Of Gringos and Old Grudges: This Land Is Their Land

EXICO CITY, Jan. 8 — In the American South, William Faulkner once wrote, the past isn't dead. It isn't even past.

In the United States, almost no one remembers the war that Americans fought against Mexico more than 150 years ago. In Mexico, almost no one has forgotten.

The war cut this country in two, and "the wound never really healed," said Miguel Soto, a Mexico City historian. It took less than two years, and ended with the gringos seizing half of Mexico, taking the land that became America's Wild West: California, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, Utah and beyond.

In Mexico, they call this "the Mutilation." That may help explain why relations between the nations are sometimes so tense.

As President Bush prepares to fly down to Mexico from Texas, where the war began back in 1846, the debate here over how to relate to the United States is heating up once again.

The question of the day is the more than 20 million Mexicans who now live in the United States.

But sensitivities about sovereignty surround every thorny issue involving Americans in Mexico. Can Americans buy land? Sometimes. Drill for oil? Never. Can American officers comb airports in Mexico? Yes. Carry guns as lawmen? No. Open and close the border at will? Well, they try.

To realize that the border was fixed by war and controlled by the victors is to understand why some Mexicans may not love the 21st-century American colossus. Yet they adore the old American ideals of freedom, equality and boundless opportunity, and they keep voting, by the millions, with their feet.

In "a relationship of love and of hatred," as Mr. Soto says, bitter memories sometimes surface like old shrapnel under the skin.

Fragments of the old war stand in the slanting morning sunlight at an old convent here in Mexico City, a sanctuary seized by invading American troops in 1847, now the National Museum of Interventions, which chronicles the struggle.

"The war between Mexico and the United States has a different meaning for Mexicans and Americans," said the museum's director, Alfredo Hernández Murillo. "For Americans, it's one more step in the expansion that began when the United States was created. For Mexicans, the war meant we lost half the nation. It was very damaging, and not just because the land was lost.

"It's a symbol of Mexico's weakness throughout history in confronting the United States. For Mexicans, it's still a shock sometimes to cross the border and see the Spanish names of the places we lost."

Those places have names like Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, Santa Fe, El Paso, San Antonio; the list is long.

The war killed 13,780 Americans, and perhaps 50,000 or more Mexicans — no one knows the true number. It was the first American war led by commanders from West Point. These were men like Ulysses S. Grant and William Tecumseh Sherman, Robert E. Lee and Jefferson Davis. A little more than a decade later, Grant and Sherman battled Lee and Davis in the Civil War.

Historians are still fighting over how and why the battles of the Mexican War began. Some say it was Mexico's fault for trying to stop the secession of what was then (and to some, still is) the Republic of Texas. Some say it was an imperial land grab by the president of the United States.

President James K. Polk did confide to his diary that the aim of the war was "to acquire for the United States — California, New Mexico and perhaps some other of the northern provinces of Mexico." When it was won, in February 1848, he wrote, "There will be added to the United States an immense empire, the value of which 20 years hence it would be difficult to calculate." Nine days later, prospectors struck gold in California.

Aftershocks still resonate from the Mexican War — or, as the Mexicans have it, "the American invasion." The students who walk through the National Museum of Interventions still gasp at a lithograph standing next to an American flag.

It shows Gen. Winfield Scott riding into Mexico City's national square — "the halls of Montezuma," in the words of the Marine Corps Hymn — to seize power and raise the flag. He had followed the same invasion route as the 16th-century Spanish conquerors of Mexico. The American occupation lasted 11 months.

Many of the 75,000 Mexicans living in the newly conquered American West lost their rights to own land and live as they pleased. It was well into the 20th century before much of the land was settled and civilized.

Now, that civilization is taking another turn. More than half of the 20 million Mexicans north of the border live on the land that once was theirs. Some 8.5 million live in California — a quarter of the population. Nearly half the people of New Mexico have roots in old Mexico. Mexico is, in a sense, slowly reoccupying its former property.

"History extracts its costs with the passage of time," said Jesús Velasco Márquez, a professor who has long studied the war. "We are the biggest minority in the United States, and particularly in the territory that once was ours."

"In the United States, almost no one remembers the war that Americans fought against Mexico more than 150 years ago."

In the United States, hardly anyone remembers anything historical. Ask some kids when the Declaration of Independence was signed, or who Richard Cheney is.

"In Mexico, almost no one has forgotten."

REALLY??? I doubt it. Probably only a handful of La Raza types. Mexico has had many more serious problems than the loss of a vast wilderness, relatively unihabited by anyone except indians, a century and a half ago.

"The war cut this country in two, and "the wound never really healed," said Miguel Soto, a Mexico City historian."

How melodramatic. But what do you expect from a Mexican historian. Go ask the average Mexican mestizo what they think of the central government in Mexico. Then ask him about the Mexican War. He'll probably bubble over with criticism and accusations about the former and look you blankly in the eye about the other.

" It took less than two years, and ended with the gringos seizing half of Mexico, taking the land that became America's Wild West: California, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, Utah and beyond."

As I said, aside from a few small areas in California, Santa Fe, and a small part of Texas, there simply were very few Mexican actually living in those territories. As a matter of fact, the Mexican government actually INVITED Anglo settlers into Texas for the explicit purpose of protecting Mexican living in northern Mexico from sale raids by Plains tribes like the Commanches, and the Apaches - which were mainly retalitory as the Mexicans did their own share of slave raiding and buying of young Indian captives.

"In Mexico, they call this "the Mutilation." That may help explain why relations between the nations are sometimes so tense."

Guess they forgot how we helped get the French out of their country after the Civil War. The main "mutilation" in Mexico has been purpetrated by a succesion of gangster regimes against the Mexican peasants.

"As President Bush prepares to fly down to Mexico from Texas, where the war began back in 1846, the debate here over how to relate to the United States is heating up once again."

Should read: "As President Jorge Bush prepares to fly down to Mexico to kiss Vicente Fox's ring in gratitude for all the all "help" (sarcasm) Mexico gave us in the U.N. recently, by opening our arms to an army of social destitutes Mexico created and is unwilling to support.

"The question of the day is the more than 20 million Mexicans who now live in the United States."

20 Million?? Last I heard it was 8 to 12 Million. Do I hear 50 million??

"To realize that the border was fixed by war and controlled by the victors is to understand why some Mexicans may not love the 21st-century American colossus."

????????????? Name a national border that was established by a card game - go on, I DARE YOU.

"Yet they adore the old American ideals of freedom, equality and boundless opportunity, and they keep voting, by the millions, with their feet."

I can't balme people for wanting to steal what is better. But I can blame people like Bush for not wanting to stop them. Better then should stay at home and correct their own government and we should help them. Better yet, ANNEX MEXICO. Anglicize it and make it well. Its a sick country. Their people would be better off. (So would we. They have lots of oil.)

"In "a relationship of love and of hatred," as Mr. Soto says, bitter memories sometimes surface like old shrapnel under the skin."

This guy is too much. Is he a history teacher or a drama teacher??

"Fragments of the old war stand in the slanting morning sunlight at an old convent here in Mexico City, a sanctuary seized by invading American troops in 1847, now the National Museum of Interventions, which chronicles the struggle."

Millions of people they can't employ, feed or support and they build an entire museum to a lost war from a century and a half ago. Brilliant!!!

"The war between Mexico and the United States has a different meaning for Mexicans and Americans," said the museum's director, Alfredo Hernández Murillo. "For Americans, it's one more step in the expansion that began when the United States was created. For Mexicans, the war meant we lost half the nation. It was very damaging, and not just because the land was lost."

This guy gets more and more maudlin. Like I said, MOST of what we took was not occupied or used. At the time it was a wasteland and wilderness which was unexploited. The average Mexican non-historian today probably has a lot more problems to think about than Buena Vista and Molino Del Rey.
But, what the heck, when your economy is collapsing, find some fall guy to take the heat. It worked before with other corrupt governments, why not Mexico's?

"It's a symbol of Mexico's weakness throughout history in confronting the United States. For Mexicans, it's still a shock sometimes to cross the border and see the Spanish names of the places we lost."

A symbol of Mexico's weakness is the fact that millions of its sons and daughters have to flee their native country just to get enough money to buy breakfast.

"Those places have names like Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, Santa Fe, El Paso, San Antonio; the list is long."

Yeah, yeah, and New Orleans, Detroit, etc. Should we give that land back to France? How about Staten Island? Should we give it back ot the Netherlands??

"The war killed 13,780 Americans, and perhaps 50,000 or more Mexicans — no one knows the true number."

More Mexicans probably died in the Mexican War from Santa Ana's inadequate or non-existant Medical corps and insane marching than from Yankee bullets.

"It was the first American war led by commanders from West Point. These were men like Ulysses S. Grant and William Tecumseh Sherman, Robert E. Lee and Jefferson Davis. A little more than a decade later, Grant and Sherman battled Lee and Davis in the Civil War."

So what has this got to do with the discussion??

"Historians are still fighting over how and why the battles of the Mexican War began. Some say it was Mexico's fault for trying to stop the secession of what was then (and to some, still is) the Republic of Texas. Some say it was an imperial land grab by the president of the United States."

It was due to many factors, among them these. Not all the people at the Alamo were Americans. A lot of Tejanos hated Santa Ana, as well as a lot of Mexicans and Mexican Indians. He was a bloodthirsty megalomaniac.

"President James K. Polk did confide to his diary that the aim of the war was "to acquire for the United States — California, New Mexico and perhaps some other of the northern provinces of Mexico." When it was won, in February 1848, he wrote, "There will be added to the United States an immense empire, the value of which 20 years hence it would be difficult to calculate." Nine days later, prospectors struck gold in California."

He tried to buy the southwest from Mexico. I believe the Americans actually DID pay Mexico for the Southwest after the war.

"It shows Gen. Winfield Scott riding into Mexico City's national square — "the halls of Montezuma," in the words of the Marine Corps Hymn — to seize power and raise the flag. He had followed the same invasion route as the 16th-century Spanish conquerors of Mexico. The American occupation lasted 11 months."

And I bet it was the most secure, most sanitary 11 months in Mexico City's history.

"Many of the 75,000 Mexicans living in the newly conquered American West lost their rights to own land and live as they pleased. It was well into the 20th century before much of the land was settled and civilized."

Sad, but true. But then, we have changed a lot haven't we in 150 years?

"Now, that civilization is taking another turn. More than half of the 20 million Mexicans north of the border live on the land that once was theirs. Some 8.5 million live in California — a quarter of the population. Nearly half the people of New Mexico have roots in old Mexico. Mexico is, in a sense, slowly reoccupying its former property."

Onlyu bceause we have people like Bush and his predecessors in the White House. Where is that guy Polk when you REALLY need him??

"History extracts its costs with the passage of time," said Jesús Velasco Márquez, a professor who has long studied the war. "We are the biggest minority in the United States, and particularly in the territory that once was ours."

So?? America is a nation of minorities. Consider yourselves lucky to be here.

The New York Times is really a rube paper. They INVITE criticism by their idiotic articles. Now I understand why Ann Cooulter has such a field day with them.

The problem with these sorts of analyses isn't that it's historically inaccurate. Because it does capture the present attitudes of the Mexican's it's a good thing. Its problem is it perpetuates a myth. That myth is that Mexican claim to these territories was something more then in name only. The original territory was New Spain not Mexico. Claim to these territories were Mexico's as a consequence of their overthrow of Spain. This was true also with respect to the claim of the US to territories east of the Appalachians (i.e. it was initially in name only, it required their conquest and settlement to make it a fact).

The issue is that though there were some settlements which one could refer to as Mexican in these territories, they like the Spanish had made very few inroads. Most settlements were along the coast in California and into what is now Texas and New Mexico. What prevented anymore then a foothold was as a result of the hostility shown both the Spaniards and later the Mexicans by the various Indian tribes (e.g. Geronimo got his moniker because he ambushed a Mexican garrison and wiped them out on St. Jerome's day). The myth, to reiterate, is the territory was sparsely populated and required American innovation and ingenuity (e.g. the five cylinder Colt revolver) in order to open it up to large settlement and civilization, though the Native American population might object to the latter.

The present descendants of these original settlements don't even refer to themselves as Mexicans. They referred to themselves, and mostly continue to as Tehanos (Texas), Spaniards (New Mexico), and Californios. Those claiming otherwise are descendants of those who migrated to the area after the Mexican American War. And they were only able to as a result of the American conquest.

So my advice to Mexico is get over it.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.