[Coeur de Lion]

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.

[fourdeuce82d]

It was very damaging, and not just because the land was lost.

yeah, the damn gringos stole the part that had hollywood, silicon valley, and the Los Angelese aerospace industry. THAT's why we are having such a hard time now. /sarcasm

[Wolfstar]

"It's a symbol of Mexico's weakness throughout history in confronting the United States."

LOL! Depending on whether you count from July 4, 1776 (Declaration of Independence), October 19, 1781 (British surrender at Yorktown), or June 21, 1788 (the Constitution ratified by majority of states), the United States has existed as a country for only about two and a quarter centuries.

Present-day Mexico is even younger. It covers the area where several advanced pre-Columbian Mesoamerican civilizations (Maya, Olmec, Toltec and Aztec) developed and flourished for centuries before first contact with Europeans. The native cultures were invaded and conquered by Spain starting in the early 1500's. During the colonial period from 1521 to 1821, Spain laid claim to "Nueva España" (New Spain), whose territories included today's Mexico, Florida, Louisiana, and most of what is today's southwestern United States. Mexico became a nation-state when it achieved independence from Spain in 1821.

The area that eventually became the southwest of the United States was sparsely populated with native North Americans even when claimed by Spain, which did little to actually colonize the area. In the mid-19th century, parts were sold and parts were ceded to the United States. California and Texas achieved their own independence before voluntarily joining the United States.

So what does "throughout history" actually mean? Whose claims take supremacy? True descendants of Maya, Olmec, Toltec and Aztec — or those of the many North American tribes who were native to the southern stretch from Florida to California prior to European migration? Spanish descendants, whose ancestors did little more than claim ownership of the land — or descendants of the early U.S. pioneers in the south and southwest, who developed and settled the land? How about the French, who claimed large chunks of the same territory prior to the Louisiana Purchase?

What a crock this whole "Atzlan" myth is.

[philetus]

Is that the Times title?

[raybbr]

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.

They must really be old. I wish those old bastards would just die so we can claim it for ourselves.

[Lady Eileen]

bump

[JamesWilson]

As President Bush prepares to fly down to Mexico from Texas, where the war began back in 1846....

I thought it was 1836???

[potlatch]

This is all liberal 'politician - speak'.

My husband and I have traveled deep into Mexico and the people are warm and friendly. Never had a problem.

We saw acres of pyramids just north of Veracruse, which had never been discovered until a North American found them!!

Naturally they are envious of our prosperity here, but seem unable to create it in their own country. They make many beautiful things, carved wood furniture, Talavera pottery, sterling jewelery, pewter serving pieces, stained glass lamps, and on and on!!

We regularly cross the border into Progresso, which is a booming tourist town now, across from Weslico, Texas.

[realpatriot71]

As if Mexico could have made anything out of the "taken" land. If all of the SW was still Mexico, it'd be the same sh!thole you see south of the border. Mexican society and culture has no concept of how to build a nation like the US, and it's laughable to think that they would have done anything productive with the SW.