|
|
|
|
| 1910: Mexican Revolution or Rebellion |
|
 |
|
On November 17th and 20th the Chicana/o Studies Department at Metropolitan State College of Denver in collaboration with the Casa Mayan Project, Community College of Denver and a variety of other collaborators will celebrate the 100 year anniversary of the 1910 Mexican Revolution at St. Cajetan’s Campus on the Auraria Campus. The Chicano Humanities and Arts Council (CHAC) is hosting an opening reception with local artists invited to show artistic displays of the Mexican Revolution on Thursday, November 17th at 6 p.m. Dr. Jesús “Chuy” Negrete will perform Canciones de la Revolución.
Some sagacious historians including Ramón Eduardo Ruiz in “The Great Rebellion: México 1901-1924,” remain baffled about whether the social upheaval where 1 million Mexicanas/os died and another million emigrated into American society, already annexed by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo sixty-two years prior, was truly a revolution. Ruiz refers to it as a “Great Rebellion” with severe catastrophic results. Living remnants that haunt América’s collective conscious as indirect results of the 1910 Mexican Revolution are euphemistically referred to as “undocumented workers.” They have created and navigated a circular underground railroad now being dismantled by American public policies.
Semanticists are also flummoxed about what nomenclature correctly addresses this historical event. Ruiz argues that “revolution and violence, the destruction of property and the loss of life, go hand in glove. One must not confuse violence with Revolution; the two are not always the same.” Some argue that violence in México from 1913-1915 is often misunderstood as “proof of a Revolution.” Using this criterion as a definition where violence becomes a pre-requisite, one could argue with alacrity that Mexico is in the midst of another revolution, referred to as the Drug Wars.
Apostles of the rebellion hoisted la bandera of nationalism and shouted, “México para los Mexicanos.” It was a firm battle cry against the dictatorship of Porfirio Díaz who had historically devastated land ownership in México. American politicos despised radical doctrines espoused by revolutionaries. Through invitation only, foreigners and multinational corporations dug in their heels swindling land from Indigenous tribes. Some historians argue that America was complicit in orchestrating the outcome of the Mexican Revolution through its influence of gargantuan amounts of dollars.
There were other psychological infiltrators. Historically, the Catholic Church preached and institutionalized pre-determination and the philosophy of fatalismo keeping the masses of people in bondage to a “Si patron” attitude. Pseudo Mexican revolutionaries under the same capitalistic banner championed the right to private property and once in office created public policies aimed at protecting land belongings taken through nefarious means to middle class Constitutionalists and hacendados unwilling to adhere to the Constitution of 1917.
There were true revolutionaries like Emiliano Zapata and Francisco Villa that adopted principles of dismantling México’s capitalistic structure through land redistribution characterizing the struggle as an overthrow of an existing economic system. Zapata was quoted as saying, “La Tierra le pretence al hombre que la trabaja. (The earth belongs to the man who works it). Land redistribution meant overthrowing capitalists, many who had ventured into México during El Porfiriato, only to plunder the earth, extracting natural resources and exploiting the workers solely to increase profit margins. Villa and Zapata had allies, for example, the Flores Magón brothers, Enrique, Jesús and Ricardo, revolutionaries who were forced to flee México to avoid captivity and incarceration. History records them as being
unsuccessful. These two charismatic leaders may have had ambitions to revert back to forms of el calpulli and communalism; but they were also in diametric opposition to the many who had overstayed their welcome in México and stood to lose mucho dinero.
The battle between hacendados and ejidatarios continued as private property became even more sacrosanct. American politicians in cahoots with México’s leaders influenced land tenure policies. Following scrimmages against capitalists, Zapata and Villa retired to haciendas, initially distributed after the 15th century conquest in México. They redistributed some of la tierra while other “revolutionaries” doled out small plots of dry worthless land, keeping peones acasillados available for exploitation by los hacendados. Dried out ejidos ostensibly protected by the constitution became dirt farms unable to be cultivated to feed a starving population.
The Prophets of Profit call the Mexican Revolution a victory for the capitalists against a ragtag band of socialists bent on recovering land for the peasantry. In the final analysis, there was bloodshed, death and cultural destruction; but there was never a fundamental overthrow of the capitalist system that had been introduced over 300 years prior. For the most part, Indigenous population’s who were heirs to el ejido, an Indigenous communal system of land ownership, still remain landless and penniless. The current Zapatista revolution in the Lacandon Jungle can attest to this reality.
Come on out and listen to experts tell tales of soldadas y soldados embroiled in struggle, musicology from la guitarra and the harmonica de Dr. Jesús “Chuy” Negrete. Eat a burrito, sip on hot chocolate and indulge in revolution, excuse me, rebellion.
Dr. Ramón Del Castillo is an Independent Journalist.
© 2010 The Weekly Issue/El Semanario
|
←
Back
|
|
|
|
|
|
view more photos
view more videos
El Semanario New Mexico 
El Semanario