Insights into the Mexican Revolution

Madero vs. the Lower Class

The Revolution envisioned by Francisco I. Madero and his middle class supporters is very different than that of the one envisioned by the lower class citizens of Mexico. Revolution and change was very important to both sides, but for very different reasons. Madero and his supporters wanted political, social, and economic reform that would both shake up the Diaz administration and provide some balance in the country. He wanted to end the dictatorship that had ruled for so long and in turn create a democratic government in its place. The lower class, however, wanted labor and land reforms in order to simply meet their day to day needs.

Madero and his followers aimed to push things like the no-reelection policy and decentralization. Madero’s goal was not to completely transform the policies that were in place from the Diaz regime, but to tweak certain things to allow for more stability and balance in Mexico. Land disputes and reform regarding the distribution of land was low on their list of priorities, which upset the lower class citizens whose livelihoods depended on it. Even after a visit to Morelos to see for himself what struggle the land issues had caused for people, which happened at the urging of Emiliano Zapata, Madero held to his belief that land issues should be settled in court rather than through government rule.

For the lower class citizens, labor reform and land reform were crucial to their survival. Under the Diaz regime, Mexican citizens were treated far inferior to foreign workers. This was blatantly apparent in the mining industry, among other things. Mexican workers not only held the most difficult and dangerous jobs, but were paid just a fraction of what foreign employees made. The local workers wanted better conditions and better pay, and less emphasis on obtaining and over paying foreign workers. Another thing they wanted (or needed) during the Revolution was land reform. Many had lost land to commercialization efforts. Their downward spiral into extreme poverty was directly caused by Diaz’s policies and political agendas, which created a desire for the Revolution.

After Madero became president, these differing goals became a growing issue for him. The Zapatistas, with their new battle cry “land and liberty”, sought to establish some type of economic equilibrium in the country that would allow people in small towns and villages to actually survive. Upset over his political appointees and his failure to implement reforms led to decreased popularity and caused Pasqual Orozco, a former supporter, to rebel against him. With the help of General Huerta, Madero was able to defeat Orozco and hold on to his reign for the time being.

Does the Mexican Revolution still “have legs” today? While researching for this particular question, the two articles that I chose to consider are “Continuity and Change in Mexican Politics: The Legacies of the Mexican Revolution” and “Introduction: The Forty-Three”, which comes from the book A Narco History: How the United States and Mexico Jointly Created the “Mexican Drug War.” After learning about the Revolution in detail through our class textbooks (The Mexican Revolution 1910-1940, Radio in Revolution: Wireless Technology and State Power in Mexico, and The Posthumous Career of Emiliano Zapata: Myth, Memory, and Mexico’s Twentieth Century), these two texts provided, in my opinion, a strong sense that the Revolution does indeed continue to still have significance in a variety of ways today.

In the “Continuity and Change” article (Morris, 2010), it is pointed out that many of the original points from the Constitution of 1917 remain in effect to this day. Some things have been changed as presidents come and go, but things like “a presidential form of government, separation and division of powers, federalism, pluralism, and basic civil liberties, as well as its more unique features like no reelection, secularism and anti-clericalism, recognition of workers and indigenous rights, ownership of sub-soil rights, and a strong role of the state in the economy” (Morris, 2010) are still in effect. These things that were established during the Revolution were key pieces that have stood the test of time and still affect how the government operates. The PRI still has a decent presence in the country as well, which means that there are still people pushing for the ideals of the Revolution. Though they are not in power, much of the corruption and discontent that stemmed from the PRI remains. The “rule of law”, if you can even call it that, is weak and people do not trust law enforcement or have faith in the justice system (Morris, 2010).

Another point of significance, though almost in the opposite way – a “what could have been” scenario, if you will – is the increase in drug violence and trafficking. Under the PRI government, the drug trafficking organizations (DTO’s) were a part of one single hierarchy (Morris, 2010). The government profited greatly from their complicity, and they allowed the trafficking organizations to do business and even protected them from consequence. They key component in this PRI/DTO “partnership” was the single hierarchy. There was much less violence because it was a simple system with not a lot of push back – both the government and the DTO’s benefitted from the arrangement. However, as other parties became more prominent and began to take control of certain areas, this led to a breakdown of the corrupted system. Officials could not longer guarantee the protection of the DTO’s. This, in turn, led to “break off’s” from the original hierarchy, and much higher rates of drug related violence. Boullosa & Wallace (2015) argue in their book A Narco History: How the United States and Mexico Jointly Created the “Mexican Drug War” that the people in power in Mexico who profited from the drug activity, in conjunction with the US’s attempts to fight the influx of drugs into the country, “led, eventually, to the ‘Mexican Drug War,’ which would cost tens of thousands of Mexican lives and spur an explosion of corruption and criminality.”

These are just two areas where the Mexican Revolution and the ideals of its time still have major significance today. There are many other areas of significance, but based on my readings this week, these were the major ones that I came across.

Class Blog Post 1

Madero vs. the Lower Class

Class Blog Post 3