When Speaking Of Mexico In Relation To Its Experience With

The Mexican American War began on April 25, 1846. The war lasted two years losing many men on both sides. The Mexican war was the third major fought by the United States. In 1810, Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla triggers the beginning of Mexico’s fight for independence from Spain. Mexico gained its independence in 1821 after a long and bloody revolution against Spain. For Mexico, the war between them and the United States was a fight to keep their institutions and national integrity intact, to protect themselves from present and future aggressions by the Americans, but more than anything else, the war was a struggle for land. In the early days of the republic, most Americans made their living by farming, so in 1803

a city where an eagle with a snake in its beak rested on a cactus. This

II. Thesis Statement: Mexico is an interesting country, with many different and people and customs, as well as major problems.

The Mexican government were seen as not knowing what they were doing, especially after them gaining independence from Spain in 1821 because the Mexican leaders lacked experience in politics, on top of being a nation that had deep-rooted connection to Spain’s ideologies rather than that of their own. While the United States thrived from the time of its colonial origins, for Mexico to modernize after gaining independence meant breaking its structures, destroying old institutions and building new ones whilst juggling an aggressive neighbor who eagerly sought more land. By putting into context the origin of the soon-to-be-at-war states, it is easier to comprehend why holding aggressive nationalistic behavior was the norm with the United States when they decided to take on its southern neighbor as the state’s population started to expand increasingly. The origins of the United States shows the attitude of “us versus them”, where Mexico’s top officials and administration were seen as incompetent and trickled down to its

The perception of history is often crafted by the information given and the information available, however, almost too often the facts accessible are warped by the viewpoints of others before they can be properly assessed. Differing outlooks thus explicate the controversial nature of historical events and why the motives and conclusions behind certain occurrences are called into question. The Mexican American war as many American historians would call it ushers a contrary tone in Mexico as their own historians would claim the “war” as United States invasion; the difference in referral is based on the different perceptions of the conflict. In the American viewpoint, the Mexican American War was driven by economic, social and political pressures to bolster United States territories, through the annexation of Texas. In the converse, it could be argued that Mexico did not declare a formal war against the United States but rather was interested in defending their country’s territorial integrity and resisting United State’s invasion. In a Mexican viewpoint then, the war was not a result of arrogance but a consequence of defending Mexican territory from United States invasion. Nonetheless the aftermath of the war produced immense repercussions, furthering American exceptionalism, slavery, and disregard for international borders prompting the inquiry of not only the unjust methods applied but the unjustified results.

José de la Cruz Porfirio Diaz Mori, the 29th president of Mexico, opened Mexico to foreign investors and companies who exploited Mexico’s resources such as land, copper, gold, silver, water, and cheap labor for corporate gain. This caused economic instability in the way that Mexico placed power in the hands of large corporations and Mexican politicians.

The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which came into effect on 2 February 1848, ended the Mexican-American war and formally resolved territorial disputes resulting from that conflict. The treaty required the U.S. government to pay the Mexican government $15 million dollars, this in return for an expanse of territory that later became the states of Arizona, New Mexico, and parts of Utah, Nevada, and Colorado. I intend to argue that the treaty benefitted the people who inhabited, and later came to inhabit, that territory. I also propose that, as a result of the transfer of territory from a dictatorial regime to one that was based on democratic principles, both Mexico and the United States ultimately benefitted in several ways.

Raat, W. Dirk, and Michael M. Brescia. Mexico and the United States : Ambivalent Vistas (4th Edition). Athens, GA, USA: University of Georgia Press, 2010.

The U.S.-Mexican War was a violent and shattering event for Mexican citizens that lasted from 1846-1848 in what is now the state of Texas. It drastically altered the course of Mexican and American history for years to come. It occurred because of the unsettled disputes about the borders of newly annexed Texas. Once the debilitating battle ended, the United States emerged a world power having acquired more than 500,000 square miles of valuable territory. There are many potentially feasible explanations on the cause of the war; including, fault laying with American slaveholders for conquest of Mexico, the war as an American plot and responsibility lying with President Polk of the United States. However, this paper focuses on the three

Mexico is an extremely important country, as far as immigration is concerned, in the world. It has a large amount of emigrants that leave their country each year. Many of these emigrants go to the United States. This has caused the Mexican immigration issue to become very popular. After research, we have found out a lot about the country of Mexico.

Alongside job losses and the increase of the dependence of Mexico on the United States, Mexico has deeply been affected on a cultural aspect after the NAFTA was put in place. Indeed, Zuloaga explains in her article that “The internal imbalances caused the Mexican people to question their independence and national identity”. (Zuolaga,2001) By these words, the author once again shows that cultural identity is well affected by economic integration measures, and thus, globalization. Further on, she also mentions the asymmetry of power among NAFTA’s member states, which is undeniably palpable looking at the lack of affirmation Mexico is offered to deliver, here in the cultural

Mexico is one of the most populated and industrialized of the third world nations, yet it remains very impoverished in comparison to it’s northern neighbor. Recently Mexico has been the third largest trading partner of the United States, has become an important exporter of petroleum and plays a pivotal role in the politics of the region. Yet Mexico is frequently treated with neglect and misunderstanding by the United States. This treatment is why Mexico is hesitant about United States influence and investment in Mexico. While many foreign countries acknowledge the United States as a

Cities on both sides of the Mexican-American border are continuously terrorized by drug cartels as a way to keep control over shipping routes and silence from citizens. (Wilkinson 2008) In 2010 an employee of the United States Embassy in Mexico was murdered along the Mexico-American border. This added tension to the ongoing drug trafficking problem and raised the issue of Mexico’s inability to control its own borders. Felipe Calderon, the President of Mexico, stated that he is seeking a stronger relationship with the United States. The effects of this relationship can be seen on the streets with the intensified level of violence against the drug cartels and the effectiveness of the government. (Dresser 2009)

The ethnic- Mexican experience has changed over the years as American has progressed through certain period of times, e.g., the modernity and transformation of the southwest in the late 19th and early 20th century, the labor demands and shifting of U.S. immigration policy in the 20th century, and the Chicano Civil Rights Movement. Through these events Mexican Americans have established and shaped their culture, in order, to negotiate these precarious social and historical circumstances. Throughout the ethnic Mexicans cultural history in the United States, conflict and contradiction has played a key role in shaping their modalities of life. Beginning in the late 20th century and early 21st century ethnic Mexicans have come under distress

Presently the United States represents well over 80% of total Mexican trade. Such dependence, especially with the current trend of including increasing amounts of strategic materials, is deeply disturbing to nationalists.3 Also as China makes continuing inroads into that market and the U.S. economy weakens, such concerns mount apace.