What would Mexico be like now, if Porfirio Diaz hadn't been ousted from power (living, military)
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.
I only hear very good things or very bad things about him. Like him modernizing the country, and having it at peace, yet having tons of poverty, and people living worse than what they lived like in colonial Mexico.
Also, that he believed in eugenics, and that he had his team of "cientificos", who believed in survival for the fittest, so that if people were dirt poor, it was their own fault, and not the government pushing them into that state of poverty.
I've heard things like, Mexico would be first world, Mexico would be so safe, Mexico would be so much "whiter", Mexico might have been a super power etc. but I think it would be like banana covered in diamond, only to be rotten on the inside.
I read a brief article on him, so forgive me if I sound ignorant. It was just a question I had in mind.
Also, that he believed in eugenics, and that he had his team of "cientificos", who believed in survival for the fittest, so that if people were dirt poor, it was their own fault, and not the government pushing them into that state of poverty.
Diaz was born in 1830 under the second president of Mexico to serve in the office for more than a few months. He was very poor and like many people who are self made, he did not think much of people who remained in poverty.
Many American presidents at the time had beliefs that would be a little shocking in the present day. It is difficult to think that he wouldn't have simply died a natural death in five years, and the country would have changed like the rest of the world.
While it is common in alternate histories to wonder what would have happened had Hitler lived, the Tsar remained in power in russia, I think the person who should be discussed with Porfirio Diaz is Teddy Roosevelt.
TR was not the same kind of person as Diaz. He was not an elitist and often was the champion of the poor. He never met Diaz as actually the first visit of a US president to foreign soil during the presidential term was between Diaz and Taft, Teddy Roosevelt's successor, a few months after TR left office.
But at the time there was many comparisons made between Teddy Roosevelt and Porfirio Diaz despite him being 28 years younger. Both men were extremely popular military leaders who had come to the highest office at a young age. At the time it was not illegal for the POTUS to run for office as many times as he wanted (but it was considered honorable to leave office after two terms).
Diaz had been elected initially under a "no re-elections" policy which he broke. As TR was facing his third potential election just after his 50th birthday while still extremely popular, many people were afraid that TR would become a benign "president for life".
On 17 February 1908, in an interview with the U.S. journalist James Creelman of Pearson's Magazine, Díaz was asked if he thought Teddy Roosevelt should run for a third time in Nov 1908. He didn't answer the question directly, but he stated that Mexico was ready for democracy and elections and that he would retire and allow other candidates to compete for the presidency
The interview was translated into Spanish and was published in Mexico a few days later. Political parties were formed with the intention of running for the presidency in 1910. When Diaz announced that he was going to run again, the country began to descend into the conditions leading to revolution.
Teddy Roosevelt chose not to run for a third term, but he changed his mind after two years. When the Republican party did not back his return to the office, he formed a third party which split the vote and resulted in a Democrat, Woodrow Wilson winning the 1912 election. Had Teddy been a five term president and died in office, it would have been him in office during WWI and he would or would not have formed the League of Nations.
Theodore "T.R." Roosevelt, Jr. died January 6, 1919 at age 60
Porfirio Díaz died 2 July 1915 at age 84
I highly recommend reading the Creelman Interview. The style is completely different from modern day interviews. It seems completely biased, like a "puff piece". But I think Creelman secretly realized the impact it would have on Mexican politics.
the year 1908 is almost completely overlooked in american history. But I think it was much more pivotal than most people realize.
A very thoughtful and interesting post, Paco. As you clearly know more about Mexican history than most posting here I would like to ask if you have an opinion about the truthfulness and accuracy of a book that was very influential in the downfall of the Diaz regime, and one that seems to have been accepted pretty much as gospel since: Barbarous Mexico, by John Kenneth Turner.
Did anyone ever do a study after the dust had settled to find out, for instance, whether there were actually such huge numbers of political prisoners being held or murdered as Turner claimed, or whether Diaz had such an effective secret police, or whether conditions in Valle Nacional were as he claimed? It has been quite a while since I read the book but I couldn't escape the suspicion that it was political propaganda that had not been subjected to scrutiny.
Why does Mexico have so many problems? This is a country that is next door to the united states. Should it not be as prosperous and have a level of development as high as Canada? It can't all stem from the drug war.
Adam Smith said the english colonies were more successful than the Spanish colonies because of the church and the crown controlled the trade in new spain. But after all this time, shouldn't mexico have developed. Why isn't it that the moment I cross the rio grande into mexico, i can't drink the water?
Did anyone ever do a study after the dust had settled to find out, for instance, whether there were actually such huge numbers of political prisoners being held or murdered as Turner claimed, or whether Diaz had such an effective secret police, or whether conditions in Valle Nacional were as he claimed? It has been quite a while since I read the book but I couldn't escape the suspicion that it was political propaganda that had not been subjected to scrutiny.
Not as far as I know. Conditions were so bad in Mexico that the 1921 census was so low, that no one believed how many people must have died.
I Censo General 1895 October 20 (12 million)
II Censo General 1900 October 28 (13.607272 million)
III Censo General 1910 October 27 (15.160369 million)
IV Censo General 1921 November 30 (14.334780 million)
V Censo General 1930 May 15 (16.552722 million)
After 1930, as in many countries around the world, the population exploded reaching 28.3 million by 1950.
It was lower by 826 thousand than the 1910 census and it was generally thought that it would be larger by a few hundred thousand because of births (even including the deaths)
The general belief was that a million people died in the revolution. Proportionately that would be like the USA losing the entire population of Florida today.
I doubt that doing a thorough investigation of the claims of a book written a decade earlier was a high priority.
As to whether John Kenneth Turner exaggerated; you might as well ask did Louis D. Brandeis, Frank Norris, Jacob Riis, Upton Sinclair, and Ida M. Tarbell exaggerate? Possibly! There collective aim was to galvanize society.
Thanks for the response, Paco. I was surprised to read that Barbarous Mexico was only first published in Spanish in the 1950's. I thought it was ironic that Turner favored Venustiano Carranza to restore order to Mexico. He seems to me to have been almost the second coming of Porfirio Diaz but he was unable to control the whirlwind that Turner had helped unleash.
Thanks for the response, Paco. I was surprised to read that Barbarous Mexico was only first published in Spanish in the 1950's. I thought it was ironic that Turner favored Venustiano Carranza to restore order to Mexico. He seems to me to have been almost the second coming of Porfirio Diaz but he was unable to control the whirlwind that Turner had helped unleash.
John Kenneth Turner also passed through a brief period of support for Zapata.But Turner soon went over to Carranza because of the Constitutionalist’s alliance with the House of the World Worker.
“The organized wage-workers are for Carranza to a man. Carranza has assisted the workers to organize and has helped them win their strike. One year ago, May 1, Carranza presided over an International Labor Day celebration of working men in the Mexican capital; he is probably the first head of any government ever to have done so radical a thing.” -JKT
The guy was super old when he left office anyways, and only lived a handful of years after that. I don't think that's come across so well here.
I posted the dates of their death.
Theodore "T.R." Roosevelt, Jr. died January 6, 1919 at age 60
Porfirio Díaz died 2 July 1915 at age 84
I think most people understand that he was old. But if he had lived out the remainder of his life in office, and his hand picked successor had kept the basic government intact, would Mexico be a different place?
Would Mexico and USA be closer or even more distant? Since monied interests from the USA were very influential in Mexico during the Porfirato, the resentments between the countries may have even been worse.
Would the Cristero War (1926–1929) gone differently?
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.
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.
