More handpicked essays just for you.
A Novel of the Mexican Revolution by Mariano Azuela essay
Conclusion on the Mexican revolution
Mexican revolution essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The significance of the Mexican revolution lies not in the repercussions this insurrection exerted on the international level, but rather in the way it served as a precursor to the direction the 20th century would follow. For while Mexico had gained significance internationally by being a leading exporter of raw material under Porfioro Diaz, it was not the only Latin American, or Luso-American country to follow this route. One must also bear in mind that the materials being exported out of Mexico were not exclusive to the region. Even within it’s geographic hemisphere, the Mexican revolution did not lead to the massive changes that the American Revolution had caused. Yet that is not to say that the Mexican revolution is not a significant event, for it established the rebellious pattern the 20th century would take. Disparities in classification of the revolution arise from the numerous factions and ideological assumptions advocated for the overthrow of Diaz’s rule, hence one can argue that it was a political, social, or economical revolution. Carlos Fuentes argued in his book, The Death of Artemio Cruz, that the form Mexico’s revolution can best be described as social.
A social revolution advocates a complete transformation of all characteristic aspects of society, encompassing the political structure, economically distribution, and social hierarchy. Disparities over the definition of this revolution results from the interdependent relationship social status has with the economic and political realm. For a higher social status correlates with a higher economic foundation, and political power, creating a model of tri-dependency in which each of the three is reliant upon the other. Hence in evaluation of the social revolution one must examine the changes exerted in all three of these categories, where with a political and economic revolution the realm of implacability falls exclusively within their own grouping.
The social structure during the waning era of Porfirio Diaz’s reign can best be described as a highly rigid hierarchical establishment, with the elite being reluctant to cede power in any sense to the growing middle class, which consequentially lead to a complete alienation of the lower classes and a growing anti-Diaz sentiment. For the reasoning behind this reluctance to embrace the new intelligentsia and middle class on...
... middle of paper ...
...ocial elitism, the one cannot be achieved without the other.
In conclusion, Carlos Fuentes describes the Mexican revolution as being social, and looking over the aspects one must agree. The intentions of the revolution were to complexly change the structure of Mexico, and whether or not the revolution succeeded in this aspirated goal is irrelevant. The other point that needs to be address is the failure of the author to examine the political aspect, the overthrowing of the old regime, and whether this holds any bearing on the classification of the revolution. To that one must remember that while it is true that not all aspects of the social revolution was discussed in the book, the political aspect is complimentary to the social revolution, not necessary. The social revolution is a broad extension of rebellious tendencies, enveloping numerous aspects. The act of doing this is unique attribute, and all one needs to do to prove that a revolution is indeed social is show that more than one feature of the society was changed willfully, in which the author did. For the political revolution calls for a change in the political realm, and the same holds true to it’s economic counterpart.
Madero called for retirement of Diaz in carefully chosen words, “General Diaz knows perfectly well that his retirement from the presidency would be a benefit to the country…that leaving it free to form a new government in accordance with its aspiration and its needs” (21).
Starting with the first chapter, Deverell examines the racial and ethnic violence that took place in the wake of American defeat. In no more than thirty years or so, ethnic relations had appeased and the Mexican people were outnumbered quickly (as well as economically marginalized and politically disenfranchised), as the second chapter discloses. The author examines a variety of topics to further his case but the most compelling and captivating sections of the book come into the third, fourth and fifth chapters. The third chapter focuses its attention
Models for post-revolutionary Latin American government are born of the complex economic and social realities of 17th and 18th century Europe. From the momentum of the Enlightenment came major political rebellions of the elite class against entrenched national monarchies and systems of power. Within this time period of elitist revolt and intensive political restructuring, the fundamental basis for both liberal and conservative ideology was driven deep into Latin American soil. However, as neither ideology sought to fulfill or even recognize the needs or rights of mestizo people under government rule, the initial liberal doctrine pervading Latin American nations perpetuated racism and economic exploitation, and paved the way for all-consuming, cultural wars in the centuries to come.
Teja, Jesus F. De La. A Revolution Remembered: The Memoirs and Selected Correspondence of Juan N. Seguin. Austin: State House Press, 1991.
This book by Otis A. Singletary deals with different aspects of the Mexican war. It is a compelling description and concise history of the first successful offensive war in United States military history. The work examines two countries that were unprepared for war. The political intrigues and quarrels in appointing the military commanders, as well as the military operations of the war, are presented and analyzed in detail. The author also analyzes the role that the Mexican War played in bringing on the U.S. Civil War.
The author of Mexican Lives, Judith Adler Hellman, grapples with the United States’ economic relationship with their neighbors to the south, Mexico. It also considers, through many interviews, the affairs of one nation. It is a work held to high esteem by many critics, who view this work as an essential part in truly understanding and capturing Mexico’s history. In Mexican Lives, Hellman presents us with a cast from all walks of life. This enables a reader to get more than one perspective, which tends to be bias. It also gives a more inclusive view of the nation of Mexico as a whole. Dealing with rebel activity, free trade, assassinations and their transition into the modern age, it justly captures a Mexico in its true light.
8. Meyer, Michael C., et al. The Course of Mexican History, 7th ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003.
...a significant event for the men and women of Mexico, comprising a large portion of their lives. Many joined the fight in search for a better life, others wanted revenge, and some were running from the law. Together they formed disorganized and unfocused militias where many lost their lives. During the revolution hundreds were forced to leave their homes and belongings in search for a safer place. Families were torn and separated for years at a time, and women were left to support their houses and children. Eventually, the rebels begun to act like the Federalists, by looting, drinking, and at times killing their own men over money related brawls. The men became accustomed to the violent lifestyle, and although they did not know why, they continued to fight without an end in sight.
Rosales, F. Arturo. Lecture 2/14 Film The US-Mexican War Prelude. Weber, David J. - "The 'Path of the World'" Foreigners in Their Native Land: The Historical Roots of Mexican Americans.
This documentary called “The Storm that Swept Mexico”, talks about one of the most important events in Mexican history which was the Mexican revolution which started on 1910 and lasted for about 10 years. At first this video starts talking about how Mexico lost a major part of their land in Mexican American war. The states that Mexico lost were Arizona, Texas, New Mexico, and California in 1848, by president Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna. Moreover, another war mentioned was the one Mexico had against France called “Battle of Puebla”. After this atrocious war Mexico had 20 years of peace until the Mexican revolution in 1910 took place. This very interesting video dragged my attention due to the fact that it explains precisely every important figure that was involved in such a big movement. Furthermore, in this fascinating video I learned a lot of interesting facts about Porfirio Diaz. For example, he is the president that lasted 30 years in power, and was the president number thirty to rule Mexico. Another interesting fact about this iconic figure is that his period as Mexican president was called the “Porfiriato”
Beginning in 1845 and ending in 1850 a series of events took place that would come to be known as the Mexican war and the Texas Revolution. This paper will give an overview on not only the events that occurred (battles, treaties, negotiations, ect.) But also the politics and reasoning behind it all. This was a war that involved America and Mexico fighting over Texas. That was the base for the entire ordeal. This series of events contained some of the most dramatic war strategy that has ever been implemented.
The Russian and Mexican revolution’s differed in the ideas they adopted but they were similar in the way they met their goals and started their uprisings. The Russian revolution was made with the goal to create an egalitarian government that was based off of Karl Marx’s socialism principles. In short, t...
The Mexican-American war determined the destiny of the United States of America, it determined whether or not it would become a world power and it established the size of the United States of America. Perhaps the war was inevitable due to the idea of Manifest Destiny - Americans thought they had the divine right to extend their territory. The Mexican-American War started mainly because of the annexation of the Republic of Texas (established in 1836 after breaking away from Mexico). The United States and Mexico still had conflicts on what the borders of Texas was, the United States claimed that the Texas border with Mexico was the Rio Grande, but the Mexicans said that it was the Nueces River, so the land in between were disputed and claimed by both the United States and Mexico.
The history of political instability in Mexico and its need for revolution is very complex and dates back to the colonization of Mexico by the Spaniards in the 1500s. However, many aspects of the social situation of Mexico when the Revolution broke out can be attributed to the thirty-year dictatorship of President Porfrio Diaz, prior to 1911. The Revolution began in November of 1910 in an effort to overthrow the Diaz dictatorship. Under the Diaz presidency, a small minority of people, primarily relatives and friends, were in ...
Life in Mexico was, before the Revolution, defined by the figure of the patron that held all of power in a certain area. Juan Preciado, who was born in an urban city outside of Comala, “came to Comala because [he] had been told that [his] father, a man named Pedro Paramo lived there” (1). He initially was unaware of the general dislike that his father was subjected to in that area of Mexico. Pedro was regarded as “[l]iving bile” (1) by the people that still inhabited Comala, a classification that Juan did not expect. This reveals that it was not known by those outside of the patron’s dominion of the cruel abuse that they levied upon their people. Pedro Paramo held...