In October 1910, Madero would issue
is Plan of San Luis Potosi from American soil in Texas. His plan declared the
Mexican people had been offered peace, but a shameful one to him that was based
on force and not law. He believed the goal of Mexico’s leaders was for the
enrichment of a small group of the population and not the betterment nor
prosperity of the homeland. Madero’s Plan called for a revolt against the Diaz
regime on November 20, 1910 (pg. 296, Russell). He wanted free elections, and a
legal review of the previous land thefts.
Once Madero returned to Mexico in 1911, he acted as the
leader of the revolution. Unlike Madero had originally thought the rural
countryside peoples were the ones who embraced him and the revolution. Madero wouldn’t
be the only leader to rise up for the occasion Villa, Zapata, and Carranza
would also lead some of the revolts. Villa and Orozco would capture Ciudad
Juarez, which secured a railroad lines to the United States and military
supplies.
Madero then fought forces in the north which occupied much
of Diaz’s troops, and consequently opened the door for the peasant rebellion in
the state of Morelos lead by Zapata. Morelos was made up of sugar planters, who
oppressed the local peasants by taking away their water and land supply. Zapata
lead the forces that took back and redistributed the land they thought was
rightfully theirs.
Once Diaz’s forces were defeated at Ciudad Juarez the end of
his regime was closing to an end. Diaz’s army lacked power and Diaz would have
to agree to the Treaty of Ciudad Juarez that called for his resignation and for
him to go into exile. He would be quoted to say, “Madero has unleashed a tiger,
let’s see if he can control it.” (pg. 299, Russell) Madero would preach that
land reform would happen to the Zapatistas to persuade them to put their arms
down. What he actually did was different, he basically kept same regime as Diaz
and moved his people to the top. He also didn’t reward those that fought for
him and left hacienda owners to do what they always had done. This caused millions
of peasants to be the labor of haciendas just as they were under Diaz. Soon
even elites turned against Madero and would now lack support from anyone.
The Huerta Dictatorship was next. He like those before him
also favored the hacienda owners and the Elites. He would create enemies when
did not allow Felix Diaz to become president as he said he would. His major
enemy would be the Governor of Coahuila, Venustiano Carranza. Carranza would
issue the Plan of Guadalupe to create a coalition to go against Huerta. He
built an army and his followers would be known as the Constitutionalist. Huerta
would also bring about himself more enemies in the likes of Villa and Zapata.
These were the leaders of the peasants in the north and the south. The three
forces of Zapata, Villa, and Carranza would ultimately bring down Huerta’s
army.
The three leaders now dashed to make it to Mexico City to
take over Mexico. Villa and Zapata didn’t want to become president, but
Carranza did, and he made sure he was the first one to arrive. This would not
bring about a Civil War where Zapata and Villa would work together to try and
overthrow their once ally Carranza.
The Mexican Revolution to me was focused on taking back what belonged to the people, overthrowing Diaz was their second priority. The Mexican people wanted what was theirs and they would fight until they had what they wanted. they fought for their land, rights, and their freedom. I was surprised that this wasn't a power grab by Zapata or Villa, them stepping back and letting Carranza take over was a move that really showed they cared about the people more than the government.
ReplyDeleteThis was a nice summary of some of the happenings during the years of the Mexican Revolution. I think one of the major issues in Mexico history as well as many other countries is the lack of progress throughout various administrations. It seems like the people in charge of the revolt end up doing the same exact thing the previous leader had done, such as the case that you pointed out with Madero. I think that is what makes Zapata and Villa so special to Mexican history. Their ability to fight for what they believe in, yet when they have the possibility of being the official leader of the country, they allow for the country to move forward by not slowing it down with violence for their own policies. I believe Diaz helped the country industrialize but the Mexican Revolution allowed for the citizens to continue the slow battle for their sovereignty. This revolution along with others points out how extremely important it is to keep in mind the lower and middle classes when it comes to administrations' policies. Many of these leaders were so focused on their close friends and elite which would eventually be the downfall of their leadership. I think it was especially important in Mexico to find something that could unite the people as a country while continuing to progress. This revolution was just another step in the long process of Mexico becoming a self sufficient and successful country. There is the argument that it went from the Porfirato to the Porfirato, even if this is true I believe it helped bring unity that much closer.
ReplyDelete