Law, Food, and Culture: Mexican Corn's National Identity Cooked in "Tortilla Discourses" Post-TLC/NAFTA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With this essay, I will briefly introduce an inquiry concerning food and national cultural identity as expressed in the law. I will examine current changes in the Mexican state's public legal obligations, i.e., the law, and the production and consumption of corn, i.e., maize or maiz. These changes suggest that law, food, and culture are mutually influential in their production and consumption. The specific law examined is Mexico's corn tariff regime altered by the Tratado de Libre Comercio de America de Norte/North American Free Trade Agreement ("TLC/NAFTA"), which in the year 2008 eliminates all tariffs for corn imports from the U.S. or Canada.' The particular food item studied is corn, a product steeped in centuries of cultural significance for Mexico. From a functional perspective, corn is central to the Mexican diet, providing millions a major source of protein and calories. It provides the primary source of income and labor for rural Mexicans. In Mexican society, corn also exerts enormous cultural significance with spiritual, communal, and nationalistic traits stewing from its everyday and historic appeal. Corn is central to dishes appreciated by millions domestically and by millions abroad when celebrating Mexican food.6 These corn-based items include: tortillas, tamales, enchiladas, sopes, huaraches, tostadas, pozole, panuchos, and many others. As TLC/NAFTA legal obligations eliminate public protection from foreign supply markets for Mexican grown corn, this essay asks: how is the law related to the cultural change in the production and consumption of corn in Mexico? For this essay, I will prepare a three-course argument. First, that the 2008 treaty obligation ending corn tariff protection is part of a larger political-economic neo-liberal process, which severely limits public food programs and consequentially disenfranchises popular sectors from the state. Aside from the eliminated corn tariff protections, Mexican popular sectors suffer from the recent elimination of corn subsidies, fixed corn prices, and public sector food aid. Second, that the current corn tariff elimination resembles Mexico's historic and cultural tortilla discourse, which poses Mexican corn and its use by popular sectors against modern, capitalist, and foreign interests. Since the colonial encounter, Mexican history illustrates the cultural challenges of corn for a state seeking international or modern legitimacy.'" Corn is popular with the masses but is often apparently contradictory to the public goals. As part of this, corn is painted as backward, pre-modern, traditional, or unhealthy. Currently, the discourse poses Mexican corn production and consumption with skyrocketing Mexican consumer corn prices, due to global demand for ethanol (a corn-based energy source) and domestic cartelization of masa (corn dough) sales. Third, by ending state support for a product of nationalist significance these political-economic and food culture changes pose challenges for Mexican democracy. As domestic governance becomes increasingly contested, any Mexican policymakers require popular support. Decreased state support for corn production and other food programs make civil society's backing for politicians and the state less certain. Describing these points, this essay's menu contains three courses. Section I incorporates theoretical insights from the food studies discipline. It argues that beyond serving for just nourishment, food possesses enormous cultural and commercial value. This creates a ripe and abundant subject for legal analysis, focusing on how the law frames these commercial and cultural tastes. This section offers conclusions from food studies suggesting future legal analysis. Section II analytically serves up the cultural importance of food in Mexico's political economy. It shows how food is stewed (combined without a clear demarcation) within a discourse of national identity on a global table. This identity is imagined as a community with competing menu options of nationalistic and domestic (state protection for corn consumption and production) and foreign and neo-liberal (a free-market for food production and consumption). Section III describes a re-imagination of food and national identity within the confines of Mexican law, specifically the TLC/NAFTA, food aid policy, and antitrust authority.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".