La Mitaform: Fill & Download for Free

In starting of the movie Hindi Medium, young Mita—played by Sanjana Sanghi— came to a boutique to get her dress stitched. When Masterji, the tailor, asked his son to show all the new varieties, Mita’s mother forbade him to do so since Mita had already decided the design of the dress. She had brought a paper from some magazine which had the design.After noticing the design, Masterji said, “Your daughter is quite modern.”To which the mother replied, “All children are modern now-a-days.”Masterji responded by saying that his son, Raj, is quite simple.Masterji and the mother wanted to slightly alter the design given in the magazine, but Raj assured her that he would stitch the dress exactly the way she wanted.While the starting and ending of a movie or a book matters a lot, I found nothing special in this starting scene which made me perplexed about its existence.It’s much later when I was reading about characters-in-arts that I figured out the importance of this scene in the movie.This is part of the character introduction. After watching the complete movie, one can say that it was an introduction of two flat characters, Raj and Mita—the protagonists.Flat characters are those whose behaviour don’t change much during the movie. On the other hand, round characters have very complicated nature and it needs character development along with character introduction. For example, in the movie Coco, Miguel is a flat character who loves music, while the musician, Ernesto de la Cruz, is a round character whose different behavioural aspects come to light as the movie unfolds.This scene was pivotal for character introduction in the movie: Mita- modern, and Raj- simple.We can see throughout the movie that Mita was always trying to be in vogue. She was throwing parties to show-off. She dressed the way rich people dress. She wanted to teach her kid in English-medium school to become part of elites and the great pains she went through to achieve it is all about the movie.Raj, as seen in the first scene, was simple and agreeing to her wishes in the whole movie.This has quite a resemblance to our day-to-day lives. There are people from both the character types around us. Character demarcation will enable us in taking informed decisions.kia hari

Paraguay is not really the only country where the mestizo population speak a native language.Most mestizos in Bolivia, for example, speak a native language besides Spanish, such as Quechua, Aymara and Guaraní (there's a significant ethnic Guaraní population in Bolivia’s Southeast).There's also a sizable, though minority fraction of the mestizo population that only speak Spanish.Ecuador is similar to Bolivia, and the Andean region of Peru (“la Sierra”) is very much like that too.In all of these cases, including Paraguay, the main defining factor is the comparatively large indigenous population.Another factor is the resiliency of their institutions, for even during the Colonial and Republican times, their social organization was not so much destroyed or replaced, but rather integrated (even though by force) into the Colonial and early republican regimes, respectively.For example, even the serf labor (“mita”) to which much of the Quechua and Aymara populations in Bolivia were subject to during the Colonial epoch, was a continuation of the same institution established during Inca rule (and probably earlier). In Inca, Colonial and early republican times, though, the natives were able to retain their internal organization and institutions, and thus it was the Cacique and/ or the Elders in each community that alloted the work for the “mita” among the members of the community.Similarly in Paraguay, the native institutions, as well as those established by the Jesuit (more enlightened than the Colonial government, and more respectful of the Guaraní language) gave the Guaraníes and the mestizo population that they gave birth to the resiliency to retain much of their identity.There was yet another factor in Paraguay, namely the republican government's policy on bilingual public education. That was something quite unique among Latin American nations until recently, for only in the last few years a few other countries, like Bolivia, have started adopting the same policy.————Edit:Following Hong Yeu’s observation, I went looking for updated data, where it became apparent that the statements about “most mestizos in Bolivia… speak a native language” is no longer accurate: As of this date, just some 30% of all Bolivians 4 years old or older claim to have learned a native language in their childhood (http://www.ine.gob.bo/pdf/boletin/NP_2016_8.pdf), and while others may have learned it in adulthood, these are not expected to be many.This represents a significant change in the last half century, since in 1968 more than 63% of Bolivians spoke a native language:(Source: Cosio, Carlos, La educación agrícola en Bolivia. Instituto Interamericano de Ciencias Agricolas. Lima, 1970.)(Note in the table above that “Castellano” stands for “Spanish”, while “Autoctono” stands for native languages other than Quechua and Aymara, such as Guarani and others)Based on this data, it may be speculated that the bilingual education policy in Paraguay, which Bolivia lacked until recently, could be the factor that made the difference.

There is a fundamental difference, Spanish slavery was illegal.Ley XXI. Iten, ordenamos y mandamos que de aquí adelante por ninguna causa de guerra ni otra alguna, aunque sea so titulo de revelión ni por rescate ni de otra manera, no se pueda hazer esclavo indio alguno, y queremos sean tratados como vasallos nuestros de la Corona de Castilla, pues lo son.“XXI Law. Also, we order and command that from now on for no cause of war or any other, even under title of rebellion nor for rescue or in any other manner, any Indian at all can be made a slave, and we want them to be treated like our subjects of the Crown of Castile, for they are."*** For those who aren't used to reading old Spanish but know Spanish, if you have noticed iten and don't know what it means, it is the Spanish evolution of Latin “item" meaning “also", modern Spaniards no longer use that term, but back then it was much more common. Same for so from Latin “sub” meaning “under" (“so título" = “sub titulo" = “under title"), although so is much more known to modern Spaniards but maybe not to foreign learners. The older the Spanish the closer to Latin.Spain was the only colonial power in which slavery was illegal, that doesn't mean there wasn't, but it was illegal (I write it in bold to see if some can wrap their head around it). It was made illegal by Isabella and Ferdinand in the Laws of Burgos of 1512 and Colombus himself was sent to prison by Isabella.And not just that, the Crown aware of the need of a system to hispanise natives (apart from favouring mixing of Spaniards with natives to have a Hispanic descendance), created the encomiendas “entrustments", based on Castile's feudal laws with the additions by Renaissance scholars from Spanish universities, they aimed to absorb natives by treating them like subjects in mainland Spain, with Spaniards and native rulers in the place of colonial nobility. They were specifically aimed at stopping any alternative potential form of organisation in which native rights weren't recognised. These encomiendas recognised rights to natives:Pregnancy leaves (“every pregnant woman shall not be sent to work after the fourth month, nor at least until 3 years later for being in detriment of the offspring”), yearly leaves, the right to keep an extra amount of their production, a minimum payment, proper feeding (“bread with garlic, and enough ají to satisfy them, and at least each Sunday, holidays and festivities a full pot of meat; miners shall be provided meat every day, and if it were not possible at the very least fish”) the right to keep their internal hierarchies as long as the chieftains submitted to Spanish authorities themselves… the right to be taught Catholicism and Spanish (it was considered a right because they were tools to prosper in Spanish colonial society).Leyes de Burgos from 1512Either way the long distance between Madrid and the overseas viceroyalties made it impossible back then for the Crown to properly enforce laws, local colonial authorities had full control in daily matters, Madrid just showed up every now and then and made sure they were working accordingly. In this situation the encomenderos “entrustmenters" neglected the rights of natives and came close to forms of slavery on many occasions. This was criticised by Spanish writers who visited the American territories and came back forcing the Crown to take action against the breaches. The most famous of course was Bartolomé de Las Casas and his writings in the Historia delas Indias or Brevísima Relación de la Destrucción delas Indias.Brevísima Relación dela Destrucción delas Indias, “Very Brief Relation of the Destruction of the Indies"Charles I (or V in the rest of Europe), made aware of the absuses by these writers, issued the New Laws limiting the abilities of the encomenderos and the inheritance of the encomiendas replacing the Viceroys or ordering the old ones to strictly apply the law against encomenderos breaking natives' rights. And they did, in most parts the Viceroys reached a middle ground in which encomenderos no longer felt impunity and respected basic rights but still not all the ample rights recognised in Spanish law, but in Perú the Viceroyal government followed Madrid's orders to the comma and punished everyone who didn't strictly follow the law with natives. So much so there was a revolt in Perú because of the punishments, a revolt led by Gonzalo Pizarro, the conquistador's younger brother.They killed the viceroy of Perú sent by the king and took control of Perú, but Spain sent another viceroy and ended their revolt. He took a similar approach to the other viceroys, demanding a minimum but not the degree of punishment of the previous one. The New Laws were ratified and accepted by the rebels with the only modification that encomiendas could be inherited for 2 generations more after that one.I am quoting the original document of the New Laws, because this goes against what people in other countries believe and it's common for some of them to not believe me, plus I am aware most people on this side of the platform don't like reading this no matter if I send the original laws document to their houses, so like it or not this is what is written on the paper from 1542 (under Title VI of the Laws of Indies – “De Indios” or “About Indians"):Ley VII. Y porque nuestro principal intento y voluntad siempre ha sido y es de la conservación y augmento de los indios y que sean instruidos y enseñados en las cosas de nuestra sancta Fée cathólica y bien tratados como personas libres y vasallos nuestros, como lo son, encargamos y mandamos à los del dicho nuestro Consejo tengan siempre muy gran atención y especial cuidado sobre todo dela conservación y buen govierno y tratamiento de los dichos indios y de saber cómo se cumple y executa lo que por Nos está ordenado y se ordenare para la buena governación de las nuestras Indias y administración de la justicia en ellas, y de hazer que se guarde, cumpla y execute, sin que en ello haya remissión, falta, ni descuido alguno.“VII Law. And because our main intent and will has always been the preservation and expansion of the Indians, and that they are instructed and taught in our Holy Catholic Faith, and well treated as free people and as our subjects, because they are so, we commend and command to those in our Council that they always pay special attention and care to the preservation, good governing, and good treatment of the Indians, and in knowing how it is obeyed and executed what is by us ordered and shall be ordered for the good governance of our Indies and the administration of justice in them, and in making that guarded, obeyed and executed without remission, failure or mistake of any sort.”Ley XX. Porque una de las cosas más principales que en las Audiencias han de servirnos es en tener muy especial cuidado del buen tratamiento de los indios y conservación dellos, mandamos que se informen siempre de los excesos y malos tratamientos que les son o fueren fechos por los governadores o personas particulares, y cómo han guardado las Ordenanzas e Instrucciones que les han sido dadas y para el buen tratamiento dellos están fechas, y en lo que se oviere excedido o excediere de aquí adelante tengan cuidado de lo remediar castigando los culpados por todo rigor, conforme à justicia; y que no den lugar à que en los pleitos de entre indios o con ellos se hagan processos ordinarios ni haya alargas, como suele acontescer por la malicia de algunos abogados y procuradores, sino que sumariamente sean determinados, guardando sus usos y costumbres, no siendo claramente injustos, y que tengan las dichas Audiencias cuidado que así se guarde por los otros juezes inferiores.“XX Law. For in one of the main things that Audiencias must serve us is in having very special care of the treatment of Indians and their preservation, we command that they must be informed always of the excesses and bad treatments that have been forced, are forced, or might ever be forced on the Indians by governors or particulars, and how they have followed the Ordenances and Instructions that they were given, which are made for their good treatment, and in whatever they have exceeded themselves or might exceed themselves from now on they shall be careful to remedy it punishing the guilty with all severity, according to justice; and that they do not allow that in trials between Indians or against them there are ordinary processes or prolongations, as it happens due to the malice of some lawyers and procurers, instead they shall be summarily determined, guarding their uses and customs, without being clearly unfair, and that Audiencias take care that inferior judges also follow this.”Ley XXI. Iten, ordenamos y mandamos que de aquí adelante por ninguna causa de guerra ni otra alguna, aunque sea so titulo de revelión ni por rescate ni de otra manera, no se pueda hazer esclavo indio alguno, y queremos sean tratados como vasallos nuestros de la Corona de Castilla, pues lo son.“XXI Law. Also, we order and command that from now on for no cause of war or any other, even under title of rebellion nor for rescue or in any other manner, any Indian at all can be made a slave, and we want them to be treated like our subjects of the Crown of Castile, for the are."Ley XXIII. Como avemos mandado proveer que de aquí adelante por ninguna vía se hagan los indios esclavos, ansí en los que hasta aquí se han fecho contra razón y derecho y contra las Provissiones e Instrucciones dadas, ordenamos y mandamos que las Audiencias, llamadas las partes, sin tela de juizio, sumaria y brevemente, sóla la verdad sabida, los pongan en libertad, si las personas que los tovieren por esclavos no mostraren título cómo los tienen y poseen ligítimamente. Y porque à falta de personas que soliciten lo susodicho los indios no queden por esclavos injustamente, mandamos que las Audiencias pongan personas que sigan por los indios esta causa, y se paguen de penas de Cámara, y sean hombres de confianza y diligencia.“XXIII Law. As we have commanded that from now on no path whatsoever to make Indians slaves is allowed, thus we command that those who have been made slaves already against their right and against reason, and against the Provissions and Instructions given to them, we command that the Audiencias without submission to trial, summarily and briefly, merely by the known truth to them, set them free, if the people who have them don't show any title or document of how they have them and illegitimately own them. And just because they fail to solicite the aforementioned themselves it cannot be allowed that they unfairly remain as slaves, we command the Audiencias to put people to pursue this cause for the Indians, and they shall be paid with treasury money, and they shall be trusted known dilligent men.”Slavery was illegal in Spain and there were wars over it being illegal.Leyes Nuevas from 1542, or Leyes de Valladolid, at the top: Carolus V Imperator et Rex HispaniaeMesoamerican slavery was not only legal but as much a fundamental practice as in Greece and Rome in Europe, they were slave societies, like all early “Classical" civilisations all over the planet their Aztecs and Mayans were our Romans and Greeks respectively, their Classical first jump to civilisation, rich city states with rule of law and developed infrastructure conquering neighbours into an empire, and with slave workforce.In fact, Spain did keep native systems at first such as the mita or repartimiento which were infinitely worse for natives than Spanish-made encomiendas because natives were randomly forced recruited among conquered peoples and there were very few rights. The mita was a system of the Incas for example, they recruited a share of adult men from each conquered town and forced them to work just with their food provided, work in whatever the Incan authorities wanted.Spain kept many of the native customs and in the case of the mita the Viceroy found it very useful for mining, that being said even in this he stipulated laws and limitations much more generous than the Inca's, as a start the families of the recruited were supported with public funds until the recruir returned (they recruited adult males so their families had no income), secondly they couldn't recruit the same person within less than a 6 year gap and the recruitment lasted a year, and the elderly couldn't be recruited. So even in the systems kept from the natives the conditions were changed.And then there was the little fact (which most just try to ignore because it's very gruesome and very against political narrative) that Spaniards didn't allow cannibalism, ritual decapitation or ritual extirpation of beating human hearts, which was the end of many slaves under the rule of the Aztecs, or Caribbean peoples in the case of cannibalism.The site was used for religious rituals where human sacrifices to honor the gods took place. Science magazine reported that the priests who performed the rituals sliced into the torsos and removed the still-beating hearts of those being sacrificed. The victims were then decapitated. Researchers said that the decapitation marks were “clean and uniform.”Cut marks indicate that the priests “defleshed” the heads to mere skulls by removing the skin and muscle using sharp blades. Then they would carve large holes into the sides of the skulls so they could be slipped onto a large wooden pole, to be placed on an enormous rack at the front of the temple called the tzompantli.The mixed ages and genders support the theory that many victims were slaves sold specifically for the purpose of sacrifice.Thanks to Parth Dutt for the link.[1]VII Law (under Title I of the Laws of Indies – “De Fé" or “About Faith"), issued by Charles I/V. We order and we command our viceroys, audiencias and governors of the Indies, that in all those provinces they tear down and make tear down, they remove and make remove, all the idols and adoration temples of the locals, and all of their human sacrifices; and that they ban explicitly under severe punishment worshipping other gods and eating human flesh, even if that flesh is from prisoners or bodies dead in war, as well as doing all the other abominations against our Catholic Faith and against all Natural Reason, and if they do the contrary, they shall punish them accordingly.On a different note, African slavery was not that lucky, African slaves were legal, by the time Spain started properly importing African slaves, the situation had changed and Britain and France doing it already in larger amounts had shown Spain the position on slavery of Isabella and Charles V was a handicap for the empire against them. In fact the entire push for African slavery was argued in Spain by economists using France and Britain's success in the Caribbean islands' plantations as their main argument for it. And it was after the War of Spanish Succession and the Treaty of Utrecht that Britain planned to introduce the practice on a larger scale to Spain profitting from it by getting the asiento de negros or the monopoly of black slave trade, they demanded the exclusive right to introduce blacks as slaves in the Spanish colonies in Utrecht for the next 30 years.The English had a letdown at the difficulties they faced for other reasons structural to Spanish colonial societies as opposed to their southern colonies, and nearing the expiration of the asiento there was a war for various reasons (including other concessions such as the navío de permiso and British piracy) between Spain and Britain called the War of the Asiento.Guerra del Asiento, War of the Asiento, by Augusto Ferrer DalmauAnd this was so because Africans became free much easier in Spain and the larger black population in Spain also meant many Spanish settlers from Spain itself had been black since the beginning, there were a large number of free blacks all over the Spanish colonies, blacks escaped from the 13 Colonies to Spanish Florida for example and then moved to Cuba (Florida's blacks moved to Cuba from Florida when Britain got it in the Seven Years War, because being a free black in Spain was a million times more common than in Britain).And these free blacks pushed to free the ones that came as slaves, so black slavery was also significantly weaker in Spain, not so much because of the treatment itself but because being black didn't mean being slave (most blacks were free), there was not such a strong link between skin colour and being a slave because free blacks were everywhere.Cuban blacks, free and flirtingFootnotes[1] Archaeologists Describe Gruesome Ritual Behind Massive Aztec Skull Tower