This article represents an attempt to understand the changes that have taken place in the traditional vision of colonial society in New Spain as shaped by past historiography, drawing on works published between 1970 and 1981. This essay was not conceived as a bibliographic summary that would examine themes, review hypotheses, and evaluate the sources used by different authors. Instead, my analysis will give greater importance to the topics that have captured the attention of scholars than to their published works, it will emphasize the scientific community rather than particular scholars, and it will focus more on those themes that in my view characterize the social processes of New Spain than on the central themes of current historiography.

Culture, according to one anthropological formulation, is “the structure of meaning through which people give shape to their experience” (Geertz 1973, 312). Clifford Geertz's definition necessarily implies consideration of struggles over the politics of that meaning. Implicit and explicit in such struggles are political efforts to impose upon others a particular concept of how things really are and therefore how people are obliged to act (Geertz 1973, 316). During the process of nation building, history and the structure of meaning that it gives to contemporary “culture” are often manipulated so that socially, politically, and economically opposed groups are merged into putative harmonious “imagined communities” whose reality enters into public consciousness and social discourse as the authentic past (Anderson 1983). But consciousness of shared identity and common discourse centered upon that identity are not un-contested. In Mexico competing images of indigenous “tradition” entail just such a political struggle over meaning, a struggle over the definition of what constitutes indigenous culture—“real” ethnic identity, as it were—and a consequent struggle over what actions, if any, need to be taken (and by whom) to combat the second-class status of most of the country's indigenous peoples.

Whether and how the international trade and investments of less-developed countries affect their patterns of income distribution has long been a matter of interest and debate. Classical economic theory has tended to be optimistic on this count based on the assumption that when poor, heavily populated countries specialize in and export the labor-intensive goods in which they are expected to have an advantage, they will grow fast and improve their income distribution as well. But while trade's positive impact on distribution may be the natural expectation when a country's exports are mainly labor-intensive manufactures, no such generalization is warranted when primary products dominate the export mix, even though one might still expect some loose tendency toward labor intensity. The distribution of rents associated with an export-specific input or inputs may be very concentrated (often the case with mineral exports) or relatively egalitarian (as with exports produced by small family farms), but political factors also affect who gets them. Other, less-direct effects may also be important, including the type of linkages from the export sector, the demands created by the income they generate, and the direction of government expenditure of the fiscal revenues resulting from the trade.

After a decade of debt crisis and severe economic decline, countries throughout Latin America are seeking radical new treatments for their economic ills. Under pressure from internal political actors, international lending and aid agencies, or some combination of these, many Latin American countries are turning to outward-looking development strategies to stabilize their balance of payments and revitalize economic growth. Serving as the centerpiece for the new strategies is the promotion of “nontraditional” exports.