The Mexican Revolution: Constitutionalists vs. Conventionists (B2)
After collaborating in the fall of the old regime, the main Conventionists leaders took different paths since they understood that they “represented dissimilar movements with distinctive regional characteristics and unclear political strategies” (Gonzales, 2002, p.144). Unlike them, Constitutionalists had clearer political goals, more military equipment, and more resources. Also, most of their leaders had military training. For example, Alvaro Obregon’s experience managing troops during the revolution and being a farmer and businessman in Sonora helped him to create assertive solutions during his mandate and he “managed to pacify, buy off, exile, or execute dangerous rivals and through implementation of new programs created a strong executive branch of government” (Gonzales, 2002, p.201). It was the administration of Obregon the one which “consolidated the Constitutionalist’s ascendancy and established political and ideological guidelines for future administrations” (Gonzales, 2002, p.201). During and after the negotiations that resulted in the Constitution of 1917, some of the factionalism that still plague the Constitutionalist coalition were political ambitions, the need for an acceptable agrarian reform, Mexico’s public indebtedness, poverty, rough presidential successions, and the need for international political legitimacy. Obregon’s belief in economic liberalism and modernism, plus his experience managing troops during the revolution and being a farmer and businessman in Sonora helped him to consolidate power in the early 1920s successfully. Also, as explained by Gonzales (2002), before Obregon was in power, De la Huerta decreed an amnesty for insurgents and gave land to Villa to convince him to retire. These actions paved the way for Obregon to have a smooth transition into power as well. The main issues that Obregon had to overcome or at least tried to overcome were Mexico’s economic difficulties, a very needed agrarian reform, political instability, meddling of foreign corporations and governments in Mexico’s internal affairs, and politically influential agrarian leaders.
Although it is said that the revolution ended during the mandates of Obregon and Calles (117–1920), I am not very sure about that. That might be the date that shows the end of the event, but it was when politicians and a piece of paper started shaping people’s minds to get them to think that good times were coming their way and get them to normalize the issues they were facing. Certainly, the Revolution is very important in Mexico’s history, as it ended the dictatorship of the Porfiriato, but a lot of the same issues that were behind the Revolution and Counterrevolution are still alive to today’s date. Some of these issues are political ambitions, Mexico’s public indebtedness, poverty, corrupted presidential elections, political instability, and cartel leaders, among others. For example, back in 1929, Calles “solved” the problem of troubled presidential successions by creating a political party called Partido Nacional Revolucionario, now called Partido Revolucionario Institucional. That party was created with the intention to “work hand and glove with the government to maintain a political elite in power throughout patronage and corruption, downsizing the military, and controlling political opponents through electoral fraud, violence, and manipulation of the judiciary” (Gonzales, 2002, p.216). PRI remained in power for 71 consecutive years, and it seems like it has been working by implementing the same basis for what it was originally created (it seems like their counterparts use some of those tricks as well). Another notorious issue that has prevailed is the violence that has been dragging Mexico since then. As explained by Gonzales (2002), “the use of assassination, torture, and execution by hitmen and security forces would continue to characterize modern Mexican politics” (p.217). The sad part is that it not only characterizes modern Mexican politics but the whole Mexican country with the upheaval of the cartels.
References
El México Antiguo. (2016). Carranza and Obregón [Facebook]. Retrieved from https://m.facebook.com/744920655642769/photos/organizaciones-sindicales-y-campesinas-desde-los-gobiernos-de-venustiano-carranz/757751981026303/
Gonzales, M. J. (2002). The Mexican Revolution, 1910–1940. University of New Mexico Press
History in Color. (2022). Villa and Zapata [Facebook]. Retrieved from https://www.facebook.com/HistoryColored/photos/a.166540767350391/911422436195550/?type=3
