The Legacy of La Revolución
Factionalism plagued La Revolucíon since the ousting of the long-standing dictator Porfirio Díaz. Yes, coalitions were built, but they dissolved just as quickly. Each faction had interests and goals that paralleled the ideologies of the regions in which they emerged. The Zapatistas advocated for agrarian land reform while the Carrancistas, and later Obregonistas, advocated for remedying the divide between hacendados and agrarians. Even after the decade of turbulence that engulfed Mexico beginning in 1910, the Revolution continued on, its goals never fully met with each succeeding president.
Dictablanda is the term that historian Paul Gillingham uses to describe the period of time beginning in the 1940s — after Lázaro Cárdenas’ presidency. Cárdenas, at least from the viewpoint of historian Michael Gonzales, epitomized the Revolution’s goals. In fact, he writes that “Lázaro Cárdenas remains Mexico’s most appealing twentieth-century president” (Gonzales 2002, 258). Looking back on the president’s legacy, it is apparent why Gonzales makes the claim. Lázaro revamped the PNR into the PRM (Partido de la Revolución Mexicana), instituted widespread land reform, and expropriated the nation’s oil. His legacy would remain and be envoked by countless leaders thereafter even as dictablanda ensued.
What is dictablanda? Paul Gillingham states that it is “a punning neologism combing dictadura, dicatorship, with blanda (soft) in place of dura (hard)” (Gillingham 2021, 2). Gillingham’s central argument revolves around dictablanda. The ensuing government indeed had hallmarks of a dictatorship, such as election fraud, but had distinctions, such as the vast divide within the PRM (later PRI) itself, especially at the regional and local levels.
“This book argues that both uncertainty and instability decreased dramatically, in a clear rupture, over the decade that straddles the midcentury, 1945 to 1955, during which a new and very different regime coalesced.” — Paul Gillingham, Unrevolutionary Mexico: The Birth of a Strange Dictatorship
Joseph and Buchenau claim that La Revolución “has legs.” They base their claim on the locality and vociferousness of the figures that sought, and are still seeking, “to contest and negotiate politics within a discursive framework that embraces the legitimacy of revolution within the context of the modern nation-state” (Joseph and Buchenau 2013, 215). Although the pair claim that the Revolution’s ideas are ongoing, Gillingham argues that it is merely a manufactured ongoingness set forth by those in power. He argues that they struggled with “the attempt to convince Mexicans that progress, modernization, and development were indeed happening, that they were part of a powerful national narrative, and to edit reality to that narrative’s outlines” (Gillingham, 220).
Gillingham is claiming that the political systems in place during dictablanda employed social-engineering. In fact, the PRI, used this tactic for the remainder of the twentieth century. This is in line with Plato’s Allegory of the Cave — the politicians casting the illusion of a fruitful revolution and depicting the heroism of figures in spite of the Revolution’s goals being yet to be completely met. Gillingham refers to this process as “Replacing overt repression with what Pierre Bourdieu called ‘the gentle, hidden violence [of] man’s exploitation by man whenever overt, brutal exploitation is possible” (219). By examining education, the arts, and expropriation in Mexico this can be deduced — yet, Joseph and Buchenau’s claim stands.
An example can be found in PEMEX (Petróleos Mexicanos). PEMEX was created by Cárdenas and effectively nationalized the Mexican oil industry. Expropriation was celebrated and Gonzales writes that “According to Adolfo Gilly, it signifies historic retribution against U.S. imperialism” (Gonzales 2002, 258). Yet, PEMEX in the decades that followed would be encumbered by numerous scandals; the most recent being in 2002 and 2020, both of which dealt with laundering money and the PRI. Despite these instances, however, there is perhaps common ground between Joseph/Buchenau and Gillingham — the Revolution has legs, but these legs are moved strategically by those in power.
Sources:
Gillingham, Paul. 2021. Unrevolutionary Mexico: The Birth of a Strange Dictatorship. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
Gonzales, Michael J. 2002. The Mexican Revolution, 1910–1940. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.
Joseph, Gilbert M. and Jurgen Buchenau. 2013. Mexico’s Once and Future Revolution: Social Upheaval and the Challenge of Rule since the Late Nineteenth Century. Durham and London: Duke University Press.
