] The National Presbyterian Church in Mexico has a large following in Chiapas; some estimate that 40% of the population are followers of the Presbyterian church.[98]

There are a number of people in the state with African features. These are the descendants of slaves brought to the state in the 16th century. There are also those with predominantly European features who are the descendants of the original Spanish colonizers as well as later immigrants to Mexico. The latter mostly came at the end of the 19th and early 20th century under the Porfirio Daz regime to start plantations.[99] According to the 2020 Census, 1.02% of Chiapas' population identified as Black, Afro-Mexican, or of African descent.[100]

Over the history of Chiapas, there have been 3 main indigenous groups: the Mixes-Zoques, the Mayas and the Chiapa.[96] Today, there are an estimated fifty-six linguistic groups. As of the 2005 Census, there were 957,255 people who spoke an indigenous language out of a total population of about 3.5million. Of this one million, one third do not speak Spanish.[96][101] Out of Chiapas' 111 municipios, 99 have majority indigenous populations.[20] 22 municipalities have indigenous populations over 90%, and 36 municipalities have native populations exceeding 50%. However, despite population growth in indigenous villages, the percentage of indigenous to non indigenous continues to fall with less than 35% indigenous. Indian populations are concentrated in a few areas, with the largest concentration of indigenous-language-speaking individuals is living in 5 of Chiapas's 9 economic regions: Los Altos, Selva, Norte, Fronteriza, and Sierra. The remaining three regions, Soconusco, Centro and Costa, have populations that are considered to be dominantly mestizo.[20][21]

The state has about 13.5% of all of Mexico's indigenous population,[96] and it has been ranked among the ten "most indianized" states, with only Campeche, Oaxaca, Quintana Roo and Yucatn having been ranked above it between 1930 and the present.[102] These indigenous peoples have been historically resistant to assimilation into the broader Mexican society, with it best seen in the retention rates of indigenous languages and the historic demands for autonomy over geographic areas as well as cultural domains. Much of the latter has been prominent since the Zapatista uprising in 1994.[103] Most of Chiapas' indigenous groups are descended from the Mayans, speaking languages that are closely related to one another, belonging to the Western Maya language group. The state was part of a large region dominated by the Mayans during the Classic period.[20] The most numerous of these Mayan groups include the Tzeltal, Tzotzil, Ch'ol, Zoque, Tojolabal, Lacandon and Mam, which have traits in common such as syncretic religious practices, and social structure based on kinship.[104] The most common Western Maya languages are Tzeltal and Tzotzil along with Chontal, Chol, Tojolabal, Chuj, Kanjobal, Acatec, Jacaltec and Motozintlec.[20]

12 of Mexico's officially recognized native peoples live in the state have conserved their language, customs, history, dress and traditions to a significant degree. The primary groups include the Tzeltal, Tzotzil, Ch'ol, Tojolabal, Zoque, Chuj, Kanjobal, Mam, Jacalteco, Moch Cakchiquel and Lacandon.[74][105] Most indigenous communities are found in the municipalities of the Centro, Altos, Norte and Selva regions, with many having indigenous populations of over fifty percent. These include Bochil, Sital, Pantepec, Simojovel to those with over ninety percent indigenous such as San Juan Cancuc, Huixtn, Tenejapa, Tila, Oxchuc, Tapalapa, Zinacantn, Mitontic, Ocotepec, Chamula, and Chalchihuitn.[96] The most numerous indigenous communities are the Tzeltal and Tzotzil peoples, who number about 400,000 each, together accounting for about half of the state's indigenous population. The next most numerous are the Chol with about 200,000 people and the Tojolabal and Zoques, who number about 50,000 each.[99] The top 3 municipalities in Chiapas with indigenous language speakers 3 years of age and older are: Ocosingo (133,811), Chilon (96,567), and San Juan Chamula (69,475). These 3 municipalities accounted for 24.8% (299,853) of all indigenous language speakers 3 years or older in the state of Chiapas, out of a total of 1,209,057 indigenous language speakers 3 years or older.[106][107]

Although most indigenous language speakers are bilingual, especially in the younger generations, many of these languages have shown resilience. 4 of Chiapas' indigenous languages Tzeltal, Tzotzil, Tojolabal and Chol are high-vitality languages, meaning that a high percentage of these ethnicities speak the language and that there is a high rate of monolingualism in it. It is used in over 80% of homes. Zoque is considered to be of medium-vitality with a rate of bilingualism of over 70% and home use somewhere between 65% and 80%. Maya is considered to be of low-vitality with almost all of its speakers bilingual with Spanish.[108] The most spoken indigenous languages as of 2010 are Tzeltal with 461,236 speakers, Tzotzil with 417,462, Chol with 191,947 and Zoque with 53,839. In total, there are 1,141,499 who speak an indigenous language or 27% of the total population. Of these 14% do not speak Spanish.[109] Studies done between 1930 and 2000 have indicated that Spanish is not dramatically displacing these languages. In raw number, speakers of these languages are increasing, especially among groups with a long history of resistance to Spanish/Mexican domination.[102] Language maintenance has been strongest in areas related to where the Zapatista uprising took place such as the municipalities of Altamirano, Chamula, Chanal, Larrinzar, Las Margaritas, Ocosingo, Palenque, Sabanilla, San Cristbal de Las Casas and Simojovel.[110]

The state's rich indigenous tradition along with its associated political uprisings, especially that of 1994, has great interest from other parts of Mexico and abroad.[20][99] It has been especially appealing to a variety of academics including many anthropologists, archeologists, historians, psychologists and sociologists.[99] The concept of "mestizo" or mixed indigenous European heritage became important to Mexico's identity by the time of Independence, but Chiapas has kept its indigenous identity to the present day.[20] Since the 1970s, this has been supported by the Mexican government as it has shifted from cultural policies that favor a "multicultural" identity for the country.[111] One major exception to the separatist, indigenous identity has been the case of the Chiapa people, from whom the state's name comes, who have mostly been assimilated and intermarried into the mestizo population.[99]

Most Indigenous communities have economies based primarily on traditional agriculture such as the cultivation and processing of corn, beans and coffee as a cash crop and in the last decade, many have begun producing sugarcane and jatropha for refinement into biodiesel and ethanol for automobile fuel.[112][113] The raising of livestock, particularly chicken and turkey and to a lesser extent beef and farmed fish is also a major economic activity. Many indigenous, in particular the Maya are employed in the production of traditional clothing, fabrics, textiles, wood items, artworks and traditional goods such as jade and amber works.[114] Tourism has provided a number of a these communities with markets for their handcrafts and works, some of which are very profitable.[96]

San Cristbal de las Casas and San Juan Chamula maintain a strong indigenous identity. On market day, many indigenous people from rural areas come into San Cristbal to buy and sell mostly items for everyday use such as fruit, vegetables, animals, cloth, consumer goods and tools.[104] San Juan Chamula is considered to be a center of indigenous culture, especially its elaborate festivals of Carnival and Day of Saint John. It was common for politicians, especially during Institutional Revolutionary Party's dominance to visit here during election campaigns and dress in indigenous clothing and carry a carved walking stick, a traditional sign of power.[60] Relations between the indigenous ethnic groups is complicated. While there have been inter ethnic political activism such as that promoted by the Diocese of Chiapas in the 1970s and the Zapatista movement in the 1990s, there has been inter-indigenous conflict as well.[60][68] Much of this has been based on religion, pitting those of the traditional Catholic/indigenous beliefs who support the traditional power structure against Protestants, Evangelicals and Word of God Catholics (directly allied with the Diocese) who tend to oppose it. This is particularly significant problem among the Tzeltals and Tzotzils. Starting in the 1970s, traditional leaders in San Juan Chamula began expelling dissidents from their homes and land, amounting to about 20,000 indigenous forced to leave over a thirty-year period. It continues to be a serious social problem although authorities downplay it.[42][60] Recently there has been political, social and ethnic conflict between the Tzotzil who are more urbanized and have a significant number of Protestant practitioners and the Tzeltal who are predominantly Catholic and live in smaller farming communities. Many Protestant Tzotzil have accused the Tzeltal of ethnic discrimination and intimidation due to their religious beliefs and the Tzeltal have in return accused the Tzotzil of singling them out for discrimination.

Clothing, especially women's clothing, varies by indigenous group. For example, women in Ocosingo tend to wear a blouse with a round collar embroidered with flowers and a black skirt decorated with ribbons and tied with a cloth belt. The Lacandon people tend to wear a simple white tunic. They also make a ceremonial tunic from bark, decorated with astronomy symbols. In Tenejapa, women wear a huipil embroidered with Mayan fretwork along with a black wool rebozo. Men wear short pants, embroidered at the bottom.[115]

The Tzeltals call themselves Winik atel, which means "working men." This is the largest ethnicity in the state, mostly living southeast of San Cristbal with the largest number in Amatenango.[99] Today, there are about 500,000 Tzeltal Indians in Chiapas. Tzeltal Mayan, part of the Mayan language family, today is spoken by about 375,000 people making it the fourth-largest language group in Mexico. There are two main dialects; highland (or Oxchuc) and lowland (or Bachajonteco).[21] This language, along with Tzotzil, is from the Tzeltalan subdivision of the Mayan language family. Lexico-statistical studies indicate that these two languages probably became differentiated from one another around 1200[20] Most children are bilingual in the language and Spanish although many of their grandparents are monolingual Tzeltal speakers.[99]Each Tzeltal community constitutes a distinct social and cultural unit with its own well-defined lands, wearing apparel, kinship system, politico-religious organization, economic resources, crafts, and other cultural features.[20][21] Women are distinguished by a black skirt with a wool belt and an undyed cotton bloused embroidered with flowers. Their hair is tied with ribbons and covered with a cloth. Most men do not use traditional attire.[99] Agriculture is the basic economic activity of the Tzeltal people. Traditional Mesoamerican crops such as maize, beans, squash, and chili peppers are the most important, but a variety of other crops, including wheat, manioc, sweet potatoes, cotton, chayote, some fruits, other vegetables, and coffee.[20][21]

Tzotzil speakers number just slightly less than theTzeltals at 226,000, although those of the ethnicity are probably higher.[116] Tzotzils are found in the highlands or Los Altos and spread out towards the northeast near the border with Tabasco. However, Tzotzil communities can be found in almost every municipality of the state. They are concentrated in Chamula, Zinacantn, Chenalh, and Simojovel. Their language is closely related to Tzeltal and distantly related to Yucatec Mayan and Lacandon.[20][49] Men dress in short pants tied with a red cotton belt and a shirt that hangs down to their knees. They also wear leather huaraches and a hat decorated with ribbons. The women wear a red or blue skirt, a short huipil as a blouse, and use a chal or rebozo to carry babies and bundles. Tzotzil communities are governed by a katinab who is selected for life by the leaders of each neighborhood. The Tzotzils are also known for their continued use of the temazcal for hygiene and medicinal purposes.[116]

The Chols of Chiapas migrated to the northwest of the state starting about 2,000 years ago, when they were concentrated in Guatemala and Honduras. Those Chols who remained in the south are distinguished by the name Chorts. Chiapas Chols are closely related to the Chontal in Tabasco as well.[20] Choles are found in Tila, Tumbal, Sabanilla, Palenque, and Salto de Agua, with an estimated population of about 115,000 people.[116] The Chol language belongs to the Maya family and is related to Tzeltal, Tzotzil, Lacandon, Tojolabal, and Yucatec Mayan. There are three varieties of Chol (spoken in Tila, Tumbal, and Sabanilla), all mutually intelligible.[49] Over half of speakers are monolingual in the Chol language. Women wear a long navy blue or black skirt with a white blouse heavily embroidered with bright colors and a sash with a red ribbon. The men only occasionally use traditional dress for events such as the feast of the Virgin of Guadalupe. This dress usually includes pants, shirts and huipils made of undyed cotton, with leather huaraches, a carrying sack and a hat.[116] The fundamental economic activity of the Chols is agriculture. They primarily cultivate corn and beans, as well as sugar cane, rice, coffee, and some fruits.[20] They have Catholic beliefs strongly influenced by native ones. Harvests are celebrated on the Feast of Saint Rose on 30 August.[116]

The Totolabals are estimated at 35,000 in the highlands.[117] According to oral tradition, the Tojolabales came north from Guatemala.[20] The largest community is Ingeniero Gonzlez de Len in the La Caada region, an hour outside the municipal seat of Las Margaritas.[117] Tojolabales are also found in Comitn, Trinitaria, Altamirano and La Independencia.[102] This area is filled with rolling hills with a temperate and moist climate. There are fast moving rivers and jungle vegetation.[117] Tojolabal is related to Kanjobal, but also to Tzeltal and Tzotzil.[102] However, most of the youngest of this ethnicity speak Spanish. Women dress traditionally from childhood with brightly colored skirts decorated with lace or ribbons and a blouse decorated with small ribbons, and they cover their heads with kerchiefs. They embroider many of their own clothes but do not sell them. Married women arrange their hair in two braids and single women wear it loose decorated with ribbons. Men no longer wear traditional garb daily as it is considered too expensive to make.[117]

The Zoques are found in 3,000 square kilometers the center and west of the state scattered among hundreds of communities. These were one of the first native peoples of Chiapas, with archeological ruins tied to them dating back as far as 3500 BCE.[116] Their language is not Mayan but rather related to Mixe, which is found in Oaxaca and Veracruz.[102] By the time the Spanish arrived, they had been reduced in number and territory. Their ancient capital was Quechula, which was covered with water by the creation of the Malpaso Dam, along with the ruins of Guelegas, which was first buried by an eruption of the Chichonal volcano. There are still Zoque ruins at Janepaguay, the Ocozocuautla and La Cinega valleys.[20][116]

The Lacandons are one of the smallest native indigenous groups of the state with a population estimated between 600 and 1,000.[118] They are mostly located in the communities of Lacanj Chansayab, Naj, and Mensabak in the Lacandon Jungle. They live near the ruins of Bonampak and Yaxchilan and local lore states that the gods resided here when they lived on Earth. They inhabit about a million hectares of rainforest but from the 16th century to the present, migrants have taken over the area, most of which are indigenous from other areas of Chiapas. This dramatically altered their lifestyle and worldview. Traditional Lacandon shelters are huts made with fonds and wood with an earthen floor, but this has mostly given way to modern structures.[116]

The Mochs or Motozintlecos are concentrated in the municipality of Motozintla on the Guatemalan border. According to anthropologists, these people are an "urban" ethnicity as they are mostly found in the neighborhoods of the municipal seat. Other communities can be found near the Tacan volcano, and in the municipalities of Tuzantn and Belisario Dominguez. The name "Moch" comes from a response many gave the Spanish whom they could not understand and means "I don't know." This community is in the process of disappearing as their numbers shrink.[119]

The Mams are a Mayan ethnicity that numbers about 20,000 found in thirty municipalities, especially Tapachula, Motozintla, El Porvenir, Cacahoatn and Amatenango in the southeastern Sierra Madre of Chiapas.[111][119] The Mame language is one of the most ancient Mayan languages with 5,450 Mame speakers were tallied in Chiapas in the 2000 census.[20] These people first migrated to the border region between Chiapas and Guatemala at the end of the nineteenth century, establishing scattered settlements. In the 1960s, several hundred migrated to the Lacandon rain forest near the confluence of the Santo Domingo and Jatat Rivers. Those who live in Chiapas are referred to locally as the "Mexican Mam (or Mame)" to differentiate them from those in Guatemala.[111] Most live around the Tacan volcano, which the Mams call "our mother" as it is considered to be the source of the fertility of the area's fields. The masculine deity is the Tajumulco volcano, which is in Guatemala.[111][119]

In the last decades of the 20th century, Chiapas received a large number of indigenous refugees, especially from Guatemala, many of whom remain in the state. These have added ethnicities such as the Kekchi, Chuj, Ixil, Kanjobal, K'iche' and Cakchikel to the population.[99] The Kanjobal mainly live along the border between Chiapas and Guatemala, with almost 5,800 speakers of the language tallied in the 2000 census. It is believed that a significant number of these Kanjobal-speakers may have been born in Guatemala and immigrated to Chiapas, maintaining strong cultural ties to the neighboring nation.[20]

Read the original post:

Chiapas - Wikipedia

Democrats invoke diversity and accuse their political opponents of racism so often it's become a source of mockery from across the political spectrum. But leading Democrats' real record on the issues of race and gender paints a different picture. Take just one example that's come to the forefront of the news due to Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer's announced retirement: the federal courts.

The leading (white) men in charge of the Supreme Court nomination and confirmation processPresident Joe Biden, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Judiciary Committee member Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.)all talk a big game on the importance of diversity in the federal courts.

"Now, with his new vacancy on the court, President Biden will have an opportunity to make history by nominating the first-ever Black woman to serve on the Supreme Court," Schumer said. "Let's face the reality here," Durbin added. "We had 115 Supreme Court Justices in the history of the United States. 108 have been white men. I really think there is room for us to consider not only women, but women of color to fill these vacancies."

But what are these Democrats' real records when it comes to supporting female and minority judicial nominees? In 2003, and for the following two years, Senate Democratsincluding then-senator Joe Bidenfilibustered the nomination of California Supreme Court justice Janice Rogers Brown to the D.C. Circuit, the second-highest court in the land and a stepping stone to the Supreme Court. There was much talk at the time among close observers of the courts that Brown would likely be the first Black female Supreme Court justice. But liberals smeared Brown even before she was confirmed to the California Supreme Court, inexplicably calling the first Black woman nominated to the position "unqualified" to serve. And, despite her sterling credentials, they continued to trash her after President George W. Bush nominated her to the appellate court.

Democrats' media allies parroted baseless liberal talking points with the aim of destroying an accomplished Black woman's reputation, all because she was nominated by a Republican president and could've become the first Black female Supreme Court Justice. State-sponsored media recycled left-wing salvos against Brown. And during Brown's 2003 committee hearing, both Schumer and Durbin repeated the smear that she was unqualified.

Then-senator Joe Biden passionately filibustered Brown's nominationand even praised Sen. Robert Byrd, a noted former Klansman, while doing so. Biden called this filibuster the most important vote of his career. Praising a Klansman while using what Democrats now call a "Jim Crow relic" to shut down the nomination of a Black woman? Nothing more perfectly sums up Democrats' record on race and the federal courts.

In 2005, Hilary Sheltonthen the director of the NAACP's Washington chapteraccused the Bush administration of seeking "to get some kind of credit because she is the first African-American woman nominated to the D.C. circuit." Fast forward to this month, when the NAACP tweeted, "President Biden is right. Appointing a Black woman to [the] Supreme Court is 'long overdue.' Diversity of background & perspective is critical on a court composed of white men for most of our nation's history."

Why the change in rhetoric? Perhaps this is more about partisan politics than about actually increasing racial diversity in the federal courts.

The Democrats' racist blockade of Judge Brown is not an isolated incident. In 2001, Bush nominated Miguel Estrada to serve on the same D.C. Circuit Court. Estrada might be on the Supreme Court today if Democrats hadn't blocked him because "he is Latino." Schumer filibustered Estrada seven times to prevent him becoming the first Latino on the Supreme Court.

The truth is that Democrats only pretend to want more diversity on the federal bench. At the Article III Projecta conservative judicial nonprofit this author leadswe document all the times Democrats had the chance to support women and minority judicial nominees made by Presidents Bush 41, Bush 43 and Trump. When presented with the opportunity to expand diversity on the federal bench during Republican presidencies, Democrats consistently vote against women, Black, Asian, gay, Hispanic and other minority judicial nominees. In fact, during the Bush and Trump presidencies, Schumer voted against 52 women and minority judicial nominees, Durbin voted against 35 and Whitehousewho belongs to an all-white beach club in Newport, Rhode Islandvoted against 28.

If diversity were their priority, why would Democrats consistently vote against the women and minority judicial nominees of Republican presidents? Because Democrats don't really care about diversity; they care about power. And they always have. In fact, some are even calling to impeach the Supreme Court's only Black justice, Clarence Thomas, because they don't like his wife's politics. This was after Democrats attempted to derail his confirmation 30 years ago with claims of sexual harassment that then-Senate Judiciary chairman Joe Biden knew were false. Even now, a liberal Black judge from South Carolina under consideration for the Supreme Court vacancy, Judge Michelle Childswho has the support of the highest-ranking Black member of Congress, Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.)is under attack by leftists for being insufficiently progressive.

According to a recent NBC News poll, Biden's support among Black Americans has plummeted from 83 percent in April 2021 to 64 percent in January. Quinnipiac picked up on a similar trend, noting Biden's approval among Black Americans has cratered to 57 percent. Biden and his allies are attempting to use the next Supreme Court pick to revive their flagging support among key constituencies, and that's understandable from a political perspective. So the Supreme Court may soon have two more Black members than Whitehouse's beach club does. But Americans shouldn't be fooled into thinking Democrats actually care about diversity. Their priority is power.

Mike Davis is the founder and president of the Article III Project (A3P), a grassroots advocacy organization that supports constitutionalist judges, fights radical assaults on judicial independence and opposes nominees outside of the mainstream. Davis previously served as the chief counsel for nominations for then-Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA), where he served as staff leader for the confirmation of Justice Kavanaugh and a record number of federal circuit judges. Davis previously clerked for Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, both on the U.S. Supreme Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit.

The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.

See the rest here:

Democrats Don't Actually Care About Diversity in the Courts | Opinion - Newsweek

REGION Two Kirtland art students earned major honors by the Liberal Arts Network for Development (LAND), a statewide network of community colleges in Michigan. LAND sponsors annual student competitions to recognize outstanding work in the liberal arts. This is the first year that Kirtland art students have submitted entries.

Paige Galbraith (St. Helen, MI) and John Morrison (Lewiston, MI) won top honors in two competition categories. Paige placed first for photography and second for her 2D drawing submission. John earned third place for his 2D drawing.

Even though its my first year at Kirtland, I already feel at home here. Being a part of the art department has given me a chance to join a community of creative people. We push each other and encourage each other, Galbraith remarks. And winning these awards makes me feel even more confident about my art and my choice to be at Kirtland.

LANDs selection committee receives entries from students across the State, with top honors usually going to students from Michigans largest community colleges.

John Thiel, Kirtlands Dean of Liberal Arts, represents Kirtland on the LAND steering committee and shares his excitement about this recognition for Kirtland students: Past winners usually come from colleges with much larger art programs that have more faculty members. It says a lot about the caliber of Kirtlands art program that two of our students earned top honors in such a competitive contest.

Though Kirtlands art program is small by State standards, it has a long legacy of student success.

Kendall College of Art and Design actively recruits our students, and each year, we have art students who earn big scholarships and transfer to Kendall and other art schools, explains Scott Rice, Full Time Faculty for Kirtlands Art Program. I couldnt be more proud of the talented students that come to Kirtland and go on to do really amazing things.

Beyond earning recognition by LAND, Galbraith and Morrison will also receive monetary prizes for their entries and present their work during LANDs annual conference in February.

I cant believe that this is my last semester at Kirtland, Morrison, winner of third place in the 2D category, states. But, I dont think that my journey with Kirtland will be over when I graduate. Ive found the courage to be myself and make art that represents me. And, Im going to carry that with me.

Kirtlands art program explores creative arts in 2D, 3D, digital, and traditional mediums and methods. Graduates of the program enter a variety of fields, from corporate marketing to studio production and illustration; others successfully transfer to art schools and universities.

To learn more about Kirtlands art program, visit Kirtland.edu/art.

Original post:

Kirtland art students win state competition - upnorthvoice.com - upnorthvoice.com

Texass primary election is especially important this year. Thats because Republican lawmakers redrew the states political maps after the 2020 Census to fortify their majorities.

With most legislative and congressional districts now carefully configured to favor one party, many races effectively will be decided in the March primary.

Here is a roundup of hard-fought Democratic and Republican primary contests for federal, state and local offices in the San Antonio area.

Early voting ends Friday. Election Day is March 1.

VOTER GUIDE: What to know for the Texas primary election

In perhaps the most closely watched congressional primary in Texas, U.S. Rep. Henry Cuellar is again trying to fend off progressive immigration attorney Jessica Cisneros, after narrowly defeating her in 2020.

Cuellar, one of the most conservative Democrats in Congress, was already under fire from the left before FBI agents searched his home and campaign headquarters in January, upending the race.

Authorities have not disclosed the nature of the investigation, but ABC News has reported that a federal grand jury sought records from organizations with ties to the oil-rich former Soviet republic of Azerbaijan. Cuellar has visited the country and served as chair of the Congressional Azerbaijan Caucus. Cuellar has said the investigation will show that there is no wrongdoing on my part.

The presence of a third candidate, educator Tannya Benavides, raises the possibility of a runoff if no candidate wins more than 50 percent of the vote.

The district, newly drawn to include a larger share of San Antonio, runs all the way to the border, including Laredo, the hometown of both Cisneros and Cuellar.

Though Cuellar won re-election in 2020 by a margin of 19 percentage points, national Republicans are targeting this seat, sensing opportunity in a potential GOP wave year and the possibility Cuellar could lose the Democratic primary.

Seven Republicans are seeking the nomination. The three who have raised the most funds are Ed Cabrera, a rancher and businessman; Cassy Garcia, a former staffer for U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, who is backing Garcia in the primary; and Willie Ng, a former San Antonio police officer and Republican nominee for Bexar County sheriff.

With longtime congressman Lloyd Doggett running for a newly drawn congressional seat in deep-blue Austin, four Democrats are running to replace him in the 35th Congressional District, which stretches from Austin to San Antonio.

Former San Antonio city councilwoman Rebecca Viagran is among the contenders. But two Austin-based candidates have attracted the bulk of the fundraising and endorsements: former Austin city councilman Greg Casar and state Rep. Eddie Rodriguez.

Both are touting their liberal bona fides. Casar, a democratic socialist and former labor organizer who championed some of Austins most progressive policies in recent years, has the support of U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders and U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

Rodriguez, who is backed by a number of his statehouse colleagues and at least three Texas members of Congress, argues that he would be a more effective legislator than Casar, pitching himself as the progressive who makes progress.

State Rep. Lyle Larson, by some measures the most moderate Republican lawmaker in Austin, is retiring from the Legislature, creating an opening in his red-leaning northern Bexar County district.

Four Republicans are competing to succeed him: attorney and trucking industry executive Adam Blanchard, former San Antonio city councilwoman Elisa Chan, financial executive and Air Force veteran Mark Cuthbert, and former Bexar County Republican Party chair Mark Dorazio.

Blanchard has easily led the field in fundraising, boosted by endorsements from Larson and Texans for Lawsuit Reform, an influential tort reform group. But Chan has loaned her campaign $750,000, allowing her to nearly double Blanchards spending through mid-January. Dorazio has trailed in fundraising, though he maintains close ties to GOP activists and has been endorsed by U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz and former Texas Gov. Rick Perry.

Three Democrats with varying rsums but few discernible policy differences are competing for the countys top elected post, which has been held by the retiring incumbent, Nelson Wolff, since 2001.

The wide-open primary features Ivalis Meza Gonzalez, former chief of staff for Mayor Ron Nirenberg; state Rep. Ina Minjarez, a former prosecutor in the Bexar County District Attorneys Office; and Peter Sakai, a former district court judge and municipal lawyer. A fourth candidate, Gerard Ponce, has raised only a few hundred dollars and has unsuccessfully sought a number of local offices in recent years.

Two Republicans are running in the GOP primary: Nathan Buchanan, a small business owner and former constable candidate, and Trish DeBerry, a former public relations executive who resigned as Precinct 3 commissioner to run for county judge. Buchanan has reported minimal fundraising, positioning DeBerry to represent the party in November.

Republicans last won an election for Bexar County judge in 1998.

The district remains anchored in Hidalgo County along the border and stretches all the way north to Wilson and Guadalupe counties just east of San Antonio. But it will have new representation next year, after Republicans tweaked the boundaries to favor a GOP candidate and incumbent Democrat Vicente Gonzalez decided to run for a neighboring seat instead.

Nine Republicans are running for the seat, led by the 2020 nominee, Monica De La Cruz, who was recently endorsed by former president Donald Trump and is backed by Republican House leadership. A super PAC aligned with House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy has supported De La Cruz and run radio attack ads against one of her main primary foes, Mauro Garza.

Six Democrats are seeking their partys nomination, including Eliza Alvarado, a former staffer for Gonzalezs predecessor, Rubn Hinojosa, and co-founder of a nonprofit that focuses on voter registration; Ruben Ramirez, an Edinburg attorney and Army veteran endorsed by Gonzalez; John Villarreal Rigney, an Edinburg attorney and small business owner; and Michelle Vallejo, a small business owner from the McAllen area.

Three Republicans are running for this newly crafted state Senate district, which sweeps around the west side of Bexar County, covering all of Medina County and parts of the Hill Country and Atascosa County. The latter is home to former state senator Pete Flores, a Republican who is making a comeback bid for the seat being vacated by state Sen. Dawn Buckingham, who is running for land commissioner.

Flores, who lost re-election in a different district in 2020, is backed by Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, who has appeared on the stump with with Flores and cut his campaign a $150,000 check. Flores main rival, former congressional candidate Raul Reyes, has called Flores a lapdog, suggesting he would be beholden to Patrick and the Senate leadership.

Reyes himself has raised the vast majority of his campaign cash $300,000 out of nearly $323,000 from a single source: Billy Hopper, the retired sheriff of Loving County, a tiny community in far West Texas located well outside the district.

Three Democrats are running for the west Bexar County seat held by state Rep. Ina Minjarez, a Democrat who is running for county judge. The field consists of Josey Garcia, an Air Force veteran and co-founder of a nonprofit that provides humanitarian aid to migrants; Steven Gilmore, a San Antonio criminal defense attorney; and Gerald B. Lopez, a Northside Independent School District trustee.

After nearly two decades as one of the most moderate Democrats in the Legislature, longtime state Rep. Ryan Guillen switched to the Republican Party last year, shortly after his south Texas district was reconfigured to favor a GOP candidate.

In his first time on the GOP ballot, Guillen is backed by a laundry list of prominent Republicans, including Trump, Patrick, Abbott and Speaker Dade Phelan. He is being challenged from the right by primary opponents Alena Berlanga, a nurse who serves on the Floresville Independent School District board of trustees, and Mike Monreal, a construction executive and retired Navy captain.

With incumbent Republican George P. Bush running for attorney general, 12 candidates are vying to take over the Texas General Land Office, which administers disaster recovery after major storms, oversees the Alamo and contributes oil and gas royalties to the state's $44 billion public school endowment.

State Sen. Dawn Buckingham, an eye surgeon from Lakeway, has emerged as the favorite in the Republican primary, winning the endorsement of former President Donald Trump and top Texas Republicans. But with eight GOP candidates running, she may be pushed into a runoff.

The four-candidate Democratic primary includes conservationist Jay Kleberg and Austin attorney Jinny Suh.

Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller is battling for a third term against East Texas state Rep. James White and rancher and economics professor Carey Counsil. Both have accused Miller of being ethically challenged, pointing to corruption charges filed against a top aide who is accused of soliciting bribes from farmers in exchange for hemp licenses.

Miller, who calls the indictment baseless, is supported by Trump and has maintained a wide lead in public polls.

Though all public polls have him well ahead of his three primary challengers, Attorney General Ken Paxton could be forced into a runoff against either Land Commissioner George P. Bush, U.S. Rep. Louie Gohmert or former state Supreme Court justice Eva Guzman.

All three have argued that Paxtons legal entanglements would make him vulnerable against the Democratic nominee in November. The Democratic hopefuls include former ACLU attorney Rochelle Garza, former Galveston mayor Joe Jaworski and civil rights attorney Lee Merritt.

jasper.scherer@chron.com

Read more:

Here's a roundup of hot primary contests in the San Antonio area - San Antonio Express-News

When I was very young, I participated in a several-month training in community organizing taught by the great Fred Ross, Sr., whose previous students included Cesar Chavez. As it became apparent that the demand for introverted community organizers was not great, I settled for a career in law. But much of the wisdom Fred imparted continues to guide me.

One point he made over and over was the distinction between organizing and mobilizing. Almost anyone, he said, could stir people up and get them to show up at a march or demonstration. By itself, however, that kind of mobilization rarely changes anything: Those responsible for the problem simply keep their heads down until the mobilization concludes and then keep doing precisely what they were before. Real power, Fred said, comes from organizing. And organizing takes time, developing trust, and understanding one person at a time.

Fred also emphasized the importance of always being truthful with the people one is organizing. No matter how awkward, embarrassing, or discouraging the answer may be, community members deserve an honest response when they ask an organizer a question. Without candor, trust is impossible. When an organizer would gloss over the difficult parts or make up something she or he did not know Fred was incensed.

Although the Industrial Areas Foundation, for which both Cesar and Fred worked, is alive and well, I fear that too much of todays political work follows the alluring expedients of mobilizing rather than the transformational path of organizing.

I am particularly struck by progressive activists repeated insistence that the Democrats have to deliver on this or that demand or their base will become disillusioned and stop voting. If that is true, it can only be because the activists mobilizing them to vote in the last election failed to level with them about the political situation the nation is in.

Thinking of the Democrats as a unitary body susceptible to coercion, and capable of delivering if it really wants to, is simply false. Those who voted Democratic in 2020 included progressives, liberals, moderates, and some very conservative people who could not tolerate President TrumpDonald TrumpRepublicans scramble to halt Greitens in Missouri Mace: I'm going to win without Trump Walter Dellinger: a scholar and a mensch MORE and yet President BidenJoe BidenUS tells UN Russia has list of Ukrainians 'to be killed or sent to camps:' report Latest satellite images show shift in Russian military activity near Ukraine Biden agrees to meet with Putin 'in principle' if Russia does not invade Ukraine MORE still carried just 51 percent of the vote. Preventing a resurgence of Trumpism requires the Democrats to maintain a very big and welcoming tent. That cannot work if the welcome evaporates immediately after the election: Progressives do not have sufficiently strong voter support for the Democrats to be viable as a narrowly ideological party.

The feel-good arguments that this country is somehow more progressive than is commonly understood do not bear close examination. Yes, Hillary ClintonHillary Diane Rodham ClintonMedia embrace of Stacey Abrams is a preview of 2022, 2024 election coverage 'What-aboutism' Ruling against Trump leaves more questions than answers on free speech Trump may not be Teflon after all: Judge orders him to comply with subpoenas MORE received almost 3 million more votes than Donald Trump, but far-right candidates won significantly more votes combined than liberal and leftist candidates did. Overall, polls consistently show self-identified conservatives substantially outnumber self-identified liberals. And although polls often show substantial majorities supporting this or that progressive policy, a segment of those liberal voters are nonetheless wedded to the Republicans because of their strong feelings about abortion particularly as opposition to abortion becomes less tolerated within the Democratic Party.

And anyone who mobilizes voters by suggesting that coming out to vote once will bring victory on this or that issue is not being honest. They are building not power but cynicism. Only organizing people for the long struggle ahead can remedy deep injustices.

Our greatest leaders frankly acknowledged the obstacles their movements faced. As massive as the March on Washington was, the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King , Jr., was under no illusions that victory was at hand:

I am not unmindful that some of you have come here out of great trials and tribulations. Some of you have come fresh from narrow jail cells. Some of you have come from areas where your quest for freedom left you battered by the storms of persecution and staggered by the winds of police brutality. You have been the veterans of creative suffering. Continue to work with the faith that unearned suffering is redemptive.

Go back to Mississippi, go back to Alabama, go back to South Carolina, go back to Georgia, go back to Louisiana, go back to the slums and ghettos of our northern cities, knowing that somehow this situation can and will be changed. Let us not wallow in the valley of despair.

I say to you today, my friends, so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream.

Had the massive mobilization swept him into declaring that victory was at hand, the brave men and women of the Civil Rights movement would have become disillusioned, lost trust in him, and fallen away. King knew better.

Five years later, on the day before he was killed, Dr. King again preached candidly about the need for perseverance:

Well, I don't know what will happen now. We've got some difficult days ahead. But it doesn't matter with me now. Because I've been to the mountaintop And I've looked over. And I've seen the promised land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the promised land.

Cesar Chavez, too, was candid about the obstacles the farmworkers movement faced and the hard, sustained work that would be required for success:

Our struggle is not easy. Those who oppose us are rich and powerful and have many allies in high places. We are poor. Our allies are few. But we have something the rich do not own. We have our bodies and spirits and the justice of our cause as our weapons.

We are now half a century beyond when Dr. King and Cesar Chavez spoke, and yet true victory remains elusive. It is not fair or just that people who have endured so much already are still having to endure more. But promising quick fixes that cannot be delivered will only prolong that injustice by feeding cynicism and division within the progressive movement.

Since the ballots were counted in November 2020 and, indeed, in earlier elections when Democrats lost too many winnable seats it has been clear that progressives would have no congressional majority but, at best, could scrape together enough votes with much more conservative members to form an anti-Trumpist coalition.

Anyone who has led the base to believe that victory was at hand on crucial but hotly contested causes if only they pushed Democrats hard enough was deceiving that base and sowing the seeds of future cynicism.

To build the kind of power that can genuinely rescue this country, we need organizing that levels with people about the obstacles ahead, just as Dr. King and Cesar Chavez did. Anything else the sugar high of short-term mobilizing or seeking some parliamentary magic that can deliver what the voters did not will only postpone the day when justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream.

David A. Super is a professor of law at Georgetown Law. He also served for several years as the general counsel for the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Follow him on Twitter@DavidASuper1

See the rest here:

Liberal activists need to level with their base | TheHill - The Hill

Liberalism is a way of life built on respect for the dignity of each individual. A liberal order, John Stuart Mill suggested, is one in which people are free to conduct experiments in living so you wind up with a large variety in types of character. Theres no one best way to live, so liberals celebrate freedom, personal growth and diversity.

Many of Americas founders were fervent believers in liberal democracy up to a point. They had a profound respect for individual virtue, but also individual frailty. Samuel Adams said, Ambitions and lust for power are predominant passions in the breasts of most men. Patrick Henry admitted to feelings of dread when he contemplated the depravity of human nature. One delegate to the constitutional convention said that the people lack information and are constantly liable to be misled.

Our founders were aware that majorities are easily led by ambitious demagogues.

More:

While the Constitution guarded against abuses of power, the founders recognized that a much more important set of civic practices would mold people to be capable of being self-governing citizens: Churches were meant to teach virtue; leaders were to receive classical education, so they might understand human virtue and vice and the fragility of democracy; everyday citizens were to lead their lives as yeoman farmers so they might learn to live simply and work hard; civic associations and local government were to instill the habits of public service; patriotic rituals were observed to instill shared love of country; newspapers and magazines were there (more in theory than in fact) to create a well-informed citizenry; etiquette rules and democratic manners were adopted to encourage social equality and mutual respect.

And:

Will the liberals of the world be able to hold off the wolves? Strengthen democracy and preserve the rules-based world order? The events of the past few weeks have been fortifying. Joe Biden and the other world leaders have done an impressive job of rallying their collective resolve and pushing to keep Putin within his borders. But the problems of democracy and the liberal order cant be solved from the top down. Today, across left and right, millions of Americans see U.S. efforts abroad as little more than imperialism, endless wars and domination. They dont believe in the postwar project and refuse to provide popular support for it.

The real problem is in the seedbeds of democracy, the institutions that are supposed to mold a citizenry and make us qualified to practice democracy. To restore those seedbeds, we first have to relearn the wisdom of the founders: We are not as virtuous as we think we are. Americans are no better than anyone else. Democracy is not natural; it is an artificial accomplishment that takes enormous work.

Then we need to fortify the institutions that are supposed to teach the democratic skills: how to weigh evidence and commit to truth; how to correct for your own partisan blinders and learn to doubt your own opinions; how to respect people you disagree with; how to avoid catastrophism, conspiracy and apocalyptic thinking; how to avoid supporting demagogues; how to craft complex compromises.

Read it all.

Look, David is a friend, and I sincerely respect and care for him, despite our political disagreements. Any criticism I ever make of his writing (or that of any other personal friend, ever) is done within the bounds of friendship. In a better world, I wouldnt have to say that, but I do.

That said, Brooks did not bring up Orban, but I think its safe to say that the criticism he makes of Putin who is a rather different figure from Orban he would apply to Orban. In the eyes of many Western liberals (right-liberals like Brooks, and left-liberals too), there are no essential differences between any of these figures. So, one thing that is missing from the Brooks column is any reflection at all on why so many people have abandoned liberalism (liberalism in the sense of our Western model, not strictly speaking the views and policies of the Democratic Party).

The basic answer is in Hammers line here: Hungary under Orbn rejects the illusion of liberal neutrality, recognizing, as this column haspreviously phrased it, that a values-neutral liberal order amounts to a one-way cultural ratchet toward leftism and progressivism.

I told an audience last night at MCC that I, personally, am torn about all this. In theory, I would prefer to live in a liberal democratic polity, but that I cant escape the conclusion that the choice for that is not on the table in the real world of 2022.The liberals of both the GOP and the Democratic Party have done little or nothing to protect those values, and that order, from the aggressively anti-liberal Left. For Americans, liberalism is a one-way ratchet to Critical Race Theory and gender ideology. Most conservatives including me have no real problem accepting gay people into the mainstream. But that is not enough for the Left today: we are compelled to affirm every new thing the sexual left comes up with, including teaching little children about gender fluidity, sending our kids to schools that do this, then set up formal structures of deceiving parents when their children come out as transgender in schools, and so forth. It is not enough that gays have the right to marry; the rare Christian baker or florist whose conscience will not let them participate in same-sex weddings must be professionally destroyed. Thats liberalism? Today, yes, it is.

Most conservatives have accepted that America used to be a racist society, and have absorbed the liberal Martin Luther King position that people should not be judged by the color of their skin, but the content of their character. But that was yesterdays liberalism. Today, if you do not affirm the malignant, illiberal ideology that entails Critical Race Theory, you are labeled a racist. If you do not want your children to be taught that (if they are white) they are an oppressor by virtue of their skin color, or, if they are a racial minority, that they are a perpetual victim, and that all their all-too-human failings are not reflexively the result of white bigotry, then you are either a white supremacist or a fellow traveler of white supremacy.

Liberalism used to stand for freedom of thought and expression. This week in Budapest, we heard the conservative essayist Heather Mac Donald talk about how on many college campuses, she has only been able to give speeches there if she is given heavy police protection against left-wing student mobs. This is what liberalism has led to. Left-wing atheist professors like Peter Boghossian, Bret Weinstein, and Heather Heying tell harrowing stories about how they were driven out of their universities by both mob action and by Kafkaesque harassment by their woke university administrations,, simply because they defended liberal principles in the face of the mobs. The men and women whose duty it is to defend old-fashioned liberalism have capitulated.

Liberalism in practice has meant that our collective cultural and artistic heritage is being viciously dismantled. Mac Donald writes about how the progressive administration of the Art Institute of Chicago is destroying the museum to make it ideologically correct, according to the ideology of wokeness. Who is standing up to defend museums from this assault? Where are the Brooks columns denouncing this kind of thing? Or any of the stuff Im talking about here?

Nowadays, to work for a major corporation, or to get into law or medicine, you are at a serious disadvantage if you are not a racial or sexual minority, no matter how competent you are at the actual job you would do. You will be forced to accept and affirm leftist cultural dogmas that you do not believe, and if you fail to do so, you put yourself at risk of unemployment. And what has liberalism done to oppose this, or roll it back? Nothing. The Democratic Party affirms this stuff, and the GOP remains too sleepy to fight it (or, as in Trumps case, satisfies itself with lazy lib-owning, while the woke consolidate power within the institutions).

Back when Donald Trump was first running, establishment conservatives couldnt get over how a figure like that became popular with the conservative base. I was one of those establishment conservatives not a Never Trumper, but one who was baffled by Trump, and troubled. It took reading J.D. Vances Hillbilly Elegy to give me a better sense of the dispossession many working class Trump supporters felt in this country in particular, how the free-market fundamentalism the GOP had been pushing for a generation had not worked out well for many of those people. I dont believe Trump was the answer, but virtually nobody else on the classical liberal side even saw that this was a serious problem. Today, the very liberal, even woke, prime minister of Canada is invoking emergency legislation to fight protesting working-class Canadians, including threatening to take away their bank accounts, and calling them all filthy racist rabble.

This is liberalism? Yes, it is: actually existing liberalism, in the year 2022. And if its not actually liberal, then we can say that proper classical liberalism does nothing at all to defend itself. But oh, the old-school liberals sure do complain about leaders of the postliberal Right who are willing to pick up the fight that they have abandoned.

Here in Hungary, Orban remains popular in part because he believes that the globalist progressive bureaucracy in Brussels, and the NGO archipelago throughout the West, should not have the last word in how Hungarians are governed. That belongs to the Hungarian people. His economic policies would cause American free marketers heads to explode but he believes there is nothing wrong with the state involving itself in the economy to protect the common good of the people.

I saw last night that the controversial Southern Baptist leader Russell Moore (also a friend I respect) attacked Hungary in his newsletter, saying:

Pay attention, though, to those who look behind the former Iron Curtain to find the future. Many religious conservativesmost notably Roman Catholics but some evangelical Protestants toohave allied themselves with Hungarys authoritarian strongman,Viktor Orbn. As libertarian commentator Matt Welchnotes, the Hungarian prime minister makes for an odd champion of American-style Christendom.

Abortion is uncontroversially legal in Hungary, the people arent particularly religious, and Orbn has exercised kleptocratic control over churches that dare to dissent from his policies, Welch argues. The key reason for the attraction to Eastern European strongmen, Welch concludes, is that they fight the right enemies and win.

If this were just a skirmish between those of us who believe in liberal democracy and those who find it expendable, that would be one thing. But the other, larger problem with this authoritarian temptation is the gospel.

If the church is a cultural vehicle for national stability and pride, then one can hardly expect dictators to do anything other than manipulate it. But if the church is made up, as the Bible tells us, of living stones brought in by regenerated hearts through personal faith in Jesus Christ (1 Pet. 2:45), then external conformity to values and civilization falls woefully short of Christianity.

Authoritarian strongman. Good grief. Thats ridiculous. What kind of authoritarian strongman puts himself before the people in free and fair elections every four years, and wins? Last year when I left Hungary, the Orban supporters in my circles were very worried that Fidesz, Orbans party, would lose the April 2022 election. Orban has been in power since 2010, which is a long time. Now, though, weeks away from the election, they are more confident. The opposition candidate chosen as the anti-Orban standard-bearer by opposition primary voters has been terrible on the campaign trail, I have been told by both pro- and anti-Orban people. You watch: if Orban wins re-election, the Western media will be filled with accusations that he somehow must have cheated.

Anyway, Moores readers who dont know any better may assume, from the way he has worded his column (which is mostly an attack on Vladimir Putin; on that, Moore is on stronger ground), that Orban is a Putin mini-me. Its absurd. Here in Hungary, I know some Evangelical Christians, all of whom are Orban supporters. Why? Heres Josh Hammer again:

The Hungarian government under Fidesz is not neutral, furthermore, on basic questions of sexual morality and the Judeo-Christian tradition: Gender ideology is kept out of schools, marriage is vigorously defended as the exclusive union of one man and one woman and Christianity is woven into the very fabric of society and polity alike.

Fidesz has no appetite for policing bedroomsand Budapest has its annual Pride paradebut the state decisively puts its thumb on the scale in favor of traditional Christian ethics. There are nodrag queen story hoursscandalizing innocent children here. On the contrary, the governments public defense of European Christendom and the illiberal nature in which its policies prefer traditional religious ethics over alternative lifestyles represents a sort ofecumenical integralismencapsulated by the fact Orbn himself is Calvinist, while his wife is Catholic. Hungarys popular, elaborate and much-discussedfamily policy measureshave also been successful in boosting the national birthrate.

I recall a conversation I had with a young Evangelical woman last summer, asking her about how she is likely to vote in the April elections. She said she will vote for Fidesz. I asked her about the most common complaint I heard from Fidesz supporters: that Orban is far too tolerant of public corruption. She said that she feels the same way, but that to vote in the opposition is to open the doors to a much more destructive kind of corruption: the surrender to gender ideology. Once that takes hold, she said, theres no getting rid of it. Similarly, I talked to a 24-year-old female colleague who was not religious, and who lived with her boyfriend. She was planning to vote Orban, because she wants to have kids one day, and does not want to live in a society in which Brussels bureaucrats and their local allies have created a world in which schools and media teach her sons that they can be girls, and vice versa.

You can roll your eyes at that if you like, but these are real and important issues for ordinary people here. They are real and important issues for ordinary people in America too. Are the left-liberals and the right-liberals fighting for the integrity of natural families against the gender ideologues? No, they are not. Viktor Orban does.

Moreover, when it comes to protecting persecuted Christians in the Middle East, Orban opened a ministry within his office to offer aid, material and otherwise, to those communities. I wrote about that office here. In 2019, I sat in a meeting in which a senior Iraqi Christian leader thanked Orban. From my account of the meeting:

When the migration crisis hit Europe in 2015, Orban famously shut Hungarys borders to Middle Easterners. Orban said that Hungarys was the only government in Europe to respond to the crisis in its own interests, and in the interests of Christianity in Europe. With a population of only 10 million, and as a country where Christianity, as elsewhere on the continent, is fragile, the Hungarians concluded that allowing large numbers of Muslims to take up residence here would mean the death knell of Christianity in time.

This scandalized the European political class. Orban doesnt care. He told our group that he understands that he is dealing with elites who believe that being a post-Christian, post-national civilization is a great and glorious thing. Orban rejects this. He said the main political question in the West today is how fractious pluralities can live together peaceably. He said, Here the most important question is how not to have the same questions as them.

Orban pointed out that the UK and France were once colonial powers in the Middle East. He added, But Central Europe was colonizedbythe Middle East. Thats a fact. Hes talking aboutthe Ottoman occupation of Hungary, from 1541 to 1699. Orban told our group that the room we were sitting was part of a Church building that had been turned into a mosque during the occupation.

Explaining his decision to shut the borders to Muslim refugees, Orban said what tipped the scales was consulting the Christian bishops of the Middle East. Orban: What did they say? Dont let them in. Stop them.

Middle Eastern Christians, said Orban, can tell you what is the [ultimate] end of a society you have to share with Muslims.

Sitting at the table listening to the prime minister was Nicodemus, the Syriac Orthodox archbishop of Mosul, whose Christian community, which predates Islam by several centuries, was savagely persecuted by ISIS. Archbishop Nicodemus spoke up, thanking Orban for what Hungary has done for persecuted Christians. Nicodemus said that living with Muslims has taught Iraqi Christians that they can expect no mercy. Those people, if you give them your small finger, they will want your body, he said.

The problem is that Western countries dont accept our experience, the prelate continued. Those people [Muslims] pushed us to be a minority in our own land and then refugees in our own land.

Under the Orban government, Hungary frequently extends a helping hand to persecuted Christians.The archbishop exhorted Orban to stay the course in defense of Christians. For 16 years, he said, Iraqi Christians begged Western leaders to help them. Addressing Orban directly, Nicodemus said, Nobody understands our pain like you.

What is the typical American conservative political response to the suffering of Middle Eastern Christians? In 2014, Sen. Ted Cruz went to a Washington summit where leaders of besieged and persecuted Middle Eastern Christians had gathered, and read them the riot act from the stage, saying that he will not support them unless they openly support Israel. As I wrote back then in response, it was a disgusting act of self-aggrandizement and I say that as a supporter of Israel. Whatever the personal views of those bishops and priests about Israel, had any one of them gone to America and publicly supported Israel, they would have been murdered when they got back home. This was a case of an arrogant American politician trying to make political hay among his Evangelical and fundamentalist supporters by exploiting the life-or-death suffering of the most persecuted Christians in the world.

Who is a better friend to Christians, then: Ted Cruz, or Viktor Orban? What should American Christians think?

Until I saw that 2019 piece I wrote just now, I had forgotten about this exchange I had with Orban back then. It came after Orban admitted frankly that Hungarian society, which is not particularly religious, was stiff suffering from the hangover of Communist totalitarianism:

Orban spoke frankly about the post-communist religious state of his country. Its still not a healed society, he said. Its still not in good shape.

I asked the prime minister if he saw evidence of a soft totalitarianism emerging in the West today, and if so, what are the main lessons that those who resisted communism have to tell us about identifying and resisting it.

He said that the Soviets and their servants in Central Europe tried to create a new kind of man:homo Sovieticus.To do this, they had to destroy the two sources of identity here: a sense of nationhood, and the Christian religion. In order to survive, said Orban,we have to strengthen our national identity and our Christian identity. Thats the story.

Western peoples have decided to create a post-Christian, post-national, multicultural society. Peoples in Central Europe do not. For Orban, re-establishing a sense of national identity and the Christian faith are the same project. Its an attempt to reverse the damage done by Communism. The danger, obviously, is that Christianity becomes emptied of its spiritual and moral content, and is filled with nationalism. On the other hand, if a pro-Christian politician like Orban can at least keep the public square open and favorable to the ancestral religious beliefs of the nation, religious leaders can step into the space politics creates, and do their work of recovery.

There you go. If Christians think that voting for Orban (or Trump, or any other populist conservative politician) is sufficient to restoring Christianity, theyre deluded. What Orban understands, though, is that politicians have to use power to keep liberalism from destroying the sense of the nation and religious belief and practice. I do not believe that liberalism per se necessarily destroys either. Again, though, I believe that actually existing liberalism offers no protection, because it doesnt even believe in its own classical principles enough to defend them from attack by progressives who have marched through the institutions including capitalist institutions.

One may not like the way the Viktor Orbans of the world fight to protect national sovereignty, cultural conservatism, and religion in the face of the Lefts assaults, but I prefer the flawed work of defense that they do to the work of defense left-liberals and right-liberals are not doing.

One more thing: Viktor Orban manages to be both a friend to Christians and a friend to Jews. Hammer who, once again, is Jewish writes:

The combination here of nationalism, public Christianity and Soros-bashing leads many in the Western press to decry Orbn and Fidesz as antisemitic. Nothing could be further from the truth. Former Israeli Prime MinisterBenjamin Netanyahu, the longest-serving leader in the Jewish states history, considered Orbn hisgreatest European ally. Hungary routinely supports Israel at theUnited Nationsand in its invariable border conflicts with Hamas and Hezbollah. Moreover, Jewish life itself in Budapest is thriving (at least based on the bleak post-World War II baseline for European Jewry). I spent half a day touring numerous gorgeous synagogues, walking through the historic Jewish ghetto and dining at a very fine kosher meat restaurant. (The goulash was delicious.) And unlike in Western and Northern European countries, which have taken a diametrically opposite stance on the issue of Islamic migration, Jews in Hungary are safe and secure. Armed guards outside synagogues are far from ubiquitous hereunlike, say, in Paris or Brussels.

You know why? Because Orbans government has kept Muslim migrants out. Thats the reason. I explained this in depth last summer, in the face of widespread anti-Semitic violence in Western capitals, when I was shocked that the traditional Jewish Quarter in Budapest was totally at peace, without armed guards or police guarding synagogues and Jewish businesses. I cited survey data of Jews in a number of European countries, revealing that the one country in Europe that Jews feel most safe in is Hungary, governed by George Soross arch-nemesis. In Viktor Orban Was Right, I wrote:

If you could wind back the clock fifty years, and show the French, the Belgian, and the German people what mass immigration from the Muslim world would do to their countries by 2021, they never, ever would have accepted it. The Hungarians are learning from their example. It is impossible to look westward from Hungary, and to see a desirable future in the models elsewhere in the European Union. Hungarians are European, but they see among the European left, and among the European establishment figures (of left and right), a death wish. They seem to believe that the only way to live in harmony with these imported peoples and cultures is to train new generations of European children to despise their own culture and traditions. In this sense, secular liberalism has become a suicide pact for Western nations.

The Left cannot bear to face this fact. Right-liberals cant seem to do so either. But people who live in the real world cant afford such illusions. Like my friend David Brooks, I would like to see the roots of classical liberalism strengthened, so we could defend a liberal conception of society. But those roots have badly eroded, for reasons that he and I would likely agree on, to a meaningful extent. I dont know whether the Hungarians are going to make it through, in the long term. I am told that the younger generations here are fairly woke, or at least they are far more liberal than their parents and grandparents. They get a lot of their information from Western media, and Western social media. The trends do not look good. But at least Viktor Orban and his people are making a stand, and not apologizing for it. Good.

Meanwhile, I would love it if either my friends David Brooks or Russell Moore would come to Hungary, and see for themselves what its like. Meet Christians. Meet Jews. Meet anti-Orban liberals, and pro-Orban conservatives. Draw your own conclusions. I dont expect either man will leave her as an Orban supporter, but at least they will have a better idea of what Orban supporters believe, and why they believe it, than they have now.

And, as Josh Hammer says about Hungarys national conservative approach to governance, Lessons for American conservatives are clear and legion. In a few weeks, CPAC Hungary will kick off. If you are an American conservative, why not come over and see for yourself?

UPDATE: Sorry, but Ive since learned that CPAC Hungary is not receiving international visitors, and only a limited number of domestic ones. Covid regulations, apparently. Still, you should come over sometime.

See more here:

What Josh Hammer Saw In Hungary - The American Conservative

Slippery when wet: Bedwetting is an unpleasant but common phenomenon normally associated with stressed toddlers or the elderly and infirm, but increasingly the term bedwetting has come to apply to those slithering members of the Liberal Party who wake up in the middle of the night in a cold sweat worrying about Simon Holmes a Courts war chest. If you believe yourself to be a bedwetter, when you reach that critical fork in the road of your career, avoid turning down the Menzian path and instead take the low road with a copy of The Guardian to guide you on your way.

Pumping up your own tyres: Its important in politics to always have someone pumping up your tyres, preferably a tame journalist at the ABC, one of the wishy-washy talkback hosts on 2GB, or any of the daytime ones at Sky. (First-time drivers should avoid After Dark at all costs!)

Successfully performing a three-point turn: These days it is best to avoid doing obvious U-turns in case the media catch you at it (surely the traffic police? -ed.) However, in Glasgow this year, shortly before my own unfortunate car accident, I witnessed a breath-taking three-point turn executed with astonishing dexterity by the Prime Minister himself. First, he got Josh to announce that international hedge funds would no longer invest in Australia unless we took tougher action against climate change, then he had Dave Sharma and a bunch of L-platers threaten to cross the floor unless we took tougher action against climate change, and then he had Twiggy Forrest invent green hydrogen so we could get to net zero by 2050! The perfect 360 degree U-turn!

Right-of-way: As Ive always said, bigots have right-of-way, too.

Brad Hazzards ahead: Health ministers and chief health officers at both state and federal levels present a dangerous road block to freedom, individual choice and democratic values, so it is best to skirt round them altogether.

Blind spots: Most young Liberals these days have a blind spot when it comes to the weather, believing that all adverse driving conditions are a direct result of catastrophic climate change. Indeed, as I personally discovered during the icy road conditions at the global warming conference in Glasgow late last year, global warming, and indeed trying to keep up with the PM during global warming conferences, can do enormous damage to your career, er, I mean to your car (Dont you mean both? ed).

Complex intersections: As a complex individual myself, I have often noted the importance that intersectionality plays in the modern academic and indeed political sphere. Obviously, being a modern Liberal, you are expected to also be a diverse and inclusive ally to the LGBTQ+ community, the gender-queer BIPOC kink community, the sustainable stolen land feminist community, the trans indigenous friends of the planet comm- (thats enough intersectional communities for one modern Liberal ed).

Continue reading here:

Learn how to be the very model of a modern Liberal member - The Australian Financial Review

Fueled primarily with small donations, UFs giving day is among the most successful in academia

Contact: Luke Anderson, 352-392-8950, landerson@uff.ufl.edu

GAINESVILLE, Fla. A school record 26,052 gifts from Gators across the globe were received by the University of Florida during its 24-hour Stand Up and Holler: Gator Nation Giving Day on Feb. 17. Contributions from thousands of alumni, students and others on that day will boost scholarships, enhance academic programs and support outreach projects that benefit families and communities.

Now in its fourth year, Stand Up and Holler is credited as a significant contributor to UFs climb last fall into the Top 5 of public universities. Alumni giving is one of the benchmarks U.S. News and World Report uses to calculate its annual rankings. UFs annual giving day is among the most successful in academia, and has created the opportunity for all Gators to invest in the university.

Funds raised during the annual giving day have also contributed to the success of the universitys $3 billion Go Greater campaign. The eight-year campaign the most ambitious in UFs history and one of the largest ever in higher education has raised more the $3.6 billion, with roughly six months remaining.

Im so grateful to the members of the UF community, and to our alumni and friends, for their love and devotion to UF, UF President Kent Fuchs said. Whether giving generously so that our professors and students have every opportunity to succeed, cheering for UF student athletes or proudly showing their pride by wearing the orange and blue, they are making amazing things happen for this university and its positive influence on people and their lives.

Gators from 12 countries and every state participated in this years Stand Up and Holler, giving a combined $20.2 million. Among this years highlights are:

Theres an unquestionable correlation between UFs rise to the Top 5 and Stand Up and Holler. When alumni, students and friends show that kind of passion for their university, UF is unstoppable, said Brian Danforth, the UF Alumni Associations executive director. One of the reasons UF is a great university is because of the heartfelt support of the Gator Nation.

UFs annual giving day is named Stand Up and Holler as a tribute to the beloved Gator football game cheer made famous by George Edmondson Jr., better known to fans as Mr. Two Bits. Edmondsons iconic orange-and-blue striped necktie is used as a symbol to promote the campaign, with replicas as long as 30 feet strategically placed throughout the UF campus.

The next Stand Up and Holler: Gator Nation Giving Day is tentatively scheduled for February 2023.

The 169-year-old University of Florida has a long history of established programs in international education, research and service, and is one of only 17 public, land-grant universities in the prestigious Association of American Universities. It is ranked No. 5 in the most recent U.S. News and World Reports list of public universities.

Luke Anderson February 21, 2022

Continued here:

Giving tops 26000 contributions during UF's annual 24-hour 'Stand Up and Holler' - University of Florida

Member for Northern Victoria Wendy Lovell says the residential and industrial land crisis in City of Greater Shepparton required more planning and development support from government.

Ms Lovell said the Victorian Liberals identified this issue over 12 months ago and in May 2021 released a policy to provide a solution for regional communities by fast-tracking planning approvals.

Regional Victoria has had a surge in population growth during the pandemic and the influx of home buyers has sent house prices soaring while rental vacancy rates plummeted.

To support this demand for population shift into regional communities, urgent action is needed to ensure an adequate supply of land well into the future, Ms Lovell said.

An elected Matthew Guy-led Liberal government will implement a program that fast-tracks 50,000 new lots of land across rural and regional Victorian councils, excluding areas in the Melbourne urban-growth boundary and the City of Greater Geelong, in the first two years of government.

An assessment of currently available residential land tabled at the February Greater Shepparton City Council meeting said the amount of zoned land is eight to 14 years, but it overestimates supply, which is as little as five years.

More developable land needs to be identified and brought to market to satisfy demand in the three to five-year outlook.

Ms Lovell said the housing shortage was making it difficult for businesses and essential services such as Goulburn Valley Health to attract skilled workers and professionals to fill vacancies.

Without new lots being opened up for new housing, greater Shepparton will miss out on the benefits of an increasing population, additional small business opportunities and better services to meet the growing demand, she said.

Continue reading here:

Urgent help needed to develop - Shepparton News