Hayden White suggests in The Content of the Form that historiography depends upon the existence of a social center that allows the historian to locate events in relation to one another and “to charge them with ethical or moral significance” (White 1987, 11). This center makes it possible for the historical narrative—as opposed to the annals and the chronicle—to achieve closure. White specifies, however, that “in order to qualify as historical, an event must be susceptible to at least two narrations of its occurrence” (White 1987, 20). According to this perspective, the historical narrative is informed by the historian's need to assert his or her authority over other competing accounts of the past. In questioning the privileged position traditionally held by historians and suggesting that historians' discourse is only one of many paths leading to a truthful (re)presentation of the past, White's version of historiography holds particular appeal for those of us who, despite having been trained in fields other than history, consider ourselves to be authoritative interpreters of Brazil.

The development of the Mexican sugar industry during the twentieth century has reflected both the general problems of industrialization in the hemisphere and the distinct historical conditions that were shaped by the Revolution of 1910. The broader problems can be assessed in terms of the implications of peripheral capitalist development for the internal dynamics of social class relations and for the corresponding political factors that set the boundaries for government policy options.