Remember the Alamo?

[TheYoungCommie]

I mean really why you wanna remember Davie Crockett he die they all die If I'm charging intro battle I want remember victory not the Alamo.

[TheYoungCommie]

Sorry for the grammatical errors the only thing to blame is my phone.

[Sea]

Most of this board isn't old enough to remember the Alamo. Not even the oldest person on earth.

But nobody's too young to romanticize the Alamo! :rolleyes:

[Goblin]

The Alamo? Doesn't ring any bells. I do know about Davy Crockett though. Guy sure knew how to rock a raccoon hat, thats for sure.

[Deity]

I doubt very many leftists will be telling you to "remember the Alamo", so if you'd like to not charge into battle with the Alamo on your mind you are free to do so!

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

"Remember the Alamo" is a reactionary slogan invented by a bunch of white slaveholders and land thieves who wanted to expropriate some land held by a foreign government for their own interests.

[Blake's Baby]

Yeah, I thought the Alamo was a victory, a victory over US imperialism?

[Rusty Shackleford]

Yeah, I thought the Alamo was a victory, a victory over US imperialism?

by a rapidly declining mexican imperialism.



Im a bit curious, since the OP is from Oklahoma, is this just an anti-Texan jab? Is this common in Oklahoma and Arkansas?

[ComradeOm]

I mean really why you wanna remember Davie Crockett he die they all die If I'm charging intro battle I want remember victory not the Alamo.Don't be so literal minded. Why do you think American/Soviet soldiers were constantly reminded about Pearl Harbour/fascist atrocities as they advanced into the Pacific/Germany? There's power in defeats as symbols

[Jimmie Higgins]

Don't be so literal minded. Why do you think American/Soviet soldiers were constantly reminded about Pearl Harbour/fascist atrocities as they advanced into the Pacific/Germany? There's power in defeats as symbolsYeah it was a cry for vengeance like "Remember the Maine" or "Never Forget 9/11". It's a slogan encouraging slaughter and having no remorse towards "the enemy". And the Davy Crockett story is also to create a sense of martyrdom and sacrifice to mobilize people to "not let them die in vain".

Everyone uses symbols to an extent though: "Remember Bloody Kansas! Remember John Brown!" etc.

[Blake's Baby]

by a rapidly declining mexican imperialism...

Good monkeys, Rusty, it was a joke.

Not sure you can really describe Mexico as 'imperialist' in the 1830s - not if 'imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism'. But, yes, Mexico was an Empire. Some of the time. A weirdly Imperial republic.

[Geiseric]

They had an emperor imposed by foreign states... still mexico didn't even have much of an army before the war even.

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

Not sure you can really describe Mexico as 'imperialist' in the 1830s - not if 'imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism'. But, yes, Mexico was an Empire. Some of the time. A weirdly Imperial republic.

It seems to me that it was a mistake for Lenin to argue that Imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism. It's been a pretty essential part of Capitalism from day one (at least, if one includes colonialism under the broader banner of Imperialism). "Old Mexico" under its early rulers was certainly Imperialist, if one views its Imperial classes as the Spanish aristocrats around the center of its empire and their attempts to settle the Yucatan in the South and its massive frontier in the North. Its wealth was (and I think still is) based on expanding into its frontier and exploiting the local agricultural and mineral resources from various remote corners in otherwise autonomous societies.

The whole war started because a weak and divided Mexican bourgeoisie lacked the resources to defend their resources from the Comanche and develop Texas so they made the dumb choice of opening it up to American "entrepreneurs" with guns. To make matters worse their military dictator was a poor military commander at best, and an even worse politician.


They had an emperor imposed by foreign states... still mexico didn't even have much of an army before the war even.

The Mexican emperor was installed about twenty years after the conflict with the USA, in part because a defeated Mexico deprived of a third of its land was unable to unite internally or overcome its economic dependence. It was a failed attempt to bring Mexico in line with some perverted alliance of French and Austrian Imperialism

[Brutus]

Remember the commune, comrades!

[ComradeOm]

It seems to me that it was a mistake for Lenin to argue that Imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism. It's been a pretty essential part of Capitalism from day one (at least, if one includes colonialism under the broader banner of Imperialism)I'm quite partial to David Harvey's contention that there are two components to imperialism: the logic of territory and the logic of capital. That skirts the distinction between 'old' and 'new' imperialism, which are subtly different mechanisms

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

I'm quite partial to David Harvey's contention that there are two components to imperialism: the logic of territory and the logic of capital. That skirts the distinction between 'old' and 'new' imperialism, which are subtly different mechanisms

I'm not familiar with it, though it makes a lot of sense. It seems however that there is not a stark divide between those two forms of Imperialism. For instance, Spanish Imperialism in Mexico and Peru was driven by a desire for land, but it soon spawned a nascent Capitalist Imperialism in the new world, especially with the growth of mineral exploitation and British piracy in the area. If anything, Imperialism and Colonialism help to accumulate the Capital sufficient for Capitalism as a distinct economic model to develop in the first place.

[Luís Henrique]

mexican imperialism

Oh good grief. :rolleyes:

Luís Henrique

[Red Commissar]

The Texas Revolution was a very complex mess that arose from a lot of different angles. The most predominant one was the Anglo settlers desiring governance away from Mexico, and with that the institution of slavery in their lands as well as bringing it into the United States. There were also some more liberal-minded concerns as well though, which comes from the climate of Mexico at the time.

If we look at 1836 Mexico it was a very problematic time. Shortly after independence Mexico was ruled by a hacendado (hacienda owner)-turned monarch, Agustin de Iturbide, who had switched sides from pro-Spain to independence when it was apparent Spain couldn't hold on much longer during the independence war. A Liberal inspired revolt overthrew him in May 1823 led by figures involved in the independence war like Vicente Guerrero and Guadalupe Victoria, or figures like Santa Anna who'd become important later on.

So for the rest of the 1820s the Liberals had control over Mexico, but a very tenuous one. Ambitious plans to try and reform the country could not go far due to the power of hacendados. Interfactional disputes would arise among the Liberals over the matter of Federalism and land reform, culminating in the 1828 elections which saw Guerrero come to power after taking up arms against what he perceived to be an electoral abuse, becoming recognized as president in 1829. This weakness among the Liberals paved way for Conservatives under Bustamante to overthrow the government that year. This prompted the Liberals to reach out to Santa Anna, then a Liberal supporter, to overthrow Bustamante and install who'd been the official winner in 1828, Manuel Gómez Pedraza, who took office in 1832 thanks to Santa Anna.

Now during this period Mexico pretty much got wrecked by financial problems and reactionaries who resisted land reform time and time again due to their influence over the military. This meant that Mexico had little actual control over its frontier regions like Texas, which continued to say do slavery despite the practice being officially banned by Guerrero, as well as the refusal to pay taxes.

Santa Anna was in a sense in power once Gómez Pedraza was made president and controlled who'd replace him. During this period, probably for opportunistic reasons, he became increasingly more conservative and decided to dissolve Congress in 1834 and institute a new constitution creating a far more centralized, authoritarian, conservative, and pro-Catholic regime in the country.

The previous liberal constitution had guaranteed some degree of federalism so this move got a lot of mess started in many parts of Mexico. Texas ended up becoming the most prominent but you had some movements in places like the Yucatán, Tabasco, and Soconusco (in Chiapas, even attempted to join Guatemala...) also aiming to breakaway from the government over similar grievances.

Initially you did have some pretty interesting figures in the Texas revolution. For example, Lorenzo de Zavala was among the countries most prominent Liberals, part of the radical faction, and ended up joining the Texas revolution thinking it'd be the best hope for those ideas to flourish. Of course there is little explanation why liberals like Zavala had been ok with the slavery factions in Texas, which would more than likely indicate either desperation on their part or not thinking those things were "important".

Texas was a pile of fail in the war with Mexico. They had to turn routs like the Alamo and Goliad into rallying cries to keep morale up and keep up the image of Santa Anna as a distant, dictatorial prick who had no interest in their livelihoods. Had they not been able to achieve their "victory" in San Jacinto where they successfully ambushed Santa Anna's camp and captured him, it is doubtful they would've won without the US increasing their support to an intervention. Most of Texas's figures had wanted to join the USA right away, but could not due to opposition in Congress from Whigs who knew it would upset the slave-free state balance in the government (granted you had some figures like Mirabeau Lamar who desired to keep Texas independent and turn it into a slavery haven, but they were a minority). Despite some Texans' pronouncements for their independence nowadays the whole period was more a temporary one waiting until the climate in the US changed to be more favorable to their admission.

[Bostana]

So wait, who is "Alamo"

[TheYoungCommie]

So is it possible these discuss threads brought on a lot of good enlightening conversation?