Jose Luis Sanchez
Mexican writer Carlos Fuentes illustrates an amazing picture of Mexico in his book “A New Time for Mexico.” His honesty in his writing is shocking to the reader because it is not expected, especially when he speaks of Mexico’s political system and its loss of territory during the Texas Revolution and Mexican-American War. On page sixty-two he names Mexicans as “The children of Caesar and Saint Thomas Aquinas,” which is a statement that I wondered about for a long time. After a while I began to see the meaning of the quote, it describes the connection the proud yet humble people of Mexico would have had if they did descend from the benevolent yet autocratic ruler and theologian. Mexicans are eternally searching in their quest for a savior, their hearts and minds scream for one to lead them out of poverty, shield them from corruption and violence and all the other ills the nation faces and or has faced; and that is the reason the people of Mexico invest God-like powers into the executive branch, regardless if the executive really will lead them as their promised savior.
The PRI ruled Mexico for about seventy years (1929-2000), and some commenter’s say they may return to power in the next presidential election. This is more than just a political party; it is an institution that stood in the way of democracy and justice in favor of security and economic growth. I would say that the PRI has always capitalized on Mexicans quest for a savior, promising every six years a new direction for the nation, a light at the end of the tunnel. Fuentes points out frequently that there are two Mexico’s, one a modern industrialized nation of 100 million people whose economy is ranked 13th largest in the world, and the other whose people live in a caste system in “prehistoric” conditions, where rates of poverty, illiteracy, and infant mortality rates even shock experts who study statistics on the “third world.” Fuentes makes the argument that Mexico must adopt democracy and respect for the law in order to unite these two Mexico’s. He mentions that Mexico should follow Spain’s example of Accords that were signed after General Franco’s death, that paved the way for a peaceful transfer of power, and from despot to democratic tendencies in that nation.
I agree with Fuentes in promoting democracy in Mexico, but I dare him to question why is there so much power centralized in the presidency. The presidents of Mexico have in the past exploited the nation and reaped the benefits, whether by owning stock in Telemex (A telecommunication conglomerate whose major shareholder and founder Carlos Slim is the world’s richest man) and resisting calls for that monopoly’s separation, or owing massive tracts of land that after a series of bill and initiatives would create another mega resort like Cancun or Baja, or sending the army to shoot University students and wage a “Vietnam” styled war in Chiapas and damning not only the army’s prestige but also the last rainforest in all of Mexico. These are actions that the presidents of Mexico have done with no oversight from the Mexican legislature and Supreme Court, the nation in my opinion is only a democracy when its time to look for a new savior every six years.
It is not with ineptitude that Mexicans face the corruption, violence, and just sheer depression of certain parts of their nation, it is with profound humility which stems from as Fuentes puts it, “mutilations of her territories.” Mexicans will never forget their great loss in the Mexican-American War. Not only was Mexico City the capital captured but the president Santa Anna was as well…it was during his imprisonment that he signed the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidelgo which gave the United States 40% of what was then Mexico. Even today speaking with my family I notice that while everyone is extremely proud of their “Mexicaness,” they always sort of bow their head in shame and eyes always lose contact when the subject of the past war comes up. It was and in many ways still is a shock that after fighting the Spaniards, French and Germans to preserve their nation, Mexico only ended up being shattered by the one nation it had hoped to emulate, the United States. It is a shock that still and most likely will always live on with Mexico’s peoples. My grandfather owned a landscaping business in California and it was truly remarkable to see him work the land. His sweat and often his blood went into the land, and he was always quick to tell me what could have been Mexico if she had kept her land intact. He says that “Mexico would be equal to or greater than the United States in terms of power, or that Mexico would have wiped out extreme poverty.” Funny enough I always respond that they will because as Fuentes points out, the character of Mexico is not to give in, described on page 81, “Mexico seems to be able to survive it all- earthquakes and hurricanes, wars and revolutions, territorial mutilation, crime, and corruption. A marvelous country of tender and hardworking people, intelligent, modest, hospitable, and secret people, prideful and resentful as well.” And that is why Mexicans regardless of their demi-God overlord and the rape of their lands, always are ready and able to proclaim loudly and with pride, “Qué Viva Mexico!”
The PRI ruled Mexico for about seventy years (1929-2000), and some commenter’s say they may return to power in the next presidential election. This is more than just a political party; it is an institution that stood in the way of democracy and justice in favor of security and economic growth. I would say that the PRI has always capitalized on Mexicans quest for a savior, promising every six years a new direction for the nation, a light at the end of the tunnel. Fuentes points out frequently that there are two Mexico’s, one a modern industrialized nation of 100 million people whose economy is ranked 13th largest in the world, and the other whose people live in a caste system in “prehistoric” conditions, where rates of poverty, illiteracy, and infant mortality rates even shock experts who study statistics on the “third world.” Fuentes makes the argument that Mexico must adopt democracy and respect for the law in order to unite these two Mexico’s. He mentions that Mexico should follow Spain’s example of Accords that were signed after General Franco’s death, that paved the way for a peaceful transfer of power, and from despot to democratic tendencies in that nation.
I agree with Fuentes in promoting democracy in Mexico, but I dare him to question why is there so much power centralized in the presidency. The presidents of Mexico have in the past exploited the nation and reaped the benefits, whether by owning stock in Telemex (A telecommunication conglomerate whose major shareholder and founder Carlos Slim is the world’s richest man) and resisting calls for that monopoly’s separation, or owing massive tracts of land that after a series of bill and initiatives would create another mega resort like Cancun or Baja, or sending the army to shoot University students and wage a “Vietnam” styled war in Chiapas and damning not only the army’s prestige but also the last rainforest in all of Mexico. These are actions that the presidents of Mexico have done with no oversight from the Mexican legislature and Supreme Court, the nation in my opinion is only a democracy when its time to look for a new savior every six years.
It is not with ineptitude that Mexicans face the corruption, violence, and just sheer depression of certain parts of their nation, it is with profound humility which stems from as Fuentes puts it, “mutilations of her territories.” Mexicans will never forget their great loss in the Mexican-American War. Not only was Mexico City the capital captured but the president Santa Anna was as well…it was during his imprisonment that he signed the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidelgo which gave the United States 40% of what was then Mexico. Even today speaking with my family I notice that while everyone is extremely proud of their “Mexicaness,” they always sort of bow their head in shame and eyes always lose contact when the subject of the past war comes up. It was and in many ways still is a shock that after fighting the Spaniards, French and Germans to preserve their nation, Mexico only ended up being shattered by the one nation it had hoped to emulate, the United States. It is a shock that still and most likely will always live on with Mexico’s peoples. My grandfather owned a landscaping business in California and it was truly remarkable to see him work the land. His sweat and often his blood went into the land, and he was always quick to tell me what could have been Mexico if she had kept her land intact. He says that “Mexico would be equal to or greater than the United States in terms of power, or that Mexico would have wiped out extreme poverty.” Funny enough I always respond that they will because as Fuentes points out, the character of Mexico is not to give in, described on page 81, “Mexico seems to be able to survive it all- earthquakes and hurricanes, wars and revolutions, territorial mutilation, crime, and corruption. A marvelous country of tender and hardworking people, intelligent, modest, hospitable, and secret people, prideful and resentful as well.” And that is why Mexicans regardless of their demi-God overlord and the rape of their lands, always are ready and able to proclaim loudly and with pride, “Qué Viva Mexico!”
book review by Jose Sanchez
No comments:
Post a Comment