U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Americas
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-05-2019, 04:03 PM
 
Location: New Mexico
7,019 posts, read 3,876,207 times
Reputation: 13240

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by CHESTER MANIFOLD View Post
The French occupation of Texas during a few years is anecdotical. Mexico inherited the legacy of the Spanish crown that was there 200 years. Just as the emerging 13 colonies inherited the legacy of those British companies.
The farthest northern reaches of the Spanish North American colonial empire was not going to belong to Mexico whether there was the war in 1846 or one five or ten years later or foreign intervention finally just prevailed. Russia had been nosing around the California coast all the way down to Drake's Bay. At one time Spain claimed the west coast all the way up to the Aleutians. Russia was apparently not interested in Spain's claims. The Louisiana (trans-Mississippi) territory flipped to Spain from France in 1763 but they didn't try to take control for several years. They figured they could maybe govern it from Havana. Then it flipped back to France and then the US. The British laid claim on the Pacific Northwest. Mexico could not have maintained control over the California gold rush. California was populating with people who had no real interest in a future with Mexico. Whole towns of the US Midwest were nearly depopulated of adult males as they headed to California. San Francisco Bay was full of abandoned ships because the crews headed to the gold fields. Texas split off and other parts of Mexico were trying to do the same including the Republic of Yucatan (1841-1848). Mexico gained and then lost the southern areas all the way down to Nicaragua and Costa Rica. The Mormons set up a de facto country in Utah with plans to reach toward the Pacific. French and American filibusteros were trying to peel off parts of Baja and Sonora throughout most of the 1850s. Mexico, beset by internal conflicts, was just one player in a cast of many.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-05-2019, 04:34 PM
 
Location: New York Area
16,517 posts, read 6,517,218 times
Reputation: 12710
Quote:
Originally Posted by SunGrins View Post
The farthest northern reaches of the Spanish North American colonial empire was not going to belong to Mexico whether there was the war in 1846 or one five or ten years later or foreign intervention finally just prevailed....Mexico, beset by internal conflicts, was just one player in a cast of many.
Great analysis. The U.S. and Britain were really the only players to seek to develop and hold land. Spain was mostly an extractor of wealth, not a developer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2019, 11:48 AM
 
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
6,215 posts, read 9,663,979 times
Reputation: 3236
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbgusa View Post
Spain was mostly an extractor of wealth, not a developer.
This sums it up pretty well too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2019, 02:53 PM
 
12,563 posts, read 18,667,120 times
Reputation: 20036
Quote:
Originally Posted by SunGrins View Post
The farthest northern reaches of the Spanish North American colonial empire was not going to belong to Mexico whether there was the war in 1846 or one five or ten years later or foreign intervention finally just prevailed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbgusa View Post
Great analysis. The U.S. and Britain were really the only players to seek to develop and hold land. Spain was mostly an extractor of wealth, not a developer.

Both of these conclusions I was also trying to summarize in my history on this thread:
1.) When Mexico achieved independence, all these former Spanish provinces likewise wanted independence, but not under Mexico City. Texas, California, Yucatan, etc. Santa Anna managed to corral most of these provinces into centralized governance of Mexico City by force or arms and brutality to the extent of massacring entire towns. But he couldn't manage past the Rio Grande and these provinces in turn were developing there own cultures and self-governance. Regardless if the Mexican-American War happened or not, they wouldn't hold them going forward. No way.
2.) Spain wasn't colonizing the new world as much as exploiting them and the land. One poster here came up with some fable of Spain colonist working side-by-side to, i guess in his mind, to create some utopian society. Rubbish. There was no colonization really, there were soldiers and governors and the church. They wanted to strip the land and people bare and bring whatever riches they can get back to Spain.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2019, 03:39 PM
 
Location: Lakeside, CA
284 posts, read 32,069 times
Reputation: 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by sf_arkitect View Post
Most America boosters are neglecting to take into account that Mexico was invaded by the US army. The capital city was sieged and eventually capitulated. At that point, the Mexican government was essentially forced to sign a treaty (i.e. sell half of it's territory) at gun point.
Hello...it called a 'war'
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2019, 05:01 PM
 
Location: New Mexico
3,949 posts, read 1,715,038 times
Reputation: 3703
Default Some oversimplification there

Quote:
Originally Posted by jbgusa View Post
Great analysis. The U.S. and Britain were really the only players to seek to develop and hold land. Spain was mostly an extractor of wealth, not a developer.
Spain (& most of the European empires) were centralized powers. In Spain & the Spanish New World, political & economic power radiated from the zócalo, the main square where the cathedral & government occupied the prime territory (& replicated in every state & major city in Mexico). The wealthy & powerful lived nearby.

No one wanted to go live in the borderlands, nor try to wrest a living from agriculture - that's what the Native Peoples were for (in the Spanish mind). Failing that, that's what the slaves imported from Africa were for. Spain didn't allow the literary/philosophical/scientific/theological innovations that were discussed elsewhere in Europe. Spain's control of printing presses & newspapers (& alliance with Roman Catholicism, which operated the Spanish schools & trained the teachers & scribes) permitted that - & also choked off the streams & sources of innovation that might have saved (or @ least prolonged) the Spanish Empire.

As a system, the Spanish Empire worked well for a long time, until arteriosclerosis of the economy weakened the basis of government, the military, the balance of trade. & the Spanish economy fell apart, seized by foreign newcomers with very different ideas.

By contrast, UK wasn't particularly hierarchical in its approach to problems, & it was exporting colonists - people attracted by free land, ideological/religious freedom, & the possibility of establishing a new beginning to society - whether human or heavenly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2019, 06:12 PM
509
 
3,134 posts, read 4,171,057 times
Reputation: 3731
People forget that the Apache’s (American’s) fought with the Mexicans for over 400 years trying to protect their lands from being taken by the Spanish and Mexicans after that.

It was finally the US Calvary that ended the 400 plus year Mexican/Apache War.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2019, 07:04 PM
Status: "Life goes on..." (set 9 days ago)
 
5,542 posts, read 8,202,731 times
Reputation: 4349
Right... That’s why Jamaica, St Lucia, Guyana, and Belize are among the most developed parts of the world. The same can be seen in India, Nigeria, and Kenya. In fact, in much of the world that formed a part of the British Empire. I hope people realize that for most centuries the most important, richest, and most powerful cities in the Americas was not New York, Boston, Savannah, or New Haven; but rather Mexico City, Lima, Quito, La Habana... the list goes on.

On the other hand, the invasion of Mexico City by the United States.


Pg 88; American Ulysses: The Life of Ulysses S Grant, Ronald C White.


The Zócalo, the heart of not just Mexico City, but all of Mexico. Notice what flag is on top of the Presidential Palace. http://libertador.mx/sobre-los-orige...smo-en-mexico/


The Zócalo today. Minus a few minor details, it basically looks the same, especially the buildings surrounding the center of Mexico.

Last edited by AntonioR; 09-06-2019 at 07:17 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2019, 07:54 PM
 
505 posts, read 141,043 times
Reputation: 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by SunGrins View Post
The farthest northern reaches of the Spanish North American colonial empire was not going to belong to Mexico whether there was the war in 1846 or one five or ten years later or foreign intervention finally just prevailed. Russia had been nosing around the California coast all the way down to Drake's Bay. At one time Spain claimed the west coast all the way up to the Aleutians. Russia was apparently not interested in Spain's claims. The Louisiana (trans-Mississippi) territory flipped to Spain from France in 1763 but they didn't try to take control for several years. They figured they could maybe govern it from Havana. Then it flipped back to France and then the US. The British laid claim on the Pacific Northwest. Mexico could not have maintained control over the California gold rush. California was populating with people who had no real interest in a future with Mexico. Whole towns of the US Midwest were nearly depopulated of adult males as they headed to California. San Francisco Bay was full of abandoned ships because the crews headed to the gold fields. Texas split off and other parts of Mexico were trying to do the same including the Republic of Yucatan (1841-1848). Mexico gained and then lost the southern areas all the way down to Nicaragua and Costa Rica. The Mormons set up a de facto country in Utah with plans to reach toward the Pacific. French and American filibusteros were trying to peel off parts of Baja and Sonora throughout most of the 1850s. Mexico, beset by internal conflicts, was just one player in a cast of many.
Those were anecdotes. All European countries were retrenching from America, The only real threat was illegal immigrants from the US. Mexico, and Spain before, had no power to control illegals.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-06-2019, 07:55 PM
 
16 posts, read 1,776 times
Reputation: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by manxhunter View Post
During the Mexican - American war?

I'm asking this because there seems to be a lot of mexicans who are angry about it.
Because Mexico is far too weak to take on the United States.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Americas
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top