Recordando la Revolución: The Mexican Revolution in Hindsight.
The Mexican Revolution was one of the key influencing events in Mexico’s history over the past century. The latter phases of revolution saw the concrete emergence of the Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI) as the single greatest political entity in Mexico. The party, which remained in uninterrupted power for 71 years, was tasked with upholding the ideals that the “Revolutionary Family” had put it in place. To what end was this successful? Thomas Benjamin puts forward the argument, “there has never been general agreement on what the revolution meant, what its objectives were, and whether they have been accomplished.” The question remains. What came from the revolution, were the initial calls for change answered, and what are the lasting consequences of the nation’s most mythicized event?
Revolutionary Education
The first post revolutionary presidents attempted to steer national discourse regarding not only the historical events surrounding the revolution, but the ideals behind it. The first official history of the revolution was published by the PRI in 1951. Historia de la Revolucion Mexicana was written to shape public perception of the revolution. Jose Lopez Bermudez, secretary general of the Central Committee of the PRI, noted that the party needed a book that wasn’t based on scholarly history, instead stating, “Our party wants a history of the Mexican Revolution that the people can read. A lively book, one open to the future since la Revolucion has not ended.”(Benjamin 148) This statement insinuated not only that they Revolution was in continuous evolution, but also granting the PRI legitimacy by being the party destined to manage its evolution.
“Because the PRI was “blessed” by the “Revolutionary Family,” the endorsement increased pressure on the party to carry out the principles, goals, and ideals of the Mexican Revolution. From the interpretation of the statistical relationships, then, perceived failure to achieve these goals — especially when they are perceived as relevant — could translate into a failure to meet society’s expectations and the corresponding assessment of being “out of touch.” (Gawronski 387)
Mexico ’68: Año de Represión
The Party’s first major contention would come less than a decade after the first official history was published. New ideological and intellectual movements emerged, inspired in part by past events and social programs set in place during the state building aftermath of the Mexican Revolution. In 1968, there had been a growing movement of civil unrest as students criticized not only the one party system but also challenged the legitimacy of the PRI. Fueled by the ideologies surrounding the Cuban Revolution, emergent thinkers once again accused the government of failing to maintain the ideals of the revolution, instead repurposing the mythic idea of revolution as a social tool for the continued existence of the party. Indeed, Gawronski argues that “Historically it [la revolucion] has been a national adhesive, at least rhetorically, despite never being uniformly understood.” (Gawronski 366)
Students’ demands appealed for change on a social level, on behalf of civil liberties and democracy in the face of the one party system. Although the PRI had emerged as the strongest political entity, Post-Revolutionary Mexican politics remained a vacuum where students forced “demands, aspirations, and desires that were not exclusively of student interest, but also interest to campesinos, workers, intellectuals, political parties etc.” (Carey 29).
The situation, coinciding with the Olympic Games to be held in Mexico that year, represented a credible threat to the PRI. While the movement gained traction throughout Mexican society, they were quickly painted anti-Mexican and ideologically dangerous. Clashes between protesters and local police became common and grew in intensity. Tensions rose steadily throughout the summer of 1968, eventually culminating in the October 2nd Massacre at Tlatelolco, the state sponsored killing of peaceful protestors in the Plaza de las Tres Culturas in the Tlatelolco neighborhood of Mexico City.
Elvira B. De Conchiero remembers the massacre:
“When I realized that the helicopter had come down dangerously low, circling right above the heads of the crowd in the Plaza de las Tres Culturas and firing on everybody — we could see the gray streaks of tracer bullets in the sky — I was so dumbfounded I said to myself, I can’t believe it — its like a movie. I’ve never seen anything like this except in movies. Those just can’t be real bullets. I wandered around in a daze, as though I’d gone out of my mind. (Carey 135)
The massacre crushed the movement and maintained the hegemony of the PRI of Mexico, which lasted up until the 21 century. It did not, however, rid the nation of the ideals and questions behind the movement which continued to circulate throughout society. The students’ conflict with older authorities became a profound representation of the ongoing struggle between the powerful and the powerless in Mexico and sent a clear message about the continuation of an active revolution.
Lasting Consequences and the PRI
Returning to the question of what the revolution achieved. The events in Tlatelolco seemed a major setback for the foundation of true democracy in Post-Revolutionary Mexico. The PRI, a party supposedly born of the ideals of a social revolution, violently suppressed the call for real and continually needed social change. While the government came through mostly unscathed on the international front, the massacre served long term consequences to the PRI.
“…the moral legitimacy of the entire PRI-state system was undermined. In particular the regime lost the support of many of Mexico’s established and upcoming intelligentsia…such world-renowned writers as Carlos Fuentes and Octavio Paz strongly denounced the brutal actions of the regime, breaking their official ties with the government and calling into question, really for the rst time, the legitimacy of the whole post-revolutionary system.” (Gawronski 371)
Although retaining political control for 7 decades, the political system put in place by the revolution deteriorated with the waning years of the 20th century. The political dominance of the president, presidencialismo, diminished as the role of congress and bureaucracy grew, signaling a greater emphasis in democracy. In the 2000 Mexican General Election, Vicente Fox replaced President Ernesto Zedillo Ponce de Leon, marking the first president from an opposition party since the party was created in 1929.
While the nation “made significant democratic strides with the PRI’s losses” at the turn of the century, many problems continued to plague Mexican society. A century removed from the initial conflict, though surrounding the outcomes of the revolution remains as divisive as the issues that started it. Regardless of the legitimacy, the effectiveness, or the completion of the Mexican revolution, the idea of the Mexican Revolution remains a cultural and political force in Mexico.
The centennial of the Mexican Revolution means different things to different people, and most likely even different things to the same person…It might mean celebrating the patriotic sacrifice of the nation’s Revolutionary heroes…the long history of corruption and the failure of the PRI-gobierno to live up to the principles embodied in the Revolutionary ideals that legitimized its rule…And for some, of course, the centennial might invoke the feeling that the victory of a radical, socialist movement distorted and undermined the nation’s Catholic heritage and traditional values. (Morris 193–194)
