Cursos

Podcast

Canales Youtube

Visitantes

37,087,317

THE XIX CENTURY.

Hits:968

THE XIX CENTURY.
The alleged independence did not bring substantial changes for indigenous and mestizo mexicans, indeed brought changes for the creoles. During the 19th century, the colonial exploitation system was not cancelled, both indians and mestizo peasants, continued to be subjugated by a fierce colonial exploitation system. Independence was only political from Spain, but not economic nor social. Now France, England and Germany, can penetrate the economic, political, social and culturally the new mexican nation and the creoles, who now head the country europeanization, will have the vocation to modernize and civilize the children of the sons of old grandparents. During the conquest the indians were treated as demonic animals, in the colonial as defeated, in the lights century as primitive and a real burden, for the desired europeanization of Mexico that the creoles aspired.

"When assuming its independence, Mexico was the largest Latin American country, and in 1822 extended further while adding the Central American provinces that measured almost half a million square kilometers. However, the geopolitical woes were egregious: international isolation, border troubles, regions separatism and road deterioration. Since the independence war, shipping traffic was paralyzed to the Far East, South America and Europe. The Oni-Adams Treaty of 1819 did not adequately fix the boundary with United States. The boundaries of the south and, above all, the borderline with the English Colonial of Belize were not accurate. Population did not grow during the wars of independence. Within a territory of 4 665 000 Km2 lived in 1822 seven million inhabitants. The war against Spain had cost six hundred thousand lives, a tenth of the total; this is equivalent to half of the working population. In addition to scarse, the population, as in the colonial days, squeezed together in the center; nobody wanted to go to the vast northern area that without people was dangerous, an invitation to dispossession, an open ark.

THE XIX CENTURY.In the economic order things were worse. Mining production fell in eleven struggle years to 6 million pesos instead of the 30 reached in 1810. The value of agricultural production shrank in half and the industry to one-third. In 1822 the treasury income was nine and half million pesos, and expenses thirteen and a half million. And as if running an annual deficit of four million wasn't enough, the nascent country inherited a public debt of 76 million. The decline in government revenue was not purely transient; was largely due to the abolition of an unfair tax: the tax per capita of indians. [5 million Indians and 1 million spaniards, creoles, mestizos and blacks. A.N.] Neither the rise in public spending could be transitory: had to sustain a large and strong army to preserve the independence. The economy was doomed to a chronic state of bankruptcy and to fall into the clutches of the sharks, as it happened.

In the social order there was a lot to do. The statement of the legal equality of all Mexicans left the Indians, used to a regime of tutelage, helpless before the creoles. Equal rights increased the inequality of fortunes. The 3,749 large states grew at the expense of the lands of indigenous communities. It was also expected, with only the egalitarian legislation, a worsening of working conditions for peons and artisans. On another topic, the civil discord favors the mix of races and the consolidation of a middle class. From 1821 it will be middle class who dispute power from the landowner aristocracy.

The day after the successful independence the political difficulties surfaced: creole inexperience in public administration; inclination of the minor warlords to become kinglets of the areas where they had fought; desires of larger warlords of being Kings or presidents of the new country; partisans wars (complete lack of understanding between monarchists and republicans, military and civilians, clerics and bureaucrats); disinterest of the great mass of the population; acute political vehemence of the minority and especially of the middle class." (Luis González. 1973)

During the period called ?independent Mexico?, all creoles were in agreement in that the civilization model had to be similar to the more advanced countries such as what Europe had under way and as that of the neighbors to the North had formed. After Iturbide, José Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna[1] (1794-1876) hovers in power for a long time in successive Governments and fratricidal struggles, seeking to create a "modern nation". In fact, Europe at that time the old empires and kingdoms were being transformed, and growing into modern nation States. This concept of human organization is relatively very new[2] in the history of humanity, and has much to do with the industrial revolution, macro trade, technology, military power and communications. The money owners were those who pushed, first in Europe and then around the world, the overthrow all the old forms of Government, and in their place, set up the "countries and democracies". A new way to govern the world, where those with economic power, can govern in the name of the society through politicians and parties, without public exposure.

However, the creoles were divided into two sides through almost all the 19th century; if one side were scottish freemasons, the others were york masons; if one were federalist, the other centralists; if one wanted to modernize the country with a european leader, others wanted to do it with a national, if one tried to copy Europe, the other the United States. In the midst of these internal creole struggles, the nation was invaded by the Americans and the French, losing more than half of the territory that had been inherited from the spanish colonial. And it was only in the middle of the 19th century that the civilizing european project, now french, could be consolidated by an Indian and a mestizo: Benito Juarez Garcia (1806-1872) and Porfirio Díaz Mori (1830-1915), both from Oaxaca. "Mexico enters independent life with a population of little more than six million, of which 60% were classified as Indians and only one million were creoles and peninsular spaniards.

It was the creole elite that took the reins of government in their hands and tried to define a country project.

For the creoles, the nation was initially constituted exclusively by themselves, the sixth of the total population. The vast majority were not a part of the nation: they were simply a problem, their biggest problem." (Guillermo Bonfil Batalla. 1987)

In the 19th century, the colonial exploitation structures were not dismantled, only adapted to new circumstances and in this structure, the anahuaca civilization did not have a space. The Ideas of ?equality, fraternity and freedom?, were only creole heritage and they never thought about extending it to mestizos, indians and blacks, and much less allow them to propose changes. Indians and peasants, were once again sacrificed in order to modernize the colonial structure. The interests of England, France and Germany, encouraged the creoles initiatives.

"In 30 years of independent life, Mexico did not have peace, economic development, social harmony or political stability.

Between 1821 and 1850 concern reigned in all orders. In thirty years there were fifty governments, almost all produced by military coups; eleven of them were presided by general Santa Anna. The life of the country was at the mercy of divided masonic Lodges, ambitious military, intrepid bandits and ?thunder? indians. The generals produced bulk little wars to overthrow presidents and governors... The standard was poverty and isolation of all sectors of human activity; however contacts abroad were higher than during the colony. For Mexico, under a ?Rio Revuelto?, tailors, merchants, shoemakers and apothecaries from France, German merchants, English businessmen, etc., came to fish." (Luis Gonzalez). (1973).

The 19th century Mexico, had been conceived by a handful of nationalist creole inspired by foreign models, either the americans or the european. But the ancient civilization and its people would continue to be denied and exploited, without the right to decide. Laws, institutions and authorities, would now be designed so that the creoles and their greedy european partners could exploit natural resources, especially mining and oil, and the indigenous and mestizo masses that still could not find accommodation in the new society and had no real rights. The colonial system that was built over three centuries ceased functioning. 80% of "Mexicans" at the beginning of the 19th century had indigenous origin; but the laws, institutions, authorities and its civilization, not even remotely had the right to design the new nation that creoles wanted to create.

Meanwhile the creoles?conservative?masons scottish pretended to form a european monarchy to leave chaos, ?"Without remedy we are lost if Europe does not come soon in our aid"? wrote Lucas Alamán. The creole?liberal?york?masons, denied any european or indigenous heritage, and pretended to create an identical model of the northern neighbor, to design the future of this patria being formed.

The two creoles sides only agreed in one thing, the millenary civilization had no place in the new project, the creoles only disagreed in whether the model should be european or that of the United States.

Towards the mid-19th century, during the creoles struggles and their inability to govern, european powers headed by France, England and Spain decided in the London Convention to intervene in Mexico, not just to ensure payment of debt owed to them, for obligations acquired by the new and poorly administered nation; but to build a european retaining wall against the expansive and voracious United States, who at that time began building their power; and at that time could not help their "creole liberal" allies because they were in the "succession civil war". The interventionist troops landed at Veracruz and the liberal government negotiated with England and Spain through the Treaty of La Soledad, for the withdrawal of their troops. The Napoleon III France initiated the invasion with support and sympathy of the conservative creoles. The Maximilian Empire lasted less than three years, in part because the United States at the end of the Civil War, demanded the departure of the french army, partly because Napoleon III needed troops to defend himself against dangerous Prussian neighbors, given that the Franco-Prussian war in Europe already was in the horizon, and in part due to the permanent fight from the liberal creoles through generals Mariano Escobedo, Ramón Corona and Porfirio Díaz.

"Mexico modern history begins with a fall and ends with another. It begins in July 1867, at the collapse of the Maximilian Empire, and concludes in May 1911, when the government of Porfirio Díaz collapses. This history spans forty-four years, which, however, is usually divided in two epochs. The initial of barely ten years (1867-1876), is called the Restored Republic. The second, thirty-four years (1877-1911), was named the porfiriato." (Daniel Cosío Villegas. 1973)

Finally the liberal creoles succeeded. They will paradoxically be two Oaxacan, one of deep indigenous lineage; Benito Juárez García and the other, Porfirio Díaz Mori, mestizo, but with an undeniable indigenous heritage, they would fulfill the creole dream that initiated in 1824. The dream of creating a modern nation like those of Europe.

The model was french, financing and technology from France, England and Germany. Mexico turned to "modernization", which was nothing else than a new europeanization. Those who paid the cost were mainly indigenous people, with their natural resources and mestizo peasants, with their cheap labor.

"The formula of "little politics, a lot of administration" successfully worked during long years because the country was eager for peace and wanted to improve their economic status, and because Porfirio showed that he could maintain peace and knew how to boost the national economy. In the end, however, it became increasingly more ungrateful, until provoking the Madero revolt.

There has never been in the world an egalitarian society in which wealth is shared in exactly equal proportion between each and every one of the members of that society. But in Mexico the unequal distribution of the new wealth seemed much more marked, and that is why no other explanation is found for the insatiable appetite of the rich, to become richer every day at the expense, of course, of some poor people who should be treated as brothers." (Daniel Cosío Villegas. 1973)


1.? For the first time he is declared President of the Republic in March 1833, but he argues that he is ill and leaves power in the hands of Valentín Gómez Farías, Vice-President. From 1833 to 1855, Antonio López de Santa Anna constantly participated in politics. He took part in many military coups, infighting and economic setbacks that lived Mexico. Both liberals and conservatives, often sought him to take over the Presidency of the country. During these years, Mexico lost much of its territory and suffered from the American and French intervention. The last occasion in which this happened was in 1853.
2.? The first society in establishing itself as a country was United States in North America in 1776.

Buscar