. Michael Peter Smith – “Looking for Globality in Los Angeles,” in Articulating the Global and the Local: Cultural Studies in Globalization, pp. 55-71 What does the author mean by “globality?” Why does he not think Los Angeles is a true global city? (or what he calls a “world city”). What does he mean by LKA as a “basket case”? Why has LA declined economically since the end of the Cold War? Smith uses “binational,” “local,” “national,” and “regional” to describe developments in LA. What does he mean by these terms? What was impact of Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 which gave amnesty to Mexicans living in the US? How did it increase immigration to US? How did the wage structure of Mexican workers in US agriculture, e.g., in California’s Imperial Valley, affect migration to LA? What was the impact of the 1990s debt crisis in Mexico and other parts of Latin America in motivating migrants to leave Mexico and go to LA? Why does LA “receive” rather than “send” what Smith calls “global commands”? From a broader conceptual perspective, what does this article say about the relationship between urban economic decline, the structure of urban space (spaciality/fragmentation), and trans-national migration? Where does power reside in Los Angeles in Smith’s analysis?
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]