A Sketch Of Mexican Society Summary

This week’s readings discusses different aspects of the Mexican war. In “Mexican Views of the Mexican-American War discusses the origin of the war between Mexico and the United States, it states “To explain then in a few words the true origin of the war, it is to say that the insatiable ambition of the United States, favored by our weakness, caused it”, the weakness that it’s referring to is the Mexican government. Like we discussed on Thursday, Mexico has always had a chaotic government that contributed the loss of Mexican land. It can be lead to think that if Mexico had a secure government, the loss of the land wouldn’t have happened. Mariano Otero’s “Considerations Relating to the Political and Social Situation of the Mexican Republic in the Year 1847” relates to the previous reading because he explains the Mexican government and weak army contributed to the loss of Mexican territory. He writes about a system that Mexico has that is unfair. The top of the system such as official, bureaucrats and etc. cared only about the position and not the actual work. They abused their powers and didn’t care about the common people. He, then, contrasts the Mexican Army with the United States army and says that the United States is working together to fund their army in ways Mexico can’t such as taxes and gathering resources. These two factors are which largely contributed to their loss because as mention before, the people were too divided and the men in government position looked after their wealth over people. The third reading is discusses about the role of women during the war. In the reading “Women and the War in Mexico” by Frances Calderon de la Barca, she fetishes Mexican women that made me feel uncomfortable when reading it. She mentions how they would be great possession for a European man. In the end of her report, she comments on the statement, “Women have nothing to do with politics” by stating it’s only natural for women to ask what is happening in their world and insults women because it says that they can’t comprehend the reason for war. Guillermo Prieto’s, “The Glorious Revolutions” pays attention to the adoration of to Santa Ana despite his flaws. Santa Ana hanged out with the people but when duty called, he …show more content…
Poinsett, he paints a picture for the audience of life of Mexico. Although it’s very useful because it’s in first person source, Poinsett writes negatively about the Mexicans. In the text stating the background information about the author, it states that he’s from a slave state so he comes to this society with a “racist” mindset. He writes the negative parts of people living in squalor and that’s okay but he needs to also add the good parts of people living in squalor to balance the views on them because people in the United States will see the Mexican society in a bad light if that is what he writes. William S. Henry’s, “With the Stars in Mexico” talks about Manifest Destiny and wanting to use their land for agriculture. Just like Joel R. Poinsett, he writes the Mexican people in a bad light saying that the Americans know how to handle the land. What I found most interesting and it relates to Frances Calderon de la Barca, is the role of Dos Amades, a woman, in the Lancers. This is the first time I’ve heard a woman being a big part of a