| dc.description |
Why did dependency theory fail to take strong root among sociologists of Mexico over the sixties and seventies; and why, in contrast, did Mexico’s sociologists tend to study social movements and the state instead? Using these questions as a starting point, this paper examines the divergent paths of research on Mexico taken by both North American and Mexican sociologists over the past several decades. In seeking the origins of these unique patterns, the paper assesses the nation’s revolutionary history, the institutional training of Mexican and North American sociologists, the corporativist and collectivist structure of politics and society, the social and political activism of Mexican sociologists, and the ruling party’s appropriation of dependency rhetorics for its own political purposes. These unique legacies, in combination with Mexico’s history of rapid and concentrated urbanization, are then examined with respect to their impact on recent and forthcoming research. Among the highlighted studies are those that examine territorially based struggles in cities and regions and their reciprocal impact on identity, collective action, and political power. |
