Conclusiones

From beginning to its end, the Mexican Revolution was not a communist or socialist revolution as was the case with Russia, China, and Cuba. The Revolution evolved from an elite struggle to a complicated social conflict confronting years of corruption and inequality that were the result of the evolving capitalist world-system. As the accumulation of wealth in the twentieth century was concentrated in the hands of core countries, efforts were organized to ensure

continued control of semiperiphery and periphery nations, as colonialism became neo- colonialism.202 _{Mexico’s revolution also signaled the worldwide scramble for control of}

petroleum resources, as Mexico had some of the most accessible reserves in the world. At about the same time across the globe, Russia (rich in natural resources) was undergoing a revolutionary process as part of a worldwide antisystemic movement that immediately dealt with attempts to criminalize its efforts to alleviate poverty, disrupting the capitalist world-system.203 _{Above all,} whether a revolution was nationalist or socialist, the Chinese, Cuban, Mexican, and Russian

202 _{Wallerstein, The Politics of the World-Economy, 1984, 56–57.} 203 _{Ibid., 56.}

Revolutions were successful, according to Wallerstein and Skocpol, because they were

nationalist movements seeking the liberation of their territories and people from local elites and foreign domination.204 _{As described by Skocpol,}

Nationalism in particular has proven to be more inclusive and powerful force for revolutionary mobilization than class struggle alone. Revolutionaries have fared best where they – and not conservative or reformist leadership – have been able to harness nationalist sentiments…collective goods provided

by revolutionaries may also include public education, health services, law and order, and economic reforms such as tax and interest reductions, the elimination of corvée labor and land reform.205

Skocpol discusses the importance of providing resources and services necessary for the development of a country, and in the case of Mexico and Cuba, basic needs were important nationalist causes for revolution as they had been historically.

The struggle for Latin American nationalism was disregarded by U.S. foreign policy makers as temporary in that it did not support the imperial nationalism of the U.S. and could be easily crushed.206 _{Nationalism in Mexico followed the recommendations of Simón Bolívar and} José Marti, who developed a hemispheric solidarity built not on competition but rather on trying to survive while confronting U.S. imperialism. It was a social and economic nationalism

surviving the legacy of dependency and colonial rule in an effort to overcome hegemony. The Mexican Revolution became a “state-directed project” that over a period of twenty-eight years engaged in developing policies for a social-revolutionary regime, and as Skocpol notes,

excelled at channeling enhanced popular participation into protracted international warfare. Because of the ways revolutionary leaders mobilize popular support in the course of the struggle for state power, the emerging regimes can tackle mobilization for war better than any task, including the promotion of national economic development. The full realization

of this revolutionary potential for building strong states depends on

threatening but not overwhelming geopolitical circumstances.207

The Mexican petroleum nationalization was the culmination of a long process that utilized the geopolitical circumstances of the twentieth century to mobilize Mexican citizens for the glory of Mexico. It is in the tradition of Pan-Americanism, a hemispheric lesson to future rebellions. Castro provides his knowledge of the importance of the Mexican case,

We also view the Mexican Revolution, which ended the decades of tyranny by Porfirio Díaz and forged the first great social revolution in our

hemisphere. And the first great agrarian reform it opened a time of fighting, both heroic and bloody, specifically to save the Revolution.

I remember from the time we were students it was discussed with every reason that the [1917] Constitution resulting from the Mexican Revolution was one of the most advanced and progressive in the world. The Mexican Revolution consists of a deep and profound inspiration for the revolutionary movements of Latin America.208 _{Fidel Castro, 1980.}

According to Castro, the Mexican Revolution significantly influenced natural resource policies around the world through the 1917 Constitution. Mexico led Latin America as a revolutionary society through the development of the 1918 Carranza Doctrine, the 1917 Constitution, and the 1938 Petroleum Nationalization. It was a twenty-eight year period of mobilization engaging nearly every sector of the Mexican population. The struggle in Mexico developed as a radical approach begun by mine workers confronting low wages and harsh working conditions that resulted in loss of life and dismemberment in the mines of Northern Mexico. The Cananea strike of 1906 was one of the first confrontations between Mexican workers and multinational corporations (MNCs) influencing the direction of the Mexican Revolution as an antisystemic social rebellion.209

207 _{Skocpol, Social Revolutions in the Modern World, 296.}

208 _{Fidel Castro, “Discurso Pronunciado Por Fidel Castro Ruz, Presidente de la República de Cuba, en el Acto de}

Amistad Cubano-Mexicana, Celebrando en la Plaza de la Revolución "JOSE MARTI", el 2 de agosto de 1980, "Año del Segundo Congreso", http://www.cuba.cu/gobierno/discursos/1980/esp/f020880e.html.

The Cananea Strike was a precursor to future struggles that would ultimately culminate with the Union of Mexican Petroleum Workers, that in 1937 won better wages and work conditions through the Mexican Supreme Court.210 _{The Revolution, in challenging national and} international intervention and “interference,” created a legal precedent that between 1906 and 1937 was won only through revolution. By seizing power and controlling the state, the

Revolution was able to significantly challenge the power of the MNCs, using legislation derived from the 1917 Constitution. It led to “protracted international warfare” that during the

Revolution saw several interventions that only served to further mobilize Mexico by

strengthening their nationalist cause. Skocpol describes the impact of the Revolution and what U.S. efforts did to radicalize it,

If the United States had been able and willing to launch sustained antirevolutionary interventions, the Revolution could not have continued after the defeats of Francisco Madero and General Victoriano Huerta made it potentially socially radical. Some scattered U.S. interventions were launched, but they were so minor that their only consequence was to provoke Mexican resentment.211

The Mexican Revolution signaled the future in Latin America, as peasant and worker led armies emerged to confront years of frustrated efforts towards social justice. It signaled the rise of charismatic campesino leaders such as Francisco Villa and Emiliano Zapata, both precursors to Cárdenas, who inspired the Mexican Revolution that since independence had fought against injustice. They led efforts to usher in some of the most radical social movements in Latin

America (Zapatistas, Villistas, Carranzistas, and Obregonistas) and developed an environmental, intellectual, and social justice ideology that grew in strength as each faction combined to defeat

the old state at the same time confronting the United States.212 _{All of this for Cárdenas was an} educational experience as a young revolutionary witnessing the ten-year Revolution he eventually led as president of Mexico. Years later Cárdenas invoked the importance of all the great leaders of the Revolution with special consideration to Villa and Zapata who paid the ultimate price for their defiance.213 _{Here Skocpol describes the importance of peasant-led} (campesino) involvement in Mexico,

in most instances, both peasants [campesinos] and city dwellers were mobilized for guerrilla warfare by nationalist revolutionary elites [Mexico

and Cuba]; only in the Mexican and Bolivian revolutions were peasant communities able to rebel on their own [Villa and Zapata] as did the French and Russian peasant communities.214

Mexican campesinos were able to organize into guerrilla armies after the elite 1910 Revolution was crushed by its own class interests. The ensuing power vacuum gave rise to the social

revolution that was heavily influenced by the Villista and Zapatista armies of national liberation. Cárdenas followed the path of Villa and Zapata and was faithful to the legacy of

environmental, intellectual, and social justice in the form of agrarian and labor reform with just natural resource policies. Cárdenas was an example of a leader in the revolution that emerged from the muddled class lines of the struggle. At the age of fifteen Cárdenas joined the revolution, becoming a general at 25 and governor at 29, earning the privilege of leading Mexico through its struggle for land and labor rights that led to petroleum nationalization on the eve of World War II. Arnaldo Córdova provides us an understanding of Cárdenas’s special place in Mexican history,

General Lázaro Cárdenas… in 1929 was already one most important players in Mexican politics, without a doubt counted as one of the principal leaders

212 _{Wallerstein, The Politics of the World-Economy, 1984, 59.}

213 _{Alan Knight, The Mexican Revolution, Volume 2: Counter-Revolution and Reconstruction (University of}

Nebraska Press, 1990), 516–517.

of the Revolution, along with Calles and General Joaqiún Amaro, Cárdenas moreover, was the revolutions greatest leader ensuring the rescue of and making sure the ideological and political success of the Revolution.215

His ability to consolidate the gains of the revolution mobilized the Mexican masses through seasoned revolutionary leadership for the economic independence of Mexico. Fidel Castro describes the monumental task Cárdenas faced as he used his stature to engage Mexican citizens in confronting the enormous geopolitical warfare Mexico became embroiled in,

It was Mexico who was the first country to actually produce oil under difficult conditions when the world power structure was undefined, when what we consider a weak country confronted the great imperialist countries by

nationalizing petroleum. And we can remember how irritated was the reaction of the imperialists and the hard won Mexican victory with its valiant and dedicated action, which immortalized the name of Lázaro Cárdenas.216

Cárdenas became the example of a new type of leadership in Latin America, one that developed a sophisticated approach to understanding the challenges of a developing state. And with limited resources and political and economic strength, the Mexican Revolution created policies and strategies for addressing challenges to its national sovereignty, specifically from the MNCs.

II. Settler Colonialism, Neocolonialism and broad-based revolutionary coalition building in