Massacre in Tlatelolco
1968 is known to be the year that social conflict broke out internationally. People around the world were tired of their government neglecting their civil rights, repression, and war (Protests 1968, n.p.). Mexico wasn't the exception when on October 2, 1968, Mexican military and armed men shot and killed several students that were in a peaceful rally at the "Plaza de las Tres Culturas" in Mexico City (Berggren, n.p.). This tragedy involves the point of view of the eyewitnesses and the government, which turn to be incoherent. It all started on July 22, 1968, when two school rivals UNAM (National Autonomous University of Mexico) and IPN (National Polytechnical Institute) had a dispute during a touch-football game that …show more content…
It was the government’s opportunity to show the world how much Mexico had evolved. The country had become strong, enlightened, contemporary, and it had grown economically after the Revolution. The last thing the government wanted was for riots to be happening all around the city because this would mean that Mexico wasn’t a perfect country as the government wanted it to seem (Berggren, 53). During the riots, the government accused the students of being influenced by communist thoughts and of being a threat to the state with their violent riots. The government also claimed that the reasons they sent “granaderos” to the riots was because the “granaderos” were trying to protect people from getting hurt (Berggren, 54). Also the government was reluctant to convey the student’s petition because this could be perceived as weakness and loss of control from their part (Berggren, 56). On September 1, 1968 the president of Mexico Gustavo Diaz Ordaz told the nation that his government would not tolerate the disturbance and the disobedience from the students, especially because the Olympics were approaching (Berggren, 57). After the students last nonviolent and silent march on October 2, 1968 the government and the military claimed that the reason they used violence and excessive force was in response to the student’s violate reaction. The government states that the students were armed and that the military only shot into the crowd because they had been shot at as well (Berggren, 59). This means that the government was willing to go all ways in order to repress the people, and avoid the criticism from the other
1968 is known to be the year that social conflict broke out internationally. People around the world were tired of their government neglecting their civil rights, repression, and war (Protests 1968, n.p.). Mexico wasn't the exception when on October 2, 1968, Mexican military and armed men shot and killed several students that were in a peaceful rally at the "Plaza de las Tres Culturas" in Mexico City (Berggren, n.p.). This tragedy involves the point of view of the eyewitnesses and the government, which turn to be incoherent. It all started on July 22, 1968, when two school rivals UNAM (National Autonomous University of Mexico) and IPN (National Polytechnical Institute) had a dispute during a touch-football game that …show more content…
It was the government’s opportunity to show the world how much Mexico had evolved. The country had become strong, enlightened, contemporary, and it had grown economically after the Revolution. The last thing the government wanted was for riots to be happening all around the city because this would mean that Mexico wasn’t a perfect country as the government wanted it to seem (Berggren, 53). During the riots, the government accused the students of being influenced by communist thoughts and of being a threat to the state with their violent riots. The government also claimed that the reasons they sent “granaderos” to the riots was because the “granaderos” were trying to protect people from getting hurt (Berggren, 54). Also the government was reluctant to convey the student’s petition because this could be perceived as weakness and loss of control from their part (Berggren, 56). On September 1, 1968 the president of Mexico Gustavo Diaz Ordaz told the nation that his government would not tolerate the disturbance and the disobedience from the students, especially because the Olympics were approaching (Berggren, 57). After the students last nonviolent and silent march on October 2, 1968 the government and the military claimed that the reason they used violence and excessive force was in response to the student’s violate reaction. The government states that the students were armed and that the military only shot into the crowd because they had been shot at as well (Berggren, 59). This means that the government was willing to go all ways in order to repress the people, and avoid the criticism from the other