You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #8: Mexican/US history...lets take a look! [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
4323Lopez Donating Member (307 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-06-03 11:31 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. Mexican/US history...lets take a look!
<<When Mexico was freed and inherited the nothern lands of the modern Southwest, there were practically no Mexicans in that land and it was primarily controlled by the few remaining Spaniard descendents and the missionaries. By the time Mexico lost the lands a few decades later, there were still less than 10,000 Mexican colonist families who had moved into this relatively empty wilderness and who were spread across an area from Texas, to Utah, to California.>>

Mexico was never "freed" and "inherited." What a crock. They were taken advantage of, being in a vulnerable position and being attacked and fighting three different factions, they were pretty much forced to sell the land. Plus, it was run by a corrupt idiot who decide to sell it. It was taken over, not "freed." lol Regardless of how many people were there, regardless of the conflicts with other Indigenous people, IT WAS ESTABLISHED LAND. Please, history is written so one-sided, it's ridiculous. And these are not my opinions. If you read up on real academics who have studied Mexican-American relations, most agree that this was the most realistic version.

It was an imperialistic nation, under the views of racism, religion, and manifest destiny, that took advantage of a messed up country in turmoil. They viewed Mexicans as "mongrels" and would do anything to spread from "sea to shining sea."

<<there were practically no Mexicans in that land and it was primarily controlled by the few remaining Spaniard descendents and the missionaries. By the time Mexico lost the lands a few decades later, there were still less than 10,000 Mexican colonist families who had moved into this relatively empty wilderness and who were spread across an area from Texas, to Utah, to California.>>

So what, that doesn't change anything. An established nation is an established nation. "10,000 Mexicans" is not a small amount of people when most were ranchers and herders. No, there was not a city, but they were here regardless. What does that change?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC