Blog 1
How did the Revolution as envisioned by Francisco I. Madero and his middle-class supporters differ from the goals that lower-class participants (campesino, laborers, etc.) had in mind?
Upon his release from prison, Madero had disguised himself as railroad worker and went unnoticing into Texas where he could draw upon the family’s local bank account, meet with relatives and political supporters to discuss the revolution. (Gonzales, p.73) Thus, is where the Plan de San Luis Potosi was formed, which focused on political reform sidestepped the social and economic concerns of peasants, workers, and nationalists. This plan had annulled the elections and named Madero the provisional president, promised free elections, and proclaimed the no-reelection principle. (Gonzales, p.73) From my understanding of the readings, Madero looked out for the people of Mexico and did what he could for the sake of the interests of the Mexican people. Basically, correct some of the mess created by Diaz. Madero wanted to give land back to those who had lost it through illegal application of the public lands law and had promised them they would have their property reinstated. (Gonzales, p. 74)
Francisco I. Madero started to act more like a political reformer thana social revolutionary and showed his commitment to the political stability and administrative efficiency than to overthrow it. Instead, he insisted that the land disputes should be settled within the courts rather than through a forced redistribution which angered the land-hungry peasants who then demanded immediate redress and unsettled the revolutionary coalition”. (Gonzales, p.74)
Francisco I. Madero set out to establish some form of democracy and promised reinstatement of lands that were illegally acquired by estates also lead to the encouragement of determining campesinos to support the northern rebel. But, seem to have failed so much that he was about to be overthrown by the social revolutionaries of Morelos and Chihuahua bringing more light on Emiliano Zapata, who played a key role in during the Mexican Revolution and the counterrevolution.
Therefore, it was like one class he wasn’t doing all that he promised with no drastic changes to support their needs and trust. Then you have the middle-class supporters who believed that he wasn’t working fast enough for him to form some political gain and trust. “Madero won support among upper-and middle-class voters by promising democracy without social and economic change” (Gonzales, p.72–73)
How and why did those diverging goals create problems for Madero once he had been elected president of Mexico? By your estimation, why was this early period of revolution and counterrevolution significant?
I think that the problems that were created for Madero when he became president all came from the conclusion that he seeks the need for change even before Diaz was no longer president. He replaced a lot of Diaz original officers and leaders. Although he said he was going to change things for the better by promising the lower-class individuals their lands back and more income or wages but none of that really happened. Just like Diaz and other previous presidents, it’s almost like a continuous of greed that takes precedence while in office. He continued to show some favoritism among middle-class individuals. Madero’s failure to carry out comprehensive reforms and to sever ties with the Porfirian establishment cost him the support of grassroots revolutionaries. He maintained the Porfirian infrastructure, relying on family members, and keeping the federal army intact. Until he was deserted by the rebel allies and then he called General Huerta to crush Orozco and drive Zapata into the mountains. (Gonzales, p. 91) I think the early period of revolution and counterrevolution was significant because it made Francisco I. Madero vulnerable to the reliance of federal armies.
