Ask a Mexican: Would Mexico have been better off if the American Southwest remained Mexico?

Dear Mexican: Just suppose that all of the southwestern United States had remained in Mexican hands. Would the Mexicans have done any better with it than they have with the present confines of Mexico?
Reversible Reconquista?

Dear Gabacho: The gran parlour game! If we turn back the clock and changed a couple of things — if Austin, Houston and their fellow invading gabachos actually became Mexican citizens respecting the rule of the land instead of merely pretending to become so, if Mexico hadn't suffered the theft of its lands or nearly gone bankrupt spending so much money in battling its ravenous neighbor to the north — would Mexico have been better off? The easy answer is sí — more land in a country generally means more possibilities for development, and California's 1849 Gold Rush (truly made the American Southwest the mecca it became for Americans) would've happened on Mexican soil, meaning Mexico would've been the beneficiary of all those prospecting migrants and subsequent worldwide attention. Not having Texas secede from Mexico would've also hastened the demise of Antonio López de Santa Anna: sure, his embarrassing defeat at the manos of the Texians forced him out of office, but he returned again and again. Santa Anna's megalomania, left unchecked, would've inspired a true coup instead of many temporary ones. And with no neocolonial ties left — with no debts to any European powers due to fighting so many wars, with no appropriating of natural resources and lands by American industrialists taking advantage of a weak country, and with the United States itself weaker due to the lack of a Southwest and all of its subsequent treasures — Mexico would've been in a much-stronger position to enter the Industrial Revolution and emerge a better, reformed land. Of course, it's just a parlour game, just like Arizona Senator John McCain blaming illegal Mexicans for starting devastating forest fires with no hard proof — except ours is responsible and fun, while his is just pendejo.

Dear Mexican: I know many Mexican names translate to English: Michael is Miguel, Juan is John, and so forth. Mexican names seem rooted in the Bible in general (everyone knows a Mexican named Jesús with a best buddy named Gabriel right?). My name is Adam, and I don't know what the Mexican version of Adam is. I think there isn't one. Every time I order at a restaurant and the cashier is Mexican and they ask my name, I check the receipt and it's wrong. They have a hard time pronouncing it too. I've got receipts back before with Asham, Awarm, Alad, Aman, Aden. Mexicans seem devoutly religious. Do they not read Genesis, or is there a mexicano version of Adam and Eve with different names?  
Gabacho Y Eva

Dear Gabacho: If you bothered to read the Spanish version of Genesis, you'd know "Adam" is Adán. Next!

GOOD MEXICAN OF THE WEEK: The American Immigration Council (AIC) sounds like a creepy front group for Know Nothings, but it's actually the nonprofit arm of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, whose members do the Lord's work by helping migrants from across the world enter this great land. The AIC actively fights Know Nothings, honors immigrants year-round, and is publishing Green Card Stories in the fall, a beautiful book featuring the inspiring stories of immigrants who came to los Estados Unidos from across the globe. More information on these mensches at americanimmigrationcouncil.org.

Ask the Mexican at themexican@askamexican.net, be his fan on Facebook, follow him on Twitter or ask him a video question at youtube.com/askamexicano!

 
My Voice Nation Help
4 comments
Sort: Newest | Oldest
USA
USA

An illegal of any nationality is still an illegal. They have violate federal and state laws. We are a nation of laws, without these laws we will be as corrupt and poor as the countries that these illegal aliens left. We can't rationalize that this was once this and that. This is now.

Ali Alexander
Ali Alexander

Of course, Mexico, or rather Spain, STOLE the American SW from the Native Americans who lived there, so it really has no more claim to it than the US does. Less in fact since many Americans are descendants of the Native Americans whose lands these were.

A Yahoo! user
A Yahoo! user

Yeah...????really and what cherokee princess are you a descendent of? And to James....ignorance begets ignorance....remember Mexicans, native peoples, blacks and other non-whites (this even included many Irish for a time) lived in internal colonies for many years and your gringo ancestors swindled thousands of acres of lands from Mexicans in Texas and the Southwest....just as is happening with Iraq....but with oil instead of Land so continue in your ignorance.

James Hodges
James Hodges

..."if Mexico hadn't suffered the theft of its lands..." What a silly statement Mexico lost its land through the spoils of war... which is the same way Mexico got its land... and even with that they were also paid for it. If you know your history the Mexican's stole (I mean won through the use of force) the lands of the Comanches, Kiowas and Apaches (e.g. what is now known as the Southwest United States). Then they used those indigenous people as slave labor to build their stinking missions in an attempt to validate their claim to the land and keep the Russians from claiming it. The Russians had come down to the area known as Ft. Ross in California (just North of what is today known as San Francisco).

Would Mexicans have done any better with it than they have with the present confines of Mexico? The answer to that is no! There is no reason to think that Mexicans North of the Rio Grande would have been any more productive than those Mexicans South of the Rio Grande. Besides, not that many Mexicans were in the North compaired to South ot the Rio Grande... because of the warring Comanches, Kiowas and Apaches

Mexicans would have done better if at the time of the Mexican/American war... the U.S.A had annexed all of Mexico and made more states. What is now Mexico would have been developed along at the same rate as the rest of the Southwestern US. You wouldn't have the illegal immigration issue that you have today because they would already be citizens. They would be better educated as they would be educated by US schools... and would be able to talk about real history rather than the political pap that La Raza likes to spew.

 
Loading...