Posted on 04/08/2006 10:23:27 AM PDT by Travis McGee
"The True History of the Southwest, 101"
The amount of historical idiocy and fallacies surrounding the history of the Southwest is staggering, chief among them the "Aztlan" fairy tales. What's the truth? How did the Spanish Europeans conquer the Southwest? The "conquistadores" (that means "conquerors") did it with the lance, and the lash.
For example, in 1541 Coronado entered present-day New Mexico (which included present Arizona during the Spanish era) searching for the "lost cities of gold." One of his first actions upon meeting the natives was to burn 100s of them alive in their dwellings, for not handing over suspected horse thieves. That is how Spain conquered the natives of the present US Southwest--not with hugs and kisses! It was certainly no love-fest between long-lost brown-skinned soul- mates, as it is often portrayed today by the delusional Aztlaners today, who spin the "new bronze race of Mestizos" toro-mierda.
By 1821, Mexico City was strong enough to overthrow even more decrepit and ineffectual Spanish rule. However, the distant provinces of the current US Southwest were far beyond the reach of the authority of independent but strife- torn Mexico. These distant northern provinces received neither military protection nor needed levels of trade from the south. Under Spanish rule, trade with the USA was forbidden, but at least Spain provided trade and Army protection from hostile Indians. Under Mexican neglect, the Southwest received neither trade nor protection from Mexico City.
For example, Comanches and Apaches ran rampant in the 1830s in this new power vacuum created by Mexican neglect, burning scores of major ranches that had been around for hundreds of years and massacring their inhabitants. Mexico City could neither defend nor keep the allegiance of its nominal citizens in these regions. Nor did it provide needed levels of trade to sustain the prior Spanish-era standard of living. Mexican influence atrophied, withered and died at the same time that American pathfinders were opening up new routes into the region.
Increasingly, a growing America was making inroads into the Southwest, via ships into California, and via gigantic wagon trains of trade goods over the Santa Fe Trail from St. Louis. The standard of living of the SPANISH in these states subsequently increased enormously, which is why they did not support Mexico City in the 1846-48 war. In fact, the Spanish-speaking inhabitants of the Southwest NEVER considered themselves "Mexicans" at all, ever. They went, in their own eyes, from SPANISH directly to AMERICAN.
So how long did Mexico City have even nominal control over the Southwest? For only 25 years, during which they had no effective control, and the area slipped backwards until the arrival of the Americans. The SPANISH inhabitants of the Southwest NEVER transferred their loyalty to Mexico City, because all the received from the chaotic Mexican government was misrule, neglect, and unchecked Indian raids.
Since then, how long has the area been under firm American control? For 150 continuous years, during which time the former Spanish inhabitants of the region, now American citizens, have prospered beyond the wildest dreams of the Mexicans stuck in Mexico. To compare the infrastructure, roads, schools, hospitals etc of the two regions is to understand the truth. The Mexican government has been mired in graft, corruption, nepotism and chaos from the very start. The ordinary Mexican peons have been trampled and abused, while only the super-rich elites have thrived. This is why millions of Mexicans want to escape from Mexico today, to enjoy the benefits of living in America they can never obtain in Mexico.
And now, we are supposed to let any Mexican from Chiapas, Michoacan or Yucatan march into the American Southwest, and make some "historical claim" of a right to live there? From where does this absurd idea spring?
At what point in history did Indians and Mestizos from Zacatecas or Durango stake a claim on the American Southwest? Neither they nor their ancestors ever lived for one single day in the American Southwest. The Spanish living in the Southwest in 1846 stayed there, and became Americans by the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. There were no Spanish inhabitants of the Southwest who were marched to the border and driven into Mexico. It didn't happen. The SPANISH in the Southwest welcomed American citizenship, which brought stability, protection from Indian raids, and a vast increase in their standard of living with the increase in trade.
In sum, NO current inhabitants of Mexico have ANY claim on even one single inch of the Southwest!
NOT ONE citizen of Mexico is sneaking into the USA to reclaim property they were deprived of, NOT ONE.
They are criminal invaders and colonizers, pure and simple.
It's time Americans learned the true history, as a counter to the prevalent Aztlaner fairy tales.
The more pressure we keep on Mexico, immigration-wise, the more reformers inside of Mexico can be emboldened and empowered to scale back monopolists' abuses down there which keep our own country flooded with economic refugees. Here's an interesting new thread on new legal progress that finally emerged in Mexico I think as a result of immigration reform's failure:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1611677/posts
Here's mine.
Thanks for the history of California. Essentially, the history is a bit different in California, AZ and NM (which were one province at the time) and Texas. But in all three cases, the Mexican govt had no effective control after 1821.
The large employers of illegal aliens are now terrified of their workers, because of (among other reasons) the threat of ruinous equipment sabotage if their illegals are threatened with deportation.
I think that Texas will be a battleground state, for sure. But it will not be a war fought on open ground between military formations this time. It will be urban warfare, with our govt unwilling to use heavy weapons. Sarajevo times ten.
Good. Let them show their dark hand for all to see. Trash the dessert. Trash the cities. Fly that Mexican Flag. Turn the American Flag upside down. Throw down the race card. Spread the fear.
Let them trash some factories. Then they won't have as much money to lobby for taxpayer subsidized "cheap" illegal labor.
Maybe our representivies would take notice then.
btw, Great essay and I'm sure glad you're back!
Recollection seems to bring to mind that New Mexico never enjoyed a very effective government, and had been completely abandoned (by its government, not its population) by 1843 ('44?), but that some semblence, albeit a feeble one, of a government was retained in Arizona.
Correct me where I'm wrong.
Is anyone wondering just how the Hispanics feel towards the Bush Administration? Take a look at the last three lines down on the right hand side of this poster for the "March for Immigrant Rights" coming this Monday.
Yes, it does say, "The World Can't Wait - Drive Out The Bush Regime" doesn't it?
http://www.sanantoniolightning.com/immigrantbig.jpg
Is anyone still thinking that we should have Open Borders? Can anyone explain to me why Bush is supporting a group that hates him?
Watch a video about these fine people and see if we want them in America. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1610000/posts
Texans won't have to. Constitutionally, the borders of any state cannot be changed or eliminated without the consent of that state's legislature and without the consent of Congress (Article IV, Section 3). California; Arizona; New Mexico; Oregon; Utah; Nevada; Colorado; Oklahoma; Kansas; Louisiana; Mississippi; Alabama; Florida; take note.
Of course a Supreme Court composed of a majority of America-haters could very well rule that that prohibition would not apply when the state is being given up to a foreign power rather than being formed into one or more other states within the US (Supreme Court followers; YOU take note). [grin]
Why do you want me to read this?
I've read similar sentiments from THREE of those who are anti-immigrant in the last two hours right here on this forum.
"Impeach Bush" rabble-rousing is common among malcontents, anti-war types, and drunks who post on websites late on Saturday night.
This is a very good piece. Just a minor tweak--LOL--"...went, in their own eyes, from SPANISH directly to TEXAN to AMERICAN.
What are you uncontent about? Have another drink it'll be ok in the morning.
Sadly, that's so true.
Nothing. I'm having a great ole time reading all the hysteria on this thread.
I can just envision a bunch of guys, with their camouflage and eye paint at the ready, chomping at the bit to play militia.
I really wonder if some of you have not lost your minds.
More importantly, simply refer to the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which concluded the Mexican American War and later the Gadsen Purchase, which further clarified all claims.
Internationally, all disputes regarding the border and ownership of those lands were settled between the nations of Mexico and the US with the Treaty, ratified by both governments. Later, when some visceral interests arose concerning the Rio Grande and valleys where some Mexicans had received grants of land from Spanish-later Mexican forms of real property ownership, the US paid handsomely to become the final national arbitor of those private ownerships. Additionally, whereas the Mexican government only recognized land grants to settlers, the US government gave private property ownership deeds and title of those lands to their occupants who previously only had grants.
The point to strss is that the exact same issues being discussed today, were more directly discussed, fought over, settled and resolved by national entities of that day, who were much closer to any original conflict of material interests than those discussing them today.
Additionally, if one were to promote an indirect cause that allows a visceral perception of ownership today from centuries ago, it is much closer associated with the Mexican form of personal property laws than US federal and state laws in the region. If one wants to protest, protest Mexican land grants instead of Title deeds and property ownership in the US.
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.
