Antonia Castaneda is a Chicana historian and feminist scholar. She is currently teaching at St. Mary’s University. Born in Texas and grown up in California, Castaneda authored numerous scholarly writings on the problems of sexuality, gender, and Chicana women in the state of California as well as the Borderlands starting from the 16th century to these days.
According to Castaneda, the sexual assault of Indian women became rather common during the period of colonization by Spaniards because: 1) rape was seen as a symbolic form of dominance over the conquered nation: women represented the Indian nation and their assault was a sign of Indian males’ castration, and an indication of Spaniards’ power; women’s rape was a means of control and means of ensuring subordination, superiority, and compliance; a form of sociopolitical terror; 2) it was not punished seriously enough by the military authorities. That was rooted in the very essence of Spanish patriarchal culture, Castaneda implies, its structure, ideology, and view of the conquest; Indians were seen as essentially inferior. This argument is obviously reasonable. Despite the seemingly friendly claims of acknowledgments of Indians’ equality and humanity, Spaniards thought of them as savage people who should be tamed with violence. As for Franciscans, it becomes clear that they were either passive in preventing sexual assaults and violence, or practiced these methods themselves. Moreover, they deliberately silenced the acts of violence.
2. Henry George’s 1868 article “What the Railroad Will Bring Us” expresses his critical view of railroad construction in California. The railroad use would contribute to increasing the revenues of only few businessmen who owned railroad interests and those involved in related industries. Meanwhile, he predicted, the majority of population would be subject to abject poverty. The land would extremely grow in value and poor people would not be able to own it, hence will need to move to cities and get employed to work for someone else. The housing bubble and the economic crisis that hit the United States back in 2009 seem to be the proof that George was right. While the crisis was rooted in unsound lending in the sphere of real estate, that pattern was based on land speculation, as well as premature subdivision, and also excessive building on what is believed to be marginal land (Gaffney, “After the Crash: Designing a Depression Free Economy”). So, yes, George was right in his negative predictions.
