Latin America

Subterms

    Latest story

    100 Shares149 Views

    Mexico City Bans Traditional Bullfights for Violence-Free Option

    by

    Showdowns between people and bulls can still go on, but the animals can no longer be hurt or killed. Some bullfighting proponents said the law imperils an ancient tradition.In the biggest bullfighting city in the largest bullfighting country in the world, Mexico City lawmakers overwhelmingly voted on Tuesday to ban traditional bullfighting — a move that was supported by Mexico’s president, Claudia Sheinbaum, but was fiercely opposed by backers of the centuries-old custom.The legislation, approved by a 61-1 vote, prohibits the injuring or killing of bulls for sport, in or outside of the arenas. It will allow for what proponents call “bullfighting without violence,” in which rules determine how long a bull can be in the ring and limit bullfighters to using only capes.“My heart always beats for animal welfare,” said Xochitl Bravo Espinosa, a Mexico City legislator who helped spearhead the effort.But Ms. Bravo Espinosa said that legislators tried to find a balance in which the bullfights could go on, albeit modified, so that people who made a living off the industry could continue working. She pointed to people who sell gear and food around La Plaza México, the largest bullfighting arena in the world, which opened in 1946 in the heart of the city and seats 42,000 people.Bullfighting proponents denounced the legislation, protesting outside the Mexico City legislature’s building on Tuesday morning. “This is just the beginning of a fight for our bullfighting,” four bullfighting groups said in a joint statement later in the day.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    More stories

    • 63 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      What Is Tren de Aragua?

      by

      A gang with roots in a Venezuelan prison, the criminal group was at the center of President Trump’s order invoking the Alien Enemies Act of 1798.President Trump’s executive order on Saturday invoking the Alien Enemies Act targeted Venezuelan citizens 14 years and older with ties to the transnational gang Tren de Aragua, saying they “are liable to be apprehended, restrained, secured, and removed as Alien Enemies.”Mr. Trump’s order was quickly challenged in court, but the gang has been a growing source of concern for U.S. officials over the last year. The Biden administration labeled Tren de Aragua a transnational criminal organization in 2024, the New York Police Department has highlighted its activity on the East Coast, and the Trump White House began the process of designating it a foreign terrorist organization in January.Here is what we know about the gang:A rising force out of VenezuelaTren de Aragua (Train of Aragua, or Aragua Train) has roots in Tocorón prison in Venezuela’s northern Aragua state, which the group’s leaders had transformed into a mini-city with a pool, restaurants and a zoo. They reportedly recorded executions and torture there to maintain control over other prisoners.As Venezuela’s economy collapsed and its government under President Nicolás Maduro became more repressive, the group began exploiting vulnerable migrants. Tren de Aragua’s influence soon stretched into other parts of Latin America, and it developed into one of the region’s most violent and notorious criminal organizations, focusing on sex trafficking, human smuggling and drugs.Colombian officials in 2022 accused the gang of at least 23 murders after the police began to find body parts in bags. Alleged members have also been apprehended in Chile and in Brazil, where the gang aligned itself with Primeiro Comando da Capital, one of that country’s biggest organized crime rings.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 88 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Walgreens Says It Will Close 1,200 Stores

      by

      The pharmacy giant said it would close the stores over the next three years and plans to “redeploy” the majority of the workers at the closed stores.Walgreens plans to close about 1,200 stores over the next three years, its parent company said on Tuesday, in an effort by the struggling pharmacy giant to cut costs and change focus.The chain, which is owned by Walgreens Boots Alliance, announced the closures in its latest quarterly earnings report, released on Tuesday.The closures will allow Walgreens to “respond more dynamically to shifts in consumer behavior and buying preferences,” Tim Wentworth, the chief executive of Walgreens Boots Alliance, told investors during an earnings call on Tuesday.There are more than 8,000 Walgreens stores in the United States, Mr. Wentworth said, and about 6,000 of those stores were profitable.“While the decision to close the store is never an easy one, we feel confident in our ability to continue to serve our customers,” Mr. Wentworth said, “and we intend to follow our historic practice to redeploy the majority of the work force in those stores that we closed.”About 500 of the closures will take place in the current fiscal year, which runs through September 2025, but the company did not say where they would occur.The company reported an operating loss of nearly $1 billion in the three months through August, roughly twice as much as the loss in the same period last year. Its stock price jumped more than 10 percent in early trading on Tuesday, as the results were slightly better than analysts had expected.Walgreens said in June that it would most likely close a significant amount of stores as part of a plan to turn around its business in the United States. At the time, Walgreens said spending by lower-income consumers in particular was lagging, driven by high inflation and depleted savings. The closures announced on Tuesday include 300 stores that had previously been approved to shut under that plan.Mr. Wentworth said that the company was also making changes to how it stocks its stores, by being “more selective” with the brands it carries, as well as expanding its own brands. This, he said, would enable the company to be “a destination for categories for which we believe we are uniquely positioned to lead, like health and wellness and, specifically, women’s health.” More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Francisco Lopera, the ‘Country Doctor’ Who Upended Our Understanding of Dementia

      by

      Francisco Lopera defied rebels, cartels and vampire bats to become a pioneering researcher of Alzheimer’s disease.In 1978, Dr. Francisco Lopera did what recent medical school graduates in Colombia and much of Latin America have long done: He set out for an obligatory year of work in a remote part of the country, where an inexperienced médico rural might be the only physician for miles. Dr. Lopera, who was born in the Andean region of Antioquia and knew mostly mountains and farm life before medical school, carried out his service in the Darién Gap, on the Caribbean coast near Panama.There Dr. Lopera, a groundbreaking Colombian Alzheimer’s researcher who died this week at age 73, treated stabbings, snakebites, complicated births, burns and fevers in a hospital that had electricity for only half the day. On one occasion, he was kidnapped by Marxist guerrillas. Another time, he had to flee gunshots.When I met Dr. Lopera in 2017, to start research on a book about the families with Alzheimer’s that became his life’s work, he told me a story about two young brothers who had died one after the other in his hospital, of unknown causes. Lopera traveled to the family home in a remote jungle clearing, where he discovered that the boys’ surviving siblings had bites on their fingers from vampire bats. He sent the bodies to a pathology lab hours away by boat, and the pathologists confirmed rabies. When the government brought in a rabies expert to investigate, Dr. Lopera joined him.He left that experience — long nights in the rainforest, searching for hidden roosts, engrossed in the natural history of rabies and bats — wanting to become a rabies epidemiologist. But that was not to be. His interests were eclectic and quick to change, and a few years later he became a neurology resident in Medellín.In 1984, Dr. Lopera examined a farmer in his 40s who appeared to have dementia. Dr. Lopera took again the unusual step of traveling to the family home, in a mountain hamlet like the one where he had been born. Not just the farmer had symptoms of dementia, he saw — a brother also appeared to be affected. Dr. Lopera had discovered what would turn out to be the world’s largest family with early-onset Alzheimer’s disease. The family shared a genetic mutation, later nicknamed the paisa mutation, that was unique to their region of Colombia. Dr. Lopera spent the next four decades studying the family’s 6,000 members.Dr. Francisco Lopera, second from right, in Yarumal, Colombia, in 2010, with Oderis Villegas, center, who was showing signs of Alzheimer’s disease at age 50. A sister, María Elsy, left, had a more advanced case.Todd Heisler/The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Elecciones en Venezuela: así es la cobertura tras un proceso controversial

      by

      Anatoly Kurmanaev está en Caracas informando sobre las consecuencias de que el gobierno venezolano declaró que su líder autoritario, Nicolás Maduro había ganado las elecciones presidenciales.[Times Insider explica quiénes somos y qué hacemos y ofrece información entre bastidores sobre cómo se elabora nuestro periodismo]A primera hora del lunes, el gobierno venezolano declaró que su líder autoritario, Nicolás Maduro, quien llegó al poder en 2013, había ganado las elecciones presidenciales. Maduro derrotó aparentemente al candidato de la oposición, Edmundo González, por siete puntos porcentuales, un resultado incongruente con las encuestas públicas y las estimaciones estadísticas basadas en recuentos parciales de votos.Las acusaciones generalizadas de fraude electoral e intimidación no se hicieron esperar. Países de todo el mundo, incluido Estados Unidos, denunciaron los resultados. Y los venezolanos salieron a las calles de Caracas, la capital del país, para protestar.Anatoly Kurmanaev, periodista de The New York Times, está en Caracas informando sobre las consecuencias. Kurmanaev, quien vive actualmente en Berlín, vivió en Venezuela durante ocho años, hasta 2021, y ha cubierto media decena de elecciones locales, regionales y presidenciales. Aunque el gobierno venezolano ha reportado cifras falsas de participación electoral en el pasado, la falta total de transparencia en estas elecciones no se parece a nada que Kurmanaev haya visto antes.“El hecho de que el consejo electoral diera a Maduro una victoria masiva sin dar ningún desglose de los resultados, sin seguir ninguno de los procedimientos normales, fue sorprendente”, dijo Kurmanaev en una entrevista telefónica el lunes.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      ¿Cuáles son los métodos que usan los gobiernos autoritarios para influir en las elecciones?

      by

      Al igual que otros líderes autoritarios de todo el mundo, Maduro ha empleado innumerables tácticas para amañar las elecciones en un intento de obtener legitimidad mientras desvirtúa el proceso democrático.[Estamos en WhatsApp. Empieza a seguirnos ahora]El lunes, el presidente Nicolás Maduro fue declarado ganador en la votación presidencial de Venezuela a pesar de las flagrantes irregularidades electorales, lo que ha sumido al país en protestas generalizadas.La votación se produjo después de que millones de venezolanos apoyaran al candidato de la oposición, Edmundo González, quien sustituyó a la popular líder de la oposición, María Corina Machado, a quien el gobierno de Maduro le prohibió postularse. Maduro fue declarado vencedor por la autoridad electoral del país, que no hizo público el recuento completo de votos, lo que alimentó las sospechas sobre la credibilidad de la victoria de Maduro.Machado calificó los resultados de “imposibles” y muchos señalaron a la interferencia del gobierno en los centros de votación.No es la primera vez que se acusa al gobierno de Maduro de presentar resultados electorales falsos. Al igual que otros líderes autoritarios de todo el mundo, Maduro ha empleado innumerables tácticas para amañar las elecciones en un intento de obtener legitimidad desvirtuando el proceso democrático.A continuación, analizamos cinco maneras diferentes en que los gobiernos autoritarios pueden amañar las elecciones.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Las elecciones en Venezuela le dan un espaldarazo a los autócratas

      by

      Nicolás Maduro, el líder autoritario de Venezuela, parece haber sobrevivido una vez más en unas elecciones que lucen profundamente injustas y plagadas de irregularidades. El resultado, que ya enfrenta resistencia y ha ocasionado disturbios que podrían aumentar en los próximos días, no es solo una decepción para la oposición y los millones de venezolanos que anhelan un cambio democrático. Las elecciones también han sido una prueba crucial de la permanencia del nuevo tipo de autoritarismo que se apodera del continente americano, y han demostrado que esa tendencia no desaparecerá pronto.La democracia está siendo sofocada o seriamente desafiada en todo el hemisferio occidental. En los últimos 20 años, Venezuela, Nicaragua y El Salvador han derivado en dictaduras. Aunque acabó detenido, el entonces presidente de Perú intentó disolver el Congreso a finales de 2022. El año pasado, Guatemala estuvo a punto de seguir esta tendencia cuando el Ministerio Público buscó impedir una transición pacífica del poder. Y queda por ver si la recién elegida próxima presidenta de México, Claudia Sheinbaum, continuará la erosión de los controles y equilibrios democráticos que inició su predecesor.El panorama no es tan desalentador. En otros lugares —Brasil, Chile, Colombia y Estados Unidos— la democracia está triunfando. Pero se está poniendo a prueba a medida que crece la oposición al pluralismo y la inclusión y se extiende el malestar social y la insatisfacción con el gobierno en un contexto de clara desigualdad e inestabilidad institucional.Las elecciones de Venezuela son un momento decisivo para América. A pesar de la alta participación, se registraron numerosos reportes de irregularidades en los comicios, intimidación de votantes y problemas en los centros de votación. Sin embargo, con el 80 por ciento de los votos escrutados, el Consejo Nacional Electoral declaró ganador a Maduro con el 51,2 por ciento de los votos, frente al 44,2 por ciento de su principal contrincante. Debido a que los funcionarios de muchos centros de votación se negaron a entregar copias físicas de los recuentos de votos, la oposición no tenía modo concreto de señalar un resultado distinto.Si Maduro logra sortear la agitación poselectoral y mantenerse en el poder otro mandato, dará pie a que otros autócratas en ciernes de la región sepan que también pueden actuar con casi total impunidad. Los procesos electorales cuestionables, los abusos contra los derechos humanos y la corrupción podrían extenderse si no se coordina una respuesta internacional contra ellos, mientras que las voces de los electores de esos países son apagadas por la represión. El retroceso de la democracia es algo que ya ha ocurrido: muchas democracias incipientes de Latinoamérica se perdieron durante la Guerra Fría y regresaron después de que terminara.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 200 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Biden Shut the Border to Asylum Seekers. The Question Is Whether the Order Can Be Enforced.

      by

      There are still ways for people to cross the U.S.-Mexico border illegally, particularly without any new resources to help guard the 2,000-mile frontier.As of 12:01 a.m. on Wednesday, the U.S. border with Mexico was shut down to nearly all migrants seeking asylum in the United States.The drastic action, the result of an executive order signed by President Biden, was designed to keep the border closed at least through Election Day and defuse one of the president’s biggest vulnerabilities in his campaign against former President Donald J. Trump.The question is how broadly it can be enforced, especially along a 2,000-mile border that does not have nearly the capacity to manage the number of people who want to enter the United States.As of Wednesday morning and into Thursday, the order appeared to be working, although it was still too early to make a real assessment. Migrants in the border towns of Mexicali and Ciudad Juárez were being turned away, and the word was spreading.In Mexicali, Guadalupe Olmos, a 33-year-old mother, said that when she heard about the new policy, she wept, and said it was now pointless to try to enter the United States. Last year, she said, gunmen shot up her car, killing her husband. She and her three children survived and have been trying to get out of Mexico.“It is not going to happen anymore,” Ms. Olmos said. “Yesterday, they told us that this is over.”Before the new restrictions went into effect, migrants would seek out border agents and surrender, knowing that anyone who stepped foot on U.S. soil could ask for asylum. Often, they would be released into the United States to wait, sometimes for years, for their cases to come up.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 188 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Mexicans Go to Polls in Historic Election, as 2 Women Vie to Lead the Country

      by

      The voting is very likely to put a woman in the country’s presidency for the first time ever, showcasing the immense strides that females have made in Mexico’s political scene.Mexicans will vote on Sunday in an election that is groundbreaking on several fronts: it’s set to be the largest race in the country’s history, it’s already among the most violent in recent memory, and it will likely put a woman in the presidency for the first time ever.The two main contenders, who have largely split the electorate between them according to polls, are women. The front-runner is Claudia Sheinbaum, a climate scientist representing the ruling party and its party allies. Her closest competitor is Xóchitl Gálvez, a businesswoman on a ticket that includes a collection of opposition parties.Ms. Sheinbaum has had a double-digit lead in the polls for months, but the opposition has argued those numbers underestimate the true support for their candidate. In an interview, Ms. Gálvez said “there is an anti-system vote,” and if Mexicans turned out in force on Sunday, “we will win.”“She’s in the mind-set where she’s ahead by 30 points,” said Ms. Gálvez, of her rival. “But she’s going to have the surprise of her life.”Xóchitl Gálvez, a businesswoman and former senator, heads a ticket that includes opposition parties from the right, center and left.Lorenzo Hernández/EPA, via ShutterstockThe contest showcases the immense strides in Mexico’s politics made in recent years by women, who weren’t even allowed to vote in the country until 1953. Both the top candidates come with considerable experience; Ms. Gálvez was a senator and Ms. Sheinbaum governed the capital, one of the largest cities in the hemisphere.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More