Summary of Rodolfo
Acuna’s Occupied America: a History of
Chicanos (chapter 1) by Ryan Steed
Initial intentions of
invasion
Acuna claims that as early as 1767, Benjamin Franklin considered the
invasion of Mexican territory. At
the time, the invasion was hidden under the false pretenses of “future
expansion.” Even after the
Louisiana Purchase, many Americans felt
Mexico and her
territories to be American in fact.
After repeated attempts to establish the
“Republic of
Texas” by force, American inhabitants
already in the area agreed to obey Mexican government stipulations. However, even after accepting these
obligations, Americans still felt the Mexicans as their inferiors. Further conflicts arose due to racial
tensions forcing
America to
negotiate for full ownership of the land.
After the initial offer of $1 million for the territory extending to the
Rio Grande was dismissed, “the
United States
launched an aggressive foreign policy, attempting to coerce
Mexico into
selling Texas. Settlers accepted more laws and
obligations imposed upon them by the Mexican government as the bid for
Texas increased to $5 million from
Andrew Jackson. Mexican
reinforcements were moved in as it was now clear that
America wanted
Texas for its industrial and
economical gains at this point, and showed little interest in stopping. Sam Houston’s “war party” was becoming
increasingly popular as he was “elected to direct the course of events.”
Henry Smith’s pamphlet entitled Security for Texas openly called for
defiance of the Mexican government.
“Anglos saw separation from
Mexico and
eventual union with the United
States as the most profitable political
arrangement.”
The invasion
Mexico
seemed to be totally out of line imposing regulations on its American settlers
as “the deliberately believed themselves, morally, intellectually, and
politically superior.” Conflict was
inevitable. A general call to arms
was declared in 1835. In reality,
the settlers with American reinforcements easily outnumbered and outperformed
than their Mexican counterparts.
There were nearly 30,000 Americans in
Texas as opposed to Santa Anna’s
army of 6,000 conscripts. The
overplayed mythology of the Alamo legend gives way to the
reality of Americans who had “come to
Texas for riches and glory. These defenders were hardly the sort of
men who could be classified as peaceful settlers fighting for their homes.” Albeit, the myth of the
Alamo and it’s heroic defenders paved the way for massive
America
government support in the form of soldiers, equipment, and funding. After the Alamo,
Houston’s army eventually captured
Santa Anna and forced him the sign the territory away. Although
Mexico disagreed
with many actions thereafter, “the Jackson Administration made it plain to the
Mexican minister that it mattered little whether
Mexico approved,
that the important thing was to protect the boarder against Indians and
Mexicans.”
Acuna points out that “the two Mexican wars gave
U.S. commerce,
industry, mining, agriculture, and stock raising a tremendous stimulus.” Expansion leads to plenty of new
opportunities, why not expand more?
James K. Polk won the presidency riding his expansionism ideals. After the annexation of
Texas, Polk seemed to do as much
as humanly possibly to stir up more trouble with
Mexico. As the boarder was still in doubt
(Rio Grande or 150 miles north of
there), Polk ordered General Taylor into the disputed territory “wanting to
provoke an attack.”
When he learned of an attack on Americans in the disputed territory, it
was all the evidence he needed to warrant another invasion. His stages of conquest included: (1)
“Mexicans would be cleared out of Texas;” (2) “Anglos would occupy California
and New Mexico;” and (3) “U.S. forces would march to Mexico City to force the
beaten government to make peace on Polk’s terms.” In the end, the war was made out to be
by the American government an outlet for economic and industrial expansion.
The reason for expansion
It has been claimed that Manifest Destiny was at the very heart of the
Mexican-American war. Acuna argues
that “Anglo-Americans believed that God had made them custodians of democracy
and that they had a mission – that is, that they were predestined to spread its
principles.” However, Acuna asks,
how can one claim Manifest Destiny in the light of the utter horrors Americans
committed on Mexicans in the months following? War atrocities mounted as American
soldiers remained encamped in Mexican cities. “In truth, the
United States
conducted a violent and brutal war.”
“The bomb did not discriminate as to age or sex. Anglo-American troops
destroyed almost every city they invaded.”
Does this reflect the supposed “God-selected custodians of
democracy?” Acuna argues that “land
was the main motive for the war.”
Americans wanted the Mexicans out.
“The United
States, through the violence of its soldiers,
left a legacy of hate in
Mexico.”
The treaty
In 1848, hostilities had officially ended with
Mexico being
forced to agree to the boarder marked at the Rio
Grande.
Mexico
further had to the rest of the Southwest of the current
United
States.
In return,
Mexico received
$15 million. The Treaty of
Guadalupe Hidalgo also featured Mexican rights equal to those of the Americans’
under the Constitution. “In
practice, however, the treaty was ignored and during the nineteenth century most
Mexicans in the United
States were considered as a class apart from
the dominant race.” In the end,
Mexico lost over
a half of their soil to a country seeking to extend their economic
self-interest.