History is being reported And re- written. Some good, some overblown. As a society we need to learn to live together. Accept the fact our blood is the same color.
Why are Homicides on the Rise Again in Mexico? What Can Be Done About It?
Hate groups need to called out for what they are! Tearing us apart. And our law enforcement needs restructuring. I am an old white woman who has finally had her eyes opened, helped by the events ov this year. I am just now Goid God learning about the concentration camps our T. Hitler has on the boulders with Mexico. In an effort to learn more ignorance is not bliss anymore I am reading about this area of white supremacy that has always happened along this bourses.
It is atrocious. I am ashamed. I wish I had a clue what I could do about it! I am choking while writing this.
You stated it yourselves, we are not taught any of these atrocities in our schools. I never attended collage, maybe the books are there. Removing requirements from the child welfare reporting system to identify tribal children is an attempt by the state to extinguish the identity and history of the original people.
- How the Chicano Movement Championed Mexican-American Identity and Fought for Change.
- online dating central near Tegucigalpa Honduras!
- central speed dating in Guntur India.
- beach dating in San Jose Costa Rica?
Dude, give us some time. Hi, I always thought this treaty allowed free access for Mexicans into the US. Is that a part that was deleted or did I mis-remember that? History was never my strongest subject. The treaty says nothing about free access. However, in practice, the border was not patrolled and no documents were required to cross the border in either direction until the s.
No, it made those on the Norte Side of the Treaty American Citizens with the right to retain their lands. They became American. It did not have a inter border policy in the Treaty. That is a misnomer used as a gateway to the open border agenda as is the espoused theft of land, that was in fact remained in the hands of the propety owners, per the treay. As with the other comment, approving because it is sincere and not racist, even though I disagree with it.
I find this blog analysis of the treaty well done. To me I feel that key to the treaty was choice to return to Mexico or remain and become a US citizen.
Navigation menu
Nowhere does it infer that the countries were conjoined. I had a college professor that was adamant that the Treaty established bilingual languages and prohibited forcing Mexicans from speaking our language. It appears that was untrue, just a wishful interpretation. In regard to immigration, I love the Mexican people but strongly believe we need a secure border. Legal immigration is good for our country. Illegal immigrantion, regardless from where, is bad. Thanks for your comment, approved because it is sincere. The treaty implied bilingual protections at least for the people who were already Spanish speakers in , which would imply supporting Spanish at least through Also you may wish to research language supports as non-English speaking European immigrants were accommodated in the US through the early s with, for example, German newspapers, schools, churches.
These interpretations of the meanings of history are not readily resolved just by reading the treaty, but knowing what the treaty actually says is still important. As far as I know, all German, Hungarian, Frisian, whatever …language publication and activities were private. Bilingual schools were common in the 19th Century, even as there was an English-only movement opposing them, and there were US-born children being reared speaking German in rural areas of the US in the late s.
HIST 3340: Mexican Americans Since 1848
Official documents were published in English and Spanish in the Southwest after the Treaty; the original California state constitution required that all official documents be published in both languages. I have been trying to check the ballot question. While I agree with the majority of your comments that I have read, I have to take issue with a portion of one. You are correct. That is the point. Drinking alcohol became a problem of illegal alcohol consumption only with prohibition.
There is a huge debate about whether marijuana should be illegal and about whether criminalization of other drugs helps or hurts addiction problems.
Time Zone Converter (Time Difference Calculator)
A major change in the immigration law in caused a lot of the current problem, as did the creation of ICE in Odd how an illegal immigration question led you to mention drugs… hmmmmmm, they do go hand in hand across our borders daily and yes, illegally. San Francisco and San Diego are beautiful examples of illegal immigrants ruling over state and federal laws. Thank you for your time and patience. I mentioned alcohol and marijuana. It is hard to imagine anybody reading the news this year who could think that asylum seekers are being treated well by the US.
Thank you Pamela Oliver! Thank you for sharing this information. I found it very helpful.
Why are Homicides on the Rise Again in Mexico? What Can Be Done About It? | Wilson Center
It is important for Xicanxs however, to be aware of how some of us oppressed indigenous peoples in the southwest by accepting proximity to whiteness at their expense. Yes, there are some good books about this complex history of the Southwest US. First off the elite texans as you say, were mexican and the mexican government, at that said time, although liberated from Spain, was still Through Santa Ana as well as rich Spanish oligarchs.
- exclusive dating service in Sholapur India;
- Brooklyn Museum.
- casual hookup Zhengzhou China.
- central speed dating in Mazatlan Mexico?
Also a total failure to mention why those Anglo types were there. They were invited there on behest of The Mexican Government, in hope to bring economic prosperity as well as in an effort to fight the commanche and indians of the pueblo. Initially it had squat to do with the United States. As Jackson wanted nothing to do with it despite that he was an evil expansionist and all.
It was these groupings of whites and Mexicans that were fighting against the government for 20 years and requesting help from tge US, not just Anglo invaders……. That is when the war began, which many Americans at the time opposed. Those are the truths you failed to mention and that, that land was Mexicos through Spanish Occupation, also an encroachment on Native American Tribal Land and Territory.
Also the points you make concerning language are really a mute point to what the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo did. Which was land grants and citizenship to The Mexican land owners on the norte side of the Treaty, who retained their agricultural lands and became American Citizens. Aztland is a myth, those that were on this side of the Norte kept their lands, America removed itself from Mexico City, after 9 months, after The Treaty was signed…..
Is there heated debate about who started it, and was there debate among the minds at the time about weather it was handled right, sure. Its just like now, but all that land was conquered as is all land. Lets us not forget the revichism used in Germany after the Treaty of Versailles. Let us not forget, the lack of rights to the average citizens under Santa Ana, and the rich poor divide. One sided history is easy to hold on to, but I implore others to check it out, read the totality of circumstances not just an agenda based blog.
Maybe its that ideological political science is a cancer and everyone wants something they think they were deprived of, when they were also deprivers, or perhaps its just division that rules the day and we all have to bleed because we cannot love. Approving because the comment is sincere and not spam or racist, although I disagree with parts. The main thing to say is that the interpretations of history are always contested and people interpret the meaning of past events in light of their current interests. That the war was controversial in its own time for a variety of reasons everybody who knows any history agrees.
As my blog post indicates, there was dispute even at the time of the treaty about exactly what it did and did not mean, partly because the US Congress did not ratify all of it and partly just because people read into it what they wanted to see. Whether you think conquest gives you rights usually depends on whether you are on the winning or losing side of the war.
But if you are going to justify current borders based on who won a war regardless of the morality of that war, then you can hardly complain if other people decide to violate those borders and see if they can move things around tho their own benefit. Yes and the Gadsden purchase was really a purchase not an act of extortion and a threat to violate the actual treaty of Guadalupe. We all know the intention by Polk was always to take virtually all of Mexico.
Furthermore the difference between Mestizo settlers living in the southwest in a territory loosely occupied by Spain for to years prior to Mexican independence is that the dominant Mestizo and Spanish Indian population that lived in the area emerged from within the cultural spaces produced by the Spanish conquest and those cultural spaces were invaded in what everyone knows was an unjust war. Yes Native Nations take priority over Mexican Mestizo cultural spaces in terms of who was first, but Mexican Mestizo cultural spaces emerged as transformed Native Nations which were conquered and hybridized and to make these hybrid cultural spaces illegitimate for the purpose of justifying Anglo invasions is simply intellectual dishonesty and outright self deception.
Thanks for a good article Pam. I am curious about how the land held by Mexicans who became American citizens was lost.