# Mexican Revolution



## elmilitaro (Sep 12, 2005)

Guys and gals on the website, I was wondering if any of ya'll knows anything on the Mexican Revolution  . I was wondering this because I have to do a project on this and I'm really stuck in a hole.


----------



## Udet (Sep 13, 2005)

hello.

I´ve been living for nearly 4 years here now; not that I´m fond of politics or of mexican revolution history, but I learned something from some mexican friends regarding this particular issue.

It´d appear the mexican revolution is some sort of sacred item in the political agenda of many politicians here. A dogma. 

The so called revolution did not put an end to poverty, misery and corruption; the wealth of the nation remained more or less in the same hands, just as it was before such mess -and as it is in the present-day Mexico-.

No revolution really took place in Mexico.

I´ve been told that revolution was not a fight of the people of the country seeking justice, tired of the oppression and explotation of a fistful of wealthy families, as it is of course depicted in mexican official history, but rather the fight of small groups who wanted to seize power.

In fact, it´d appear there were only 2 or 3 significant battles between the "rebels" and the federal army during the entire revolution. So there is no significant military value there.

It was a rather a state of complete lawlessness, where gangs and bands of bandits and criminals sacked estates, plundered farms, murdering the rich in the process, virtually across the entire country.

It´s apparently recorded some 500,000 people of european heritage, dropped their european names and named themselves: Martinez, Lopez, Hernandez, etc.

As a friend here told me, the fundamental (a terrible one) legacy of such revolution was the main mexican political party: PRI. The political party who seized absolute control of the country for some 70 years, until the present day president won the 2000 elections.

PRI, a mean machine of (complete) corruption, tight political control and distribution of power -both political and, of course, economical- among its members.

So after all, the substance, the core which allegedly gave life to the so-called Revolution is still present in this country.


----------



## me262 (Sep 13, 2005)

Udet said:


> No revolution really took place in Mexico.



what the heck are you talking about?

so for you the nearly 2 million casualties are non exiisten!!!!
what you are triig to do is like not acceping the holocaust!!!!


----------



## lesofprimus (Sep 13, 2005)

I think he is referring to a more "Traditional" Revolution according to past Revolutions....


----------



## me262 (Sep 13, 2005)

and what do you consider a traditional revolution?


----------



## lesofprimus (Sep 13, 2005)

One that is organized by the people against a common foe, not bands of banditos roving the country killing innocents.....


----------



## me262 (Sep 13, 2005)

as far i know , only of the revolution leades, pancho villa indeed he was a bandit, ( more like a robin hood) but he joint the revolutionaries against the federal goverment, represented by porfirio diaz, and yes it was the common pesant that took the fight against the rich peoples, in the south one leader was emiliano zapata, he said that the land belongs to the one that work it, and his fighting call: tierra y libertad, land and liberty

the mexican revolution started on nov 20 1910, but the initals fightings started around 1907 and lasted until 1917


----------



## plan_D (Sep 14, 2005)

Ask yourself, did the Mexican Revolution have two distinct opponents facing off against one another? Did the Working Class rise against the High Class? 

By the sounds of what Udet is saying the Mexican "Revolution" was merely a state of anarchy more than an organised Coup.


----------



## Pisis (Sep 14, 2005)

i think this might be moved in the politics sec


----------



## Udet (Sep 14, 2005)

Me 262:

When I said "no revolution really took place in Mexico" I was strictly referring to the fact the fundamental conditions of the country were not modified.

Quite the opposite, the country was financially ruined (beyond recognition) when the so called revolution ended and those in misery remained even more miserable afterwards. And in fact, 1 or 2 million people had died.

(i.e. the entire mexican railway system was laid -entirely- during Porfirio Díaz ruling; the stystem was the workhorse for both federal and revolutionary forces and it was so worn out upon termination of the war, not one sole single kilometer of rails has been laid ever since.)

As I said, official history of the country has it the Revolution (with capital "R", a sacred item) exploded when the people got tired of the oppression and arrogance of a millionaire minority who owned the land, water, oil, wealth and why not the lives of peasants.

Such view is pure crap. It was more about a gang of rebels who thought it would be cool to be in power, and to steal and screw the people the same way the pre-revolution wealthy families did, so why not to set the entire country ablaze in order to get to the top.

In seting the place ablaze, a state of absolute, complete and utter lawlessness followed. All kinds of atrocities were commited by all kinds of armed gangs.


The infamous PRI political party, as I´ve read, was not even a politcal party; it was rather the "contract" or "pact" signed by the rebels -winning side- after the Revolution to distribute the power among themselves, where the sets of rules of the game were implemented.

Such rules were mean.

"Ok, here´s the deal, I get this part of the cake, you get that one over there, you the skinny guy who looks like a goblin will get that part over there..."

They agreed the killing should stop, but any guy in the winning side could re-ignite the conflict if he believed the share he was alloted was not enough or simply if his interests were not served. Some more local conflicts rose during the 20´s if i recall correctly.

No long posting please, so I end this one here. 


As I said i am not an expert on the matter; my judgment is based more on the opinions of many mexicans I´ve met here, as well from newspaper editorials and a fistful of books.


----------



## elmilitaro (Oct 3, 2005)

so what about all those people that died?


----------



## me262 (Oct 3, 2005)

udet:

i can understad your p.o.v., but you most considered the oposite.
although not all the objectives where fullfiled, you can see a beter way of life in the people, i mean, during the porfiriato even young childrens where forced to work up to 18 hours a day,you could not vote, among others
now war is war here and in china!!, so expect to be ugly and with it all kind or attrocities.

"Such view is pure crap. It was more about a gang of rebels who thought it would be cool to be in power, and to steal and screw the people the same way the pre-revolution wealthy families did, so why not to set the entire country ablaze in order to get to the top. "
since you are living in mexico here i go:

por lo que se ve tu solo ves lo negastivo de la revolucion , no te has puest a pensar en los cientos de civiles que pelearon para tratar de mejora su forma de vida y de sus decendientes, aparte ese punto de vista que das es el de los ricos que fueron desalojados de sus grandes haciendas, por ejemplo te pongo a la famila terrazas, originarios del estado de chihuaahua:
una vez le preguntaron a uno de ellos si eran de chihuahua y el respondio : no chihuahua es mio!!!!
tu tratas de justificar el que por una parte se cometieran atroizidades y despues negar los beneficios que se lograron con tal pugna, que te pareceria que en tu pais original el 90 % de las propiedades, estuvieran bajo el control de solo el 10% de la poblacion, y el otro 10% para el 90% de la poblacion , eso justifica la situacion? no lo creo
por otra parte la vida del campesino y de su famila en aquel tiempo era dominada por los grances hacendados, has oido del permiso de pernada o de las tiendas de raya? investiga y di si eso es justo para la poblacion de bajos recusos, tal parece que tu tratras con solo los de la alta sociedad, para los cuales la revolucion no sirvio.preguna a los de la baja sociedad y veras otro forma de ver la situacion del mexicano. no niego que el pri se haya comverito en una tipo de dictadura, pues el pri domino el pais por mas de 70 años ( eses seria otro asunto que discutir)

sorry guys, i could not resist to do this in my mother laguage


----------



## elmilitaro (Oct 8, 2005)

hey me262, Yo estoy con tu desision de escribiendo en espanol, yo tampaco no estoy verguenzado de mi patria y sangre mexicana!!!


What part of mexico is your heritage from?? Me personally, my parents are from San Luis Potosi.


----------



## me262 (Oct 8, 2005)

i was born in mexico city,and raised up in cd juarez, chih.
my dad is from mexico city and my mom from torreon coahuila


----------



## Nonskimmer (Oct 8, 2005)

Are you what they call a Tex-Mex?


----------



## syscom3 (Oct 8, 2005)

The "revolution" had an impact in America.

We sent an expeditionary force across the border to hunt down Pancho Villa, in which several officers were involved who would soon lead the US forces in WW1. The commander of the force was "Black Jack" Pershing. There were also several low ranking officers who would be in top positions in WW2

It was also the first time that airplanes were used by the US Army.


----------



## me262 (Oct 9, 2005)

Nonskimmer said:


> Are you what they call a Tex-Mex?


nope, tex mex or texicans are born here from mexicans parents.


----------



## me262 (Oct 9, 2005)

syscom3 said:


> The "revolution" had an impact in America.
> 
> We sent an expeditionary force across the border to hunt down Pancho Villa, in which several officers were involved who would soon lead the US forces in WW1. The commander of the force was "Black Jack" Pershing. There were also several low ranking officers who would be in top positions in WW2
> 
> It was also the first time that airplanes were used by the US Army.



yeap the famous punitive expedition, and if i can remember right, there is a pic of john "black jack" pershing with the then unknown erwin rommel, i do not remember from what book is this pic or where i saw it,  

but back to pershing, he never managed to get close to villa, there is a story in which villa captured one of the planes and flew it to pershing's camp and saluted from the air


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Oct 9, 2005)

Pershing with Rommel? Where was this picture taken?


----------



## me262 (Oct 9, 2005)

i can not remember where or when i saw that pics, but in it they said that it was the then obscured erwin rommel, sorry it was many years ago!!!!


----------



## syscom3 (Oct 9, 2005)

I dont believe that pancho villa was ever in an airplane. Nor do I believe that erwin rommel was in mexico then.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Oct 10, 2005)

I too have not heard of that, if it is true, would be very interesting.


----------

