Ciudad de Mexico, 1968, Tlatelolco, Archives; I just visited DF! / Questions on archives and social movement / Latest reading

I just visited Mexico City for the first time, and i had a really amazing time. Even on the one day i was really sick, i made it to the Casa Azul, home of Frida Kahlo, which was extremely special to me. I also saw the pyramids to the north of the city, which are just a trip. Seeing murals up close of Diego Rivera and Jose Clemente Orozco in downtown wasn't so bad, either.

One thing I didn't do was to see the new exhibit put on by the Centro Cultural Universatario Tlatelolco on the matanza, when the student movement was violently repressed. In an attempt to open up a history that has been very closed to the public, the university is attempting to provide some kind of space to evaluate that historical moment.

Certainly, such exhibits are important for public consciousness and recognition of historical atrocities. And to my knowledge, there is still little public recognition of the role that COINTELPRO (Counter Intelligence Programs) and other state repression played in the violent disruption of vibrant social movements of the 1960's and 1970's in this country. The recent amount of art shows in Los Angeles around the Black Panther Party for Self Defense, like the work of Emory Douglas are an invitation to keep such discussions alive.

So, what does recognition of government wrong-doing (or were they doing exactly what we could expect?) in the 60's mean for us on the left? If government funded institutions like universities or museums can't be counted on to counter repression in the present day, what use can we make of such exhibits in our education work? What kind of institutions independent of government and even foundation funding can we create for ourselves?

So, those are some of my thoughts for the day.

On another note, i'm reading the book Undoing Empire: Race and Nation in the Mulatto Caribbean. It's extremely dense reading, looking at the amount of Moorish influence that existed in the conquest of what is now known as the Caribbean and Latin America. This complicates the idea of a "pure" Christian conquest, and that there were numerous "stowaway" religious refugees who traveled to the "New World" to desert the second they arrived and join up with indigenous populations, try to lead new lives within the new colonial empire, and other shades of survival. The history is new and exciting to me. The writing on architecture (one of the main sites of analysis for the author) is intellectually new to me and challenging. Coming back from Mexico with this new viewpoint into history is, to put it in "bro" terms, really getting me stoked.