So we stole Mexico?”

So lots of people seem inclined to insist that all the ILLEGAL ALIENS, coming from Mexico, have some sort of right to do so because the United States stole that land from Mexico.

 Well, I can understand the ignorance but let’s address the stupidity first shall we? So, all you all you folks think that a citizen from another nation is somehow imbued with the right to just cross the boarder from the nation they are a citizen of, into a nation where they are not a citizen of and set up house. In law that practice is called ‘squatting’ and in the past it was dealt with by the land owner and a length of rope. Now days there is a reemergence of this practice amongst the anarchist and punk culture and while they have established a certain following even here amongst some like Randy Quaid, it didn’t end well for him.

 So let’s address the ignorance now: Regardless of the vast history and culture of the original inhabitants of Mexico and Central America from 1492 to 1502 they fell under conquest and rule of Spain. You know the country that decimated the native tongues and Faiths and replaced them with the Spanish equivalents. That is why the language of Mexico is primarily Castellan Spanish, not Mexican, French or English. Are we clear on that point?

 There was the “Period of Conquest” from 1521 to 1600;The “Colonial Period” from 1650 to 1810;And last but not least “The Struggle for Independence” from 1807 to 1910. It truly began in 1808 Spain was overwhelmed by war so King Ferdinand VII abdicated to King Charles IV of France, also known as ‘Charles the Imbecile’. The reality is Napoleon’s military might was who Ferdinand abdicated to and there is a complete history of this in “Affair of Escurial”, for the literate to become more familiar with the changing world then and not really relevant to Mexico’s bid for independence save for the fact, Spain was a dying ‘Super Power’.

When Super Powers are at war that is the time when ‘colonist’ will choose to revolt and Mexico was no exception to this phenomenon.

 So an insurgency of idealist peasants and miners started a rebellion (Just like us terrorist Americans did in 1776) under the leadership of a Jesuit Priest by the name of Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla (No, this isn’t about the horse movie.). “The Cry of Delores” issued on September 16th, 1810 is the celebrated as Independence Day. So if you some how though the Cinco de Mayo or the “Fifth of May” is about Mexican Independence Day, you are both ignorant and dead wrong. Embarrassed yet and you think you want to claim you understand the Mexican people enough to think they have claim to come here? Right!

 Cinco de Mayo is just the celebration of an unlikely victory of the Mexican Army (Not Spanish, Mexican) in 1862.

 Mexican Independence Day is still celebrated on September 16th and is still a major celebration of Mexican pride and independence. Not unlike our own Fourth of July here in the United States of America but we aren’t supposed to have any pride because we ‘stole’ this country, right? (Sarcasm light is now off.)

 Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla was an interesting figure in history and I highly recommend everyone delve deeper than I will do here about him. Apart from being a Jesuit trained priest, he was a ‘criollo’ or ‘creole’ meaning he was born in Mexico but born to parents of pure Spanish ancestry. So while he didn’t have the status of the ‘Iberian Pennsulares’ or permanent resident colonist in Mexico the originally hail from Spain, he has higher status than the ‘mestizo’ or people of Spanish and Amerindian decent. The pure Amerindian or ‘Mexicans’ had even less status, rights and dignity than even them. Also it should be noted that every class I’ve mentioned thus far is ‘commoner’ or not of Spanish Nobility, let alone Royalty which is a how other social division in Spain; however much of this same division of class is still practiced in Mexico today, with subtle and even violent differences based on the state or region your in. (This will be referenced again so make a mental note.)

 So in reality you had what amounted to a bunch of ‘uppity colonist’ wanting to keep the efforts of their ‘slaves’ labor to themselves is what this revolution against Spain was all about. Why does that sound familiar?

 That struggle for independence, even though it is celebrated on September 16th was a continuing struggle but in 1821 the Empire of Mexico was declared and ruled by the dictator Augustin de Iturbide. Funny that name does not sound Mayan or even Amerindian in the least. Probably because it wasn’t, rather it was the name of a Basque gentry’s family or class called the Valladolid.

 You may not like the idea of ‘class’ or ‘status’ and in America your free not to accept such notions but America is not the rest of the world. If you have never travelled outside of America or even in Mexico, Central/ South America, you are clueless and any opinions you have regarding this practice are irrelevant. You are free to go down there and try and change this, I’ll send you a deck of cards so you will have something to do in your prison cell, after you try.

 As it is with most dictatorships, Iturbide put the penis into the word dictator and after several failures to include an inability to pay his army (A reoccurring theme in Mexican governance.) in 1822 several leaders to include Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna (Yeah, right, the guy they named the California wind after, sure.) called for him to step down.

 Granted there is a huge amount of details that I’m skipping here but my goal is to educate all those simpering morons that somehow have got it into their heads that Mexican, Central or South American Nationals somehow have a right to enter our boarders.

 Oh, wait did you catch that; Central America is no longer a part of the Mexican Empire! That’s right, because in 1823 with the accession of Mexico’s new Emperor, Agustin I, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Costa Rica and Honduras declared independence from Mexico even though they had changed their name to the United Mexican States instead of the Mexican Empire in October of 1824. I’m guessing Emperor Agustin I; never got the memo but those other four states sure did and wanted none of it.

 This now begs an important question with great relevance to today; if those states are not a part of the United States of Mexico, then that would mean that people, from Central America, that illegally crossed the boarder here; also illegally crossed the boarder into Mexico to get to here. (Epic sentence wasn’t it but I digress.) Bottom line on that is Mexico is not enforcing there boarder policies nor are they rendering humanitarian aid but rather they are exploiting the Central Americans as they enter into Mexico and/or facilitating their passage up into the US. (This is not a conspiracy theory but a matter of known fact if you have ever been to Central America.)

 So as well as adopting the name of United States of Mexico, ‘defining’ that nation as a representative ‘republic’ with a new constitution penned by the wealthy land owners no less and adopting Catholicism as the official National religion, Mexico went through a series of coups and counter coups because the elections down there just really don’t matter. This is a fact of life even to this day as is Mexico’s continuing struggle for independence.

 The accuracy of their nomenclature aside, the ‘Mexican Republic’ gave way to a period that blew through in Mexican History, often called the ‘Age of Santa Anna’. (Like the wind pun and no the wind was not named for him.)

 More aptly called ‘The Age of Caudillismo”, derived from the old Spanish word cabdillo, its origins in Latin from capitellum or caput-‘head’ usually defines a political-military leadership or simply ‘war-lords’. (Hey, I’m not making this up, its history baby and if you don’t like it complain to the dead, but they won’t care.)

 In this era we find the Santa Anna overthrew President Bustamante for Manuel Pedraza to become President in 1828. In 1832 Santa Anna took that office by election instead of overthrow and served as President 11 more times after that. Much like our current President of the United States of America, Santa Anna abrogated (did away with) the federal constitution of Mexico. That probably made it easier to be elected 11 more times, I’m sure. However by 1834 this abrogation aggravated some folks in the Mexican states of Yucatan and the northern state of Choahuila y Tejas.

 You may know Choahuila y Tejas by better by its present name of the Great Lone Star state of Texas. Yep, it would seem a bunch of uppity English speaking settlers and Mexican Nationals decided they weren’t too thrilled with Santa Anna’s rule and on 2nd, 1836; they declared independence from Mexico at Washington on the Brazos. This was the birth of the Texas Republic; you remember, the Alamo? While that was a defeat it gave Sam Houston time to gather militia and at the Battle of San Jacinto on April 21st, 1836, they defeated and captured President/General Santa Anna.

 So Texas was not the United States, Texas was its own republic and didn’t ‘steal the land but rather won its independence from Mexico. No illegal has any rights, claim or authority to cross over that boarder so La Raza can just suck it! By 1845, Congress ratified Texas as a state within the United States but that case is locked solid and closed; illegal’s have no right to cross into Texas based on the land theft claim or any ancestral claim there as that was Comanche territory previous to then.

 You know it really chaps my hide to think that someone is out there teaching some lame duck history that America stole Texas from the Mexicans when the facts above confirm much the contrary. If there were any dirty tricks being played at the time though it needs to be mentioned they were being played against the Comanche by Santa Anna. You see he allowed American settlers into Comanche territory with the sole goal of having them fight the Comanche and thus defend his northern boarders for free. It wasn’t until the folks tired of paying tribute to a non-constitutional republic, decided to take matters into their own hands and that suddenly required the attention of Santa Anna.

 Hämäläinen, Pekka (2008). The Comanche Empire. Yale University Press. pp. 357–358

“A key factor in the decision to allow Americans in was the belief that they would (a) protect the northern Mexico from Comanche attacks and (b) buffer the northern states against U.S. westward expansion. The policy failed on both counts: the Americans tended to settle far from Comanche raiding zones and used the Mexican government’s failure to suppress the raids as a pretext for declaring independence.”

This was written by a REAL historian not a pseudo, La Raza historian but since those same Comanche raids also were happening in ‘New Mexico’ territory lets address the rest of the claim that the United States stole the land, apart from Tejas.

 This is concerning the post Annexation of Texas Period and the territory known as ‘Alta California and the Northern parts of the current Mexican states of Sonora and Chihuahua (Yes, it’s a Mexican state and not just a little dog.).

 Before I take this any further I would just like to mention that I’m a half-breed Cherokee, I know what the history of westward expansionism did to my culture but plain and simple; none of the folks that suffered or stole those lands is alive today. I have no claim on the land nor do I have any right to ask any on that land today, to pack up and move. I saw the mistakes of the English, French, Spanish and early Americans here and their treatment of the native cultures. I don’t think repeating such mistakes in the name of vengeance are any justification nor any way to honor the blood of those who died on both sides of all those conflicts. There is no one alive today that holds guilt for this or is there any alive today that can claim any suffrage. I mention in passing that this holds true to other claims such as slavery as well as illegal immigration.

 You cannot hold the sons and daughters accountable for the sins that they were not here to commit; nor can one who was not present for the commission of said sins hold any grudge for that past.

 So despite Santa Anna’s defeat during the Texas Revolution in 1836, the Second Federal Republic of Mexico (Also known as the Centralist Republic of Mexico) wasn’t doing so well in the land department and was losing territory faster than hatter loses their mind.

 The independent Republic of Texas was recognized by Britain, France and the United States (Essentially the United Nations at the time period being the major ‘super powers of the era.) and all advised Mexico not to attempt to re-conquer the new nation. (Now, ain’t that real sweet; all those folks sticking up for the Texas Republic like that; not that they needed any help.)

 Mexico however threatened war against the United States if they annexed the new nation, indicating that they had designs on retaking the newly independent nation. Just lie Mexico’s constitution, Santa Anna didn’t have much use for the treaties he signed either as he did sign one recognizing Texas’ independence, the Treaties of Velasco.

 Historians will probably never agree completely as to the origins of what set off the Mexican-American War; really very few wars can be defined down to one detail as not every moment in history is recorded without bias or even recorded. Yes, while the old adage: “The victor writes the history” is relevant, just as relevant is a thing I like to call: “Whiny sore loser syndrome”.

You really have to look in the middle to gain a reasonable overview.

 I cite the debated territorial boarder of Texas and Mexico which in the Treaties of Velasco claims the territory to the Rio Grande as independent Texas. Mexico didn’t like that and claimed the boarder at the Nueces River. So when Texas was finally annexed against the wishes of Mexico, this matter of a boarder dispute was conveniently omitted in the resolution to Congress. Much like the Affordable Healthcare Act, Congress failed to read but verify precisely what they were voting for. Nothing has really changed, has it?

 The US President at the time, James K. Polk and Democrat no less, was a big proponent and supporter of American territorial expansion to the Pacific coastline. He reissued that favorite Democratic concept of ‘Manifest Destiny’ to justify the war with Mexico. The ‘Whigs’ (Eventually who morphed into the Republican Party) rejected such a concept saying: “American imperialism did not represent an American consensus; it provoked bitter dissent within national policies.”

Funny how it’s the Democrats always wanting to share their guilt with everyone else for there piss poor policies. Truly there is more than enough guilt to go around but none of this guilt belongs to any alive today, so stop trying to lay it on anyone.

 Regardless of the claims of ‘land theft’ from Mexico, after Texas declared independence other nations were like sharks smelling blood in the water and France and Britain had designs on the territory of Alta California.

 In 1946 alone Mexico changed Presidents four times, war ministry six times and finance ministry sixteen times. One can speculate in all that turmoil they were incapable of negotiating with John Slidell whom Polk had authorized to offer $25 million for the Rio Grande Boarder on Texas and the provinces of Alta California and Santa Fe de Nuevo de Mexico with a negotiation cap of $30 million and a forgiveness of a $3 million dollar debt owed to US citizens for damages caused by the Mexican War of Independence.

 While President Joaquin de Herrera was inclined to negotiate with Slidell, the military opponents accused that Mexican President of treason and deposed him replacing him with General Paredes y Arrillaga who immediately wanted to reclaim Texas.

 The US cited the Treaties of Velasco claiming the boarder of the Rio Grande and Polk sent a small 70-man detachment under General Taylor. Ignoring the Mexican demands to withdraw to the Nueces River, Taylor erected an outpost on the banks of the Rio Grande across from the city of Matamoros, Tamaulipas. On April 25th, 1846, a force of 2000 Mexican calvary, under General Mariano Arista, attacked a patrol from the outpost under command of Captain Seth B. Thorton, killing 16 US solders. Referred to as the Thorton Affair, it was this more than anything that caused the US to declare war upon Mexico.

 So while one can speculate all they wish about the war and if it was it justified; I prefer to ask is any war ‘justified’ as I always say: “Rationalizations are lies you tell yourself; justifications are when you share those lies with others”.

A moot point really as the US kick Mexico’s butt and even took over Mexico City in the course of the war. In the end the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (No, not the horse movie) spelled out the consequences of the war for Mexico. (This is how the real world works; there are consequences for actions, especially when you lose at war.) There was the forced Mexican Cession of the territories of Alta California and New Mexico to the US in exchange for $15 million dollars and forgiveness of the $3 million dollar debt and the acceptance of the Reo Grande as the national boarder in Texas.

 So La Raza, your claims are unfounded, false and all lies. If you have issues with that land being lost, take it up with your government in Mexico not here and not with US citizens. You have no claim based in this very accurate and complete history. Right or wrong it is a done deal and the more you whine about it the less sense it makes. Perhaps any citizens complaining about this history and any supporting illegal immigration based on slander they are spinning about the history, should be deported right along with all the illegal aliens. That way you can be closer to the government that actually is the root of all your issues. Try bullying them as we the citizen’s of America, have had enough of your crap and the Liberal guilt crap.

 Take your hatred of this nation and get the hell out!