• More Money, More Problems: Los Angeles at the Nexus of Urban and Imperial Growth
• Erika Pérez (bio)

In this compelling study of capitalism, empire, and urban development, Jessica Kim analyzes Angeleno male capitalists, their partnerships with Mexican aristocrats and politicians, and how these capitalists’ extractive impulses generated great wealth for an influential cohort of men who then reinvested in Los Angeles’s development, transforming a small city into a metropolis. Kim’s study reveals the ebb and flow of power, wealth, and cultural values between the urban core of Los Angeles and its Mexican periphery, resulting in unintended consequences particularly during the Mexican Revolution, when flows of power occasionally reversed, signifying a watershed point in borderlands relations.

Kim’s two-fold argument plays out across an introduction, six chapters, and an epilogue: the first is that “doctrines of urban growth and the geography of Los Angeles as core with Mexico as hinterland were racialized,” and second, that any study of borderlands investment must “connect urban speculation schemes to the undoing of capitalist agency” (pp. 13, 14). Defining empire as “an economic endeavor that takes land and property and assembles them into a larger system of extraction and profit,” Kim notes that Los Angeles’s regional boosters and architects of a “city-empire” were mainly transplants from the East, Midwest, and Europe and well-known to one another, some arriving with modest wealth (p. 10). This cadre of capitalists and middle-class boosters paid close attention to one another’s experiences and tactics of extending a “new form of empire,” relying on “the ostensibly benign practices of free trade, economic integration, and the expansion of markets, precisely the tools and goals of Los Angeles investors in Mexico” (p. 11). As Angeleno elites expanded regional economies in the West and the metropolitan economy specifically, they then implemented these tools and lessons at the global level, [End Page 57] thus letting Kim offer a multiscalar view of borderlands history. Viewed by themselves as “contributing to global American commercial interests,” these elite capitalists expected Washington, D.C. politicians and bureaucrats to support their endeavors through public policy, but they faced disappointment upon realizing that they were themselves embedded in another type of core-periphery relationship, one far less advantageous to them (p. 11).

Chapter One explores Los Angeles’s urban growth and how it was shaped by its relationship to Mexico as its hinterland from the 1860s to the 1890s. Taking lessons learned in managing labor regimes and in forging alliances with local Mexican American elites, boosters and investors shifted their attention to replicating these practices in Mexico through commercial empire but without the burden of formally annexing additional territories. Instead, investors like William Rosecrans masked neocolonial designs “in the language of hemispheric fraternity as well as Manifest Destiny and the Monroe Doctrine” (p. 35).

Chapter Two analyzes nuanced racial distinctions made by Angeleno investors and boosters in their dealings with Mexicans and Mexican Americans of the middle and elite classes from their regulation of mestizo and indigenous laborers whom they racialized as socially inferior but ideal for manual labor. Angeleno discourses of race at the turn of the twentieth century were influenced by lessons learned from American imperialism in the Philippines and elsewhere and reflected a “wider debate over race and empire with specific regional dialects and dimensions” (p. 51). The chapter introduces readers to the exploits of a number of key Angeleno capitalists, for example, Harry Chandler and Harrison Gray Otis, whose Colorado River Land Company pursued agricultural development through irrigation; oil and real estate speculator Thomas Bard, who established the Quimichis Colony, a commercialized agriculture enterprise supported by middle-class and wealthier stockholders from the Los Angeles area; and Edward L. Doheny and his Mexican Petroleum Company. Although Kim emphasizes in later chapters the Mexican Revolution as a watershed event for Angeleno investors, earlier examples of ordinary Mexicans’ resistance to Angeleno control through work stoppages or labor strikes in the oil fields show...

• 更多的钱，更多的问题：洛杉矶处于城市与帝国增长的交汇处
• 埃里卡·佩雷斯（ErikaPérez）（生物）

在这项关于资本主义，帝国和城市发展的引人入胜的研究中，杰西卡·金（Jessica Kim）分析了安杰利诺男性资本家，他们与墨西哥贵族和政治家的伙伴关系，以及这些资本家的提倡冲动如何为一群有影响力的人创造了巨大的财富，这些人随后又在洛杉矶的发展，将一个小城市变成一个大都市。金的研究揭示了洛杉矶市中心与墨西哥外围地区之间权力，财富和文化价值的起伏波动，导致意想不到的后果，特别是在墨西哥大革命期间，权力流动偶尔逆转，这标志着边境地区的分水岭关系。

金的两方面论点贯穿于引言，六章和结语中：第一是“城市增长理论和以墨西哥为腹地的洛杉矶地理地理种族化”，第二，对边境地区投资必须“将城市投机计划与资本主义机构的消灭联系起来”（第13、14页）。Kim指出，帝国是“一项经济活动，需要土地和财产，并将其整合为更大的开采和利润系统，”金指出，洛杉矶的“城市帝国”区域支持者和建筑师主要是从东部，中西部，欧洲和彼此知名的国家，其中一些人的财富不高（第10页）。一群资本家和中产阶级的拥护者密切关注着彼此的经验和策略，这些经验和策略依靠“表面上自由贸易，经济一体化和市场扩张的良性做法，确切地说是洛杉矶投资者在墨西哥的投资工具和目标”（第11页）。当安杰利诺（Angeleno）精英们扩展了西部地区经济，特别是大都市经济时，他们随后在全球范围内实施了这些工具和课程，[完第57页]因此，让金（Kim）提供了无边界历史的多尺度视图。这些精英资本家将自己视为“为美国全球商业利益做出的贡献”，期望华盛顿特区的政治人物和官僚通过公共政策支持自己的努力，但是他们意识到自己已融入另一种核心－外围关系中而感到失望。 ，这对他们不利的一环（第11页）。

第一章探讨了洛杉矶的城市发展以及1860年代至1890年代与墨西哥作为腹地的关系对洛杉矶的影响。吸取了在管理劳动制度以及与当地墨西哥裔美国精英结成联盟中吸取的教训后，推动者和投资者将注意力转移到通过商业帝国在墨西哥复制这些做法，而又没有正式吞并其他领土的负担。取而代之的是，像威廉·罗斯克拉恩斯（William Rosecrans）这样的投资者“用半球形的兄弟情结，清单的命运和门罗主义”的语言掩盖了新殖民主义的设计（第35页）。

第二章从对混血儿和土著工人的管制中分析了安杰利诺投资人和助推器在与墨西哥人和墨西哥裔美国人的中产阶级和精英阶层打交道时所产生的细微种族差异，他们对这些人的社会地位低下但对体力劳动却很理想。20世纪初的安杰利诺种族论述受到菲律宾和其他地区美帝国主义汲取的教训的影响，反映了“关于种族和帝国带有特定地区方言和规模的更广泛的辩论”（第51页）。本章向读者介绍了许多重要的安杰利诺资本家的发展成果，例如哈里·钱德勒（Harry Chandler）和哈里森·格雷·奥蒂斯（Harrison Gray Otis），他们的科罗拉多河土地公司通过灌溉追求农业发展。石油和房地产投机商Thomas Bard，建立了Quimichis殖民地，这是一家商业化的农业企业，得到了来自洛杉矶地区的中产阶级和较富裕的股东的支持；爱德华·多尼（Edward L. Doheny）和他的墨西哥石油公司。尽管金在稍后的章节中强调了墨西哥革命是安杰利诺投资者的分水岭事件，但早期普通墨西哥人通过停工或油田罢工抵制安杰利诺控制的例子表明...