A Conflict in Interest
The year 1910 marked the beginning of reform within the Mexican political order. Proposals such as Francisco Madero’s Plan of San Luis Potosi and The Plan de Ayala by Emiliano Zapata denounced the rigid control of dictator Porfirio Diaz, stating that the existing government offered no concessions to the Mexican people. In an effort to overthrow Diaz, Madero’s plan for revolution declared the current government nonexistent beginning at six o’clock on the evening of November 20, 1910. Emiliano Zapata, however, developed a plan resulting from his own lost faith in Madero’s goals and unfulfilled promises. On November 25, 1910, Zapata offered his own proposal to “continue the revolution begun by (Madero)” until
…show more content…
Emiliano Zapata, however, made no effort in his proposal to designate a position of power to himself or anyone else, stating that representatives will designate an interim President once the revolution is achieved. Through these statements, Madero seemed anxious to take control of the government, while Zapata focused on serving the needs and rights of all the Mexican people. In maintaining an illusion of democracy, Madero stated in his Plan that the new government would collect loans (forced and voluntary) to pay the debt caused by the revolution, and that these loans would be carefully documented and repaid. Just as Diaz had done in his dictatorship, Madero took from the poor in order to pay for the actions of an elite group, all while upholding the image that he was carrying out his plan with the Mexican people in mind. His Plan stated, “The most severe penalties will be applied to the soldiers who sack a town or who kill defenseless prisoners.” This statement was one of few that demonstrate concern for the “defenseless” peasants. Madero addressed the taking of the indigenous peoples’ land by declaring that the land shall be returned to its former owners, and if this is not possible, they will receive indemnity from those who stole their
The Mexican Revolution brought multiple parties and movements out of the woodwork. In John Womack’s Zapata and the Mexican Revolution, a story of one state’s drive for agrarian reform and its people’s evolving mission was told, with Emiliano Zapata as a pivotal leader. The dynamics of the revolution, however, reach deeper than Womack’s account portrays. While Womack documents the revolutionary path of the Zapatistas from the southern state of Morelos, the story of Pancho Villa, an arguably parallel character fighting for states in the North against the repressive powers of General Victoriano Huerta, reads more as a subplot. The writings of Samuel Brunk, Ana Maria Alonso, and Mariano Azuela shed light on the less simplistic dynamics of
For example, some of his reforms were the following: 1. That America is free and independent of all nations; 8. The salaries of the representatives will be enough for sustenance; 13. That the general laws apply to everyone, without excepting priviledged bodies, along with other radical reforms (Morelos). Unfortunately, none of them were actually implemented, as Morelos’ guerilla warfare tactic, resulting in many defeats. Finally, his movement ended as he was executed in 1815 by the Spanish Inquisition ("Father Hidalgo Proclaims Grito de Dolores”).
During the “Cry of Dolores” Hidalgo challenged the undermined population to rise up with all of the power that they have to fight against the dominating
After Diaz had won by a landslide, he released Madero from prison. Madero promptly fled to San Antonio, Texas to plan a revolution. There he wrote the Plan of St. Luis Potosi, which said that the election was fraudulent and that he was the provisional president of Mexico. The plan was purely political and Madero planned to have a completely democratic government. The plan said nothing about changing the situation for farmers and peasants. However, rural peasants latched onto the plan, thinking that Madero would also reform the country economically and socially. There were many revolutions carried out under Madero's flag, specifically revolutions carried out by Pancho Villa and Emiliano Zapata.
The Mexican Revolution began November 20, 1910, and ended on May 21, 1920. The revolution was against the regime of Porfirio Diaz who reigned for 35 years, after Mexico gained its independence from Spain. and was not a good president in the sense that he failed to support the middle and lower classes of Mexico. It was run by the middle (some in the middle (A very a little amount) and all in the lower classes, and they were all influenced by Francisco I. Madero. Although the lower classes didn’t originally full on oppose Diaz they felt neglected as a people. Madero saw this and sought out to influence the people of the country to revolt, so that they could then shift their views completely. Madero writes the Plan de San Luis Potosi, which was a political document written by Madero to describe how he was wrongly imprisoned by Diaz in order for him to lose the election. Madero also wrote the document to spread new ideas on what democracy was, and how to eradicate corruption in Mexico’s government. With the publication of this document support for Diaz and his presidency easily disappeared eventually causing him to resign. Madero then ran for president and won the election properly. But he only reigned for two years before being assassinated, by none other than the military governors, military, and lower classes because Madera failed to make any change in the social classes. A key factor that lead to his assignation was that the
With Madero’s efforts he was able to become president but was assassinated by a team put together by Victoriano Huerta. “Two Mexico’s” was addressed when the Revolution was sparked and taken control by Venustiano Carranza part of the constitutionalist army and Emiliano Zapata which whom will be under credited for their efforts in the future. They took Huerta out of power in 1914.
During the Mexican Revolution there were many prominent figures that emerged during the long struggle. Some of the figures had a positive impact on the region, and some others a very negative impact on the people of Mexico and their quest for an uncorrupted government. One figure that stands out in the border region between Mexico and The United States during this time is General Francisco “Pancho” Villa. To understand Pancho Villa’s significant role during this uprising it is important to understand who Villa was prior to the revolution, and what acts lead to his rise to power.
Supreme Executive Power led the Mexican people with the purpose of installing a workable ex-
Acosta: Of course you can ask, but i on the other hand cannot give you an answer. Shit, all I can truly say is that the government is one son of a bitch! They despise rebellion to the extend where they begin to eliminate leaders in order to keep maintenance. Ha! Those bitches still haven’t finished me off.
Cervantes, on the other hand, has a different perception of the revolution - which seems nobler and greater - until we learn about its shortcomings on a practical level. He pointed out that the revolution, which was "bound to win", was meaningless if Mexico is going to fall again "in the cluthces of [its] eternal opressors, excecutioners, and caciques." Cervantes believes that he and Demetrio and his men are "the tools Destiny makes use of to reclaim the sacred rights of the people", and that they should be "fighting against tyranny itself" for principles and ideals. On a rhetorical level this view seems sound and virtuous. However, the foreboding dark consequences remain discernible.
This is largely due to the fact that Diaz gave away the country's wealth to buy the loyalty of some, by gifts of haciendas (large estates), concessions or cash. Under his leadership, the gap between the rich and the poor grew undoubtedly larger due to his disregard of democratic principles and the common folk, and his acute determination to keep his dictatorship by any means possible. One of the most renowned opposition leaders of Diaz at the time was the European-educated Francisco Madero. Madero led a series of strikes in resistance to Diaz across the country and eventually ran against him in the election for presidency in 1911. Although Madero had a significant number of votes, Diaz had him imprisoned because he felt the people of Mexico were not ready for democracy, and feared the loss of his own presidency. Madero was not released until after the election so that votes could be tabulated in favour of Diaz. When released from prison, Madero continued to fight against his former adversary. Madero led the first phase of the armed revolution which resulted in Diaz's defeat and to his own presidency reign until 1913. It was during this time that many of the folk heroes of the Revolution emerged, including Francisco "Pancho" Villa of the North, and Emiliano Zapata of the South. In 1913 Madero was assassinated by A Mexican general by the name of Victoriano Huerta. Victoriano and his federal army was defeated in a coalition of armies led by Alvara Obregon, who took
On January 1, 2004, over one thousand people in the mountain hamlet of Oventic, Chiapas, celebrated the 10th anniversary of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN) rebellion with song and dance. Thus, it seems a fitting time to take stock of the successes and failures of the Zapatista movement in the context of its original goals. While the EZLN has been able to establish thirty eight autonomous indigenous communities in Chiapas, it has failed to weaken the Mexican government's commitment to neo-liberal economic policies. In the following pages, we will explore those factors which enabled the Zapatistas to establish regions of autonomy and extrapolate from Theotonio Dos
An interview given by Diaz in 1908 was read by Francisco I. Madero and he was inspired to gather supporters to defeat Diaz in the 1910 election. In the interview Diaz said that he thought Mexico could handle free elections by 1910 (Summary 4). Madero was a strong believer in democracy and realized that Diaz had a monopoly with the government. Madero thought that Diaz should step down from office (Consul General 1-2). By the time 1910 came around Madero had inspired many citizens and had quite a group of followers. His chances for election were very good and Diaz got scared. Right before the elections in 1910, Diaz falsely accused Madero and had him thrown in jail. Diaz is once again elected as president. Madero was soon released and, learning of Diaz’s reelection, he fled to Texas (Summary 4). While there he stated that the elections were illegitimate and that he was the President Pro-Temp until new elections could be held (Consul General 2). He also wrote a document, which called for a revolt on November 20, 1910 which marks the start of the Mexican Revolution (Summary 5).
Luis Cervantes was a character who portrayed those people who were well educated about the revolution and knew exactly what they were fighting for. Because he was so knowledgeable, he could be looked at as Demetrio's "right hand," as many leaders had trustworthy people they turned to in the wake of the revolution. However, he abandons Demetrio and his men towards the end of the book. This makes the reader wonder if he was tired and gave up on the cause, as many followers of the revolution did, or if he foresaw the defeat of Demetrio and got out while he could. Both of
result, the Spanish lost a great deal of their labor force. The Spanish looked for another way to