The most pervasive themes that marked world reaction to the first manned landing on the moon on July 20, 1969, related to its meaning for man as man. The United States itself deliberately chose this emphasis, as witness the plaque left behind, “We came in peace for all mankind”; Neil Armstrong's “one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind”; and the dramatic high point of President Nixon's earth to moon exchange, “For one priceless moment in the whole history of man, all the people of this earth are truly one.” But no amount of suggestion by the United States can possibly explain the universality and the evident wholeheartedness of the thought that man generally—as distinct from men of one nation, or of one political alignment, or one social system—had achieved a historic triumph and one that must change his future condition and his future international relationships.

Éno estudo dos escritores brasileiros modernamente chamados de barrocos e, em particular, no estudo dos barrocos menores, que se verifica a justeza da observação de Curtius segundo a qual seria preferível evitar, em teoría literaria, o emprégo dessa expressão, dadas as numerosas confusões que tem suscitado. Realmente, apenas a falta de rigor intelectual permite transpor, das artes visuais para as artes da palavra, coneitos e fenômenos que só têm sentido e significado enquanto interpretações plásticas da realidade. Em literatura, o que boje se chama de “barroco” é, muito simplesmente, o que sempre se denominou de maneirismo, êsse fenômeno que, em tôdas as épocas (assinala, aida, o especialista alemão), revela-se complementar dos diversos classicismos que se sucedem. A mudança de terminologia só teria justificação se correspondesse, por um lado, a urna apreensão mais sutil ou mais correta de tal estilo e, por outro, se se tornasse indispensável para enquadrar peculiaridades estilísticas de que os contemporâneos não tivessem tido consciência.

Historians specializing in the study of Latin America are not making the fullest use of the theories of Bolton, Turner, and Webb. Herbert Eugene Bolton proposed his schema of a comprehensive history for the Americas almost fifty years ago, while this year we mark the seventy-seventh anniversary of the full expression of Frederick Jackson Turner's Frontier theory. The views of these two scholars, while provocative, did not lead to revolutionary new interpretations in the history of Latin America—nor, despite the hopes of the two advocates, did their ideas succeed in moving the historian of the United States away from a narrow and chauvinistic base. Nevertheless, the theories of Turner and Bolton have caused discussions and debates that have been of great interest.

Industrialization was a powerful social force in the historical development of the Anglo-American economies; economic power was diffused throughout a new, individualistic, and independent economic class that successfully broke the political and cultural monopoly of a traditional, landowning elite. Recognizing the importance of industrialization in social change, conventional economic theory, as taught in the United States and Great Britain, implicitly relied on it to give dynamism to static equilibrium models of resource allocation and income distribution, while Marxist analysis placed it in the very center of a dynamic growth theory.

There are many ways of dealing with events that are perceived by a government as threats to the stability of the existing political system. Two contrasting ways will be discussed in this study of Mexico, and an attempt will be made to evaluate their relative efficacy in controlling activities regarded as subversive by the government in question. The first method to be discussed will be referred to as the legal approach to subversion. Focus will be on both the latent and manifest functions (in Mertonian terms) of the letter, intent, and implementation of the Mexican law.

The ley de disolución social (law of social dissolution) forms part of the Mexican Federal Penal Code, which is applicable throughout the entire republic.

One of Paraguay's most important writers of the past forty years is Gabriel Casaccia, the pen name used by Benigno Casaccia Bibolini. Born in Asunción in 1907, he was educated at the Colegio Nacional of his native city and holds a doctor's degree from the Facultad de Derecho y Ciencias Sociales of the National University. Since 1935 he has resided in Argentina. His literary production has included five novels: Hombres, mujeres y fantoches, Mario Pareda, La babosa, La llaga, and Los exiliados. He is also author of two collections of short stories, El guahjú and El pozo, and one play, El bandolero. In this article, I will attempt to survey briefly Casaccia's interpretation of Paraguay in his novels, especially his view of the social and political vicissitudes of recent years.

Si bien es muy conocido que la integración económica latinoamericana, mejor dicho sudamericana, se inicia con la suscripción en 1961 del Tratado de Montevideo, hoy estamos contemplando que desde esa fecha se ha venido produciendo precisamente el proceso inverso, por una serie de causas y factores que no es el momento de analizar ni exponer y que están culminando con la desintegración económica de los países sudamericanos.

Sin tomar en cuenta a los países centroamericanos que iniciaron muy tempranamente el proceso de su integración exclusivamente entre ellos, sin referirse en nada al resto de sus hermanos latinoamericanos, los países sudamericanos y México emprendieron en 1961 su propia integración a base del ya mencionado Tratado de Montevideo; mas transcurridos algunos años, después de la Reunión de Presidentes en la ciudad de Bogotá en 1967, países como Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, Bolivia, Perú y Chile, resuelven crear una subzona particular de comercio denominada “Subandina”, la misma que de acuerdo con los postulados que sostiene está constituyéndose en un grupo antagónico, por no decir rival, de los que quedaron integrando el Tratado de Montevideo, o sea, Brasil, Uruguay, Paraguay y la Argentina, países que por su situación geográfica han sido denominados los del grupo del Atlántico.

For years many Americans have assumed that the United States has exploited Cuba. The greatest opportunity for this control existed when the United States occupied Cuba after the Spanish-American War. The island was ravaged by war, famine, and disease, and the Cubans were exhausted after nearly a decade of depression, and revolution. It would have been easy for the U.S. government and business interests to control Cuba economically. Yet this did not occur. By concentrating our attention upon Cuban sugar production, perhaps the real nature of United States-Cuban economic relations may become apparent.

In the aftermath of the Spanish-American War, the McKinley administration found itself caught between two forces. The Congressional Joint Resolution of April 20, 1898, bound the Americans to leave Cuba once the island was pacified, but the Paris Peace Treaty of December 10, 1898, assumed that the United States would remain for a period of reconstruction.

It is not surprising that prior to the construction of the Panama Canal, Nicaragua was considered of strategic importance to the world's major sea powers. Together the Río San Juan and Lake Nicaragua provide a water passage from the Caribbean Sea to within 20 kilometers of the Pacific Ocean (see map). In addition to its obvious inter-oceanic canal potential, this water passage was primarily useful for hundreds of years as an alternate route for the pirate-threatened Central American colonial commerce.

A remarkable number of historical and geographical misconceptions have appeared in the literature concerning this river. The recent publication of the seventeen-volume Colección Somoza containing documents relating to the history of Nicaragua from 1503 to 1550 does much to clarify this period of exploration and navigation.

Almost every day our newspapers feature accounts of student ferment on one or another of the university campuses in both the “developed” and “developing” nations around the globe. University students appear to have become extremely active in recent years in attempting to influence policy decisions taken by both administrators of higher education and government officials. In Brazil, however, such student political activism is clearly not just a recent phenomenon. While Brazilian university students have played an increasingly important role in national politics since World War II, most recently in their outspoken opposition to the military-dominated governments of the late Castello Branco and that of President Artur Costa e Silva, they enjoy an important tradition of student political activism that cannot be overlooked. In fact, accepting the suggestions made with real insight by E. Wight Bakke regarding the causes of student activism, we find that an examination of the student tradition in Brazil helps to explain current student agitation.