Porfirio Diaz: how a democrat became a dictator and led the country to revolution

30
Porfirio Diaz: how a democrat became a dictator and led the country to revolution

This ruler came to power under democratic slogans, but quite quickly the love of power outweighed his former beliefs. When he could not be re-elected to the next term, he installed a puppet president in his place for 4 years, then changed the country's constitution to suit himself, as a result of which he was re-elected to the presidency many times. He increased the presidential term from 4 to 6 years, persecuted the opposition, enriched his oligarch friends, and plunged the population into hopeless poverty. Not only presidential elections, but also the laws themselves turned into a mere formality under him, which contributed to an unprecedented increase in corruption. His name is Porfirio Diaz.

How he came to power, what helped him stay in it for more than three decades, and most importantly, how this ruler ended up and what consequences his rule had for the country, we will tell you.



The way to power


The future dictator of Mexico was born in 1830 in the city of Oaxaca into the family of a blacksmith. His father died when Porfirio was three years old. As a child, he worked as a carpenter and shoemaker, graduated from school and entered the seminary, hoping to become a priest. This choice was not unusual: in Mexico at that time, a person from the lower classes could only make a career either in the church or in the army.

However, pretty soon young Porfirio realized that being a priest was not his calling. At the age of 16 he enlisted in the army. Just at this time, the Mexican-American War began, which lasted two years. But the young man was not destined to take part in its battles; all this time he was in the rear doing repairs. weapons.

After the war, Diaz entered the Institute of Sciences and Arts of Oaxaca, where one of his teachers was Benito Juarez, the future president of Mexico. For some time, Diaz taught Latin, changed several professions, until in 1854 he received a lawyer's diploma.

When three years later another war began in Mexico, this time a civil one between liberals and conservatives, Diaz again joined the army. He fought on the side of the liberals, quickly rose in rank, took part in 12 battles, and within a few years rose to the rank of colonel. The Civil War ended in 1861 with the complete victory of the liberals, but peaceful life was still far away. The defeated conservatives did not resign themselves and wanted to take revenge with the help of foreign armies. Taking advantage of the internal turmoil, French, British and Spanish invaders invaded the country. The war with them lasted another six years.


Porfirio Diaz in 1861

Already in 1862, 32-year-old Diaz became a brigadier general. He wins, which contributes to his fame and popularity. In 1865, he was captured by the French and was able to escape, which only increased his number of supporters. Finally, at the final stage of the war in 1867, Diaz's troops took the capital of the country, Mexico City.

Diaz's political ambitions appeared during the war. They appeared openly for the first time in 1871, when Diaz attempted a rebellion against the ruling President Juarez, his former teacher. The attempt ended in failure, a few months later Juarez died, and Diaz received forgiveness.

But Diaz had no intention of stopping. A new uprising in 1876 against Juárez's successor, President Sebastian Lerdo, was already successful: Lerdo was removed, and Díaz legalized his seizure of power a few months later by winning the presidential election.

Porphyriat


From this moment on stories Mexico began an era named after the new president - the Porfiriat. Initially, Diaz tried to show himself as a greater liberal and democrat than his predecessors. Thus, he himself introduced an amendment to the country’s constitution, according to which one person could not hold the post of president for more than one term. This only added to his popularity among the people. A hero of two wars, who also voluntarily limited his power - what other candidate could be better?

When he came to power, Diaz was 47 years old. It is possible that he himself thought then that he would only restore order in the country and cede power to others. First of all, the new president improved relations with the United States, attracted many American and European investors to the country, which contributed to economic growth, and repealed a number of anti-clerical laws, which brought him the support of Catholic priests.

At the end of 1880, Diaz, since he could not be re-elected for another term under the constitution, ceded the presidency to his ally Manuel Gonzalez. During the 4 years of Gonzalez's reign, corruption in the country reached unprecedented proportions, so in 1884 Diaz returned to the presidency, welcomed by the population. The necessary amendments were again made to the constitution, and Diaz was able to be re-elected for further terms. And in 1904, he increased the presidential term from 4 to 6 years.

Democratic institutions were formally preserved. Diaz’s people constantly won victories in parliamentary elections; there was an “opposition” in the country in the person of Nicolas Zúñiga. Zúñiga was distinguished by eccentric behavior, few people took him seriously, so Diaz understood perfectly well that Zúñiga had no chance of winning the election. Those who had similar chances were forced to flee the country.

During the Diaz years, Mexico experienced economic growth. New enterprises appeared in the country, foreign investments came in, railways were built, production of coffee, sugar, and cotton increased, which were exported. However, only a few dozen oligarchic families - friends and associates of Diaz - were able to benefit from all this. They also enriched themselves through the extraction of minerals - gold, silver and copper. Oil production has also increased significantly.

All this brought fabulous profits to the oligarchs. The vast majority of the population continued to become poor. 96% of rural residents did not have land and became farm laborers. The country was overflowing with beggars, and things were bad in the areas of education and medicine, which Diaz did not consider necessary to develop. In 1910, only 19% of Mexicans were literate. Infant mortality was 400 children per 1000. 50% of the total housing stock were shacks - one-room dwellings without water, electricity or sewerage. Since medicine was in a state of disrepair, epidemics of smallpox, typhus, malaria, dysentery and other diseases were frequent in the country.


Market in Mexico City. 1885

Against this already sad background, the life of the workers was especially unenviable: they worked 12 hours a day and 7 days a week. Quite often they were paid not in money, but in stamps, which were accepted only in factory shops or landowners' stores. About a quarter of the workers were women, who were paid half as much as men. Alcoholism was widespread both among workers and among peasants.

The army and police were entirely under the control of Diaz, and the number of mounted gendarmerie (rurales) increased several times, which successfully suppressed scattered and unorganized peasant uprisings. Many criminals also appeared among the gendarmes.


Mexican poor. 1906

Diaz allowed his friends to enrich themselves, but he did not forget himself. He acquired many estates, collected weapons and paintings, and loved ostentatious luxury: surviving photographs from his saloon carriage resembled the home of a gypsy baron. As the famous aphorism goes, absolute power corrupts absolutely.


Porfirio Diaz in 1907

In 1908, when Diaz was already 78 years old, he announced that seven presidential terms were enough and he would not run for the next one. However, his closest supporters immediately began a struggle for power, having long been waiting for the “old man,” as they called him, to leave. In this situation, in 1910, Diaz broke his own word and was re-elected for another term. Although elections in Mexico have long been a farce, this time the fraud was such that it caused mass outrage throughout the country. The dissatisfied were led by the opposition candidate Francisco Madero, whom, by the way, initially no one took seriously either.


Parade in Mexico City. 1910

A revolution and civil war began in the country, and various bandits and partisan leaders with the aura of “people's defenders” like Pancho Villa began to play an increasingly important role. In this situation, 81-year-old Diaz was no longer able to continue his reign. In May 1911, he abdicated power and immediately fled first to Spain and then to Paris. There he died four years later, surrounded by plundered wealth, but cursed in his homeland by millions of compatriots.

Just a couple of weeks after his flight, the rebel army entered Mexico City, greeted by the joyful cries of hundreds of thousands of citizens.

The Mexican Revolution and Civil War, which began in 1910 due to widespread popular discontent with Diaz's rule, lasted 10 years. During its course, up to 2 million military and civilian people died, which was a huge figure for the relatively small Mexico, whose entire population at that time barely reached 15 million. The revolution left no stone unturned from the Porfiriat.

In modern Mexico, the name of Porfirio Diaz is forgotten, not a single street is named after him, and his remains still rest in one of the cemeteries in Paris. Who knows, perhaps if he had resigned after his first term, today there would be monuments to him all over Mexico, and the 2 million people who died during the civil war would live to old age.
30 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +7
    8 January 2024 04: 59
    They say history repeats itself. After the drunkard, Mexico came to us with Porfirio Diaz. All according to the classics of the genre.
    1. +3
      8 January 2024 10: 13
      Much earlier, I read about the events of this time by contemporaries --- Jack London and John Reed. I really liked it! There is a Soviet film "The Mexican" I want to watch. There are some Mexican films about that time, I watched them a long time ago, but I should do it again. I really liked the book by the Cuban author Alejo Carpentier, “The Vicissitudes of Method,” with epigraphs from Rene Descartes, and the title from the same place. In general, a collective image of a Latin American puppet dictator. Monstrosities, torture and execution of opponents, provocations, insane luxury for oneself, wives, lovers, friends...... Flight, oblivion, mediocre children. It’s interesting that almost all dictators have Indian blood!
      By the way, the famous and beloved song by all Latin Americans, “Cucaracha,” is actually about Diaz! Cucaracha is Spanish/Mexican for "cockroach" --- a reference to his mustache. And the song mentions an illegal drug.
      1. +2
        8 January 2024 12: 26
        I also immediately remembered London.
        The faces blurred before Rivera's eyes, but he saw the rifles. The revolution will continue!
        Yes, from memory.
        1. +2
          8 January 2024 12: 57
          Quote: Andrey Moskvin
          .... The faces blurred before Rivera's eyes, but he saw the rifles. The revolution will continue! .

          I heard that the film also has this phrase. This is what films used to be like. About historical famous people. Now what? About Trotsky, for example, it’s a masterpiece
        2. +1
          8 January 2024 20: 13
          I remembered O'Henry - "Kings and Cabbages". )))))
  2. +13
    8 January 2024 05: 12
    This ruler belay came to power under democratic slogans (I do remember feel ), but quite quickly the love of power outweighed his former beliefs. When he could not be re-elected for the next term, he installed a puppet president in his place for 4 years (but don't be so unhappy crying call a person), then changed the constitution of the country to suit himself (what are you talking about? and who officially proposed, I wonder), as a result of which he was re-elected to the presidency of many sad once. Extended the presidential term (What do you mean, A Sarmatov, you allow yourself belay !!!) ....., persecuted the opposition (and the editors belay Where is he looking!!!), enriched his oligarch friends (well, what about without request this...), and plunged the population into hopeless poverty. Not only presidential elections, but also the laws themselves turned into a mere formality under him. feel , which contributed to an unprecedented increase in corruption (What are you doing, Sarmatov, you allow yourself!!! - twice belay !!!!).

    That's how it is crying , you can’t hide the truth from the Mexican people...
    Oh yes Andrey Sarmatov soldier oh yeah...
    1. +18
      8 January 2024 05: 58
      Quote: Wildcat
      Here it is, you can’t hide the truth from the Mexican people...
      Oh yes Andrey Sarmatov, oh yes...

      Amazing parallels, isn't it?
      1. +11
        8 January 2024 06: 03
        Yes, there are no parallels, it seemed to you!
        But, you know, you don’t see such an informative text on VO every day.
        Or this, well, what are the parallels here: ".....revolution and civil ...., which began in .... year due to mass discontent of the population with the government of ...., lasted .... years. During its course, up to .... million military and civilian people died, which was a huge figure for a relatively small ......, the entire population of which at that time barely reached .... million.

        In modern .... the name ...... is consigned to oblivion, not a single street is named after him, and his remains still rest in one of the cemeteries ..... Tohe knows, perhaps, if he had resigned after his first term, today there would be monuments to him all over ....., and those who died during the civil .... ... million people would have lived to old age.
        "
      2. +3
        8 January 2024 10: 27
        Quote: Tucan
        Quote: Wildcat
        Here it is, you can’t hide the truth from the Mexican people...
        Oh yes Andrey Sarmatov, oh yes...

        Amazing parallels, isn't it?


        Considering that Diaz was a protege of the United States, the parallels are quite clear.
    2. +4
      8 January 2024 10: 17
      And the oligarchy in the colonies is the same everywhere. Why play at democracy if the old time-tested methods still work perfectly?
      1. +4
        8 January 2024 10: 29
        Quote: paul3390
        And the oligarchy in the colonies is the same everywhere. Why play at democracy,.....

        hi What should they play? To morally elevate and justify yourself? At least before, at least after? calling the years of lawlessness and robbery “saints”‽
        One way or another, Latin American dictators were very lucky ---- because there was slavery for the most defenseless literally under their rule. But other oligarchs, although they strive for slavery, or serfdom for the lower ones, have not achieved it. Bye.
        1. +6
          8 January 2024 10: 33
          But other oligarchs, although they strive for slavery or serfdom, have not achieved it.
          Bye. Haven't reached it yet. But judging by the admiration for the blessed times of the Republic of Ingushetia in the upper echelons, the dream of estate women with serf souls still does not let go. And they are steadily moving towards it. Unless, of course, we finally come to our senses and stop them...
          1. +3
            8 January 2024 10: 42
            And you can remember Jorge Amadou’s novel “Land of Golden Fruits,” how they encouraged people to go and develop new cocoa plantations and make good money at the same time. And when people arrived, they were forced to work all day long, seven days a week, paid not with money, but with products from the store at inflated prices, and attempts to escape were brutally suppressed.
    3. +1
      8 January 2024 22: 23
      Quote: Wildcat
      Oh yes Andrey Sarmatov soldier, oh yes...

      Exactly, exactly. How about the classic - “What are you hinting at? I’m asking you, what are you, royal face, hinting at?” lol
  3. +14
    8 January 2024 06: 11
    Well, the author of the article is good, historical, but it’s better not to touch on the same topics, otherwise freedom of speech and conscience is flourishing in our country, and for a euphemism on a poster like “no voble” you can get away with a fine, but for such an allusion you will be subject to discredit . As they used to say during the union, we live in “such” times.
  4. +7
    8 January 2024 06: 18
    A typical course of the historical process. Lenin wrote about this in August 1917 in his work “State and Revolution”:

    If, as a result of a revolution, the ruling class is expelled from society, and others are not sufficiently organized to take its place, the State apparatus, led by a figure like Napoleon or Bismarck, becomes the dominant force in society. This is the historical period of statehood, when the State apparatus is not in the hands of any class.

    And then a new class grows within it, which takes power.
  5. +2
    8 January 2024 06: 58
    Who knows, perhaps if he had resigned after his first term, today there would be monuments to him all over Mexico, and the 2 million people who died during the civil war would live to old age.
    So is it his fault that, after removing him from power, the freedom fighters fought among themselves?
    1. +3
      8 January 2024 07: 39
      Quote: Dart2027
      freedom fighters fought among themselves?

      O. Henry in his “Kings and Cabbages” also had freedom fighters and ardent revolutionaries wink
    2. 0
      9 January 2024 21: 58
      Dart2027, the fact that a revolution has begun is always the fault of the one who brought the country to it. Who drove ordinary people to the point where they abandoned their everyday activities and went to seek justice by force of arms? Let me give you an analogy. If a wall collapses in a house, who is to blame? Obviously, someone who hasn't done any renovations on this house in 30 years. Perhaps the builders made a mistake. In this case, both the owner and the builder of the house were Diaz.
      Of course, freedom fighters are not angels with wings either, but they are already a consequence of the chaos that has arisen, but the cause is always those who are in power.
      1. +1
        10 January 2024 19: 27
        Quote: Andrey_Sarmatov
        Dart2027, the fact that a revolution has begun is always the fault of the one who brought the country to it.

        About 50 years ago this might have worked, but nowadays stories about spontaneous revolutions cause nothing but laughter. Revolutions are organized by someone and paid for by someone. And by the way, you still haven’t answered the question.
        Quote: Dart2027
        So is it his fault that, after removing him from power, the freedom fighters fought among themselves?
  6. +3
    8 January 2024 08: 34
    Absolute power develops absolutely... and non-absolute power - non-absolutely? wink
  7. +9
    8 January 2024 08: 46
    Francisco Madero, whom, by the way, initially no one took seriously either.
    And because of this, they were subjected to repression, they put him in prison, and not only him, but several thousand more of his supporters, so that they would not interfere with the elections.
    The number of mounted gendarmerie (rurales) increased several times, which successfully suppressed scattered and unorganized peasant uprisings.
    Yes, not successfully, as it were. There was a war against the Indian population of some states, which was not happy with the agrarian policy, this war is not over, it either subsided, then flared up again and continues to this day.
    various bandits and partisan leaders with the aura of “people's defenders” like Pancho Villa.
    One of the sons of the owner for whom Jose Darateo (Pancho Villa) worked as a farmhand raped one of his sisters. Jose got a revolver and killed him. And he fled to a state where the peasants were waging an armed struggle against their owners. Kanesh, a robber, had no right, he a slave, and the owners are nice people, they are not robbers, you can rape, mock, but if you raise a weapon against them, you are immediately a robber. What is allowed to the owner of life is not allowed to the slave, right the author?
    In modern Mexico, the name of Porfirio Diaz is forgotten; not a single street is named after him.
    Far from it, his name was consigned to oblivion after the revolution. Those monuments that were erected to him during his lifetime still stand. But it seems that in the year 2015 in the city of Orizaba, Veracruz, local authorities erected the first posthumous monument. Yes, it’s not accurate about the oligarchs, not all of them were his friends. In Mexico there was a group of oligarchs consisting of large landowners, officials and the bourgeois intelligentsia, the leader was the Minister of Finance Jose Limantur. They sought to establish the dictatorship of the Creole oligarchy, which was closely connected with foreign capital, They viewed Indians and mestizos as an inferior race. Diaz only expressed their interests. By the way, Diaz himself was half Indian.
    1. +1
      8 January 2024 22: 18
      Quote: parusnik
      One of the sons of the owner for whom Jose Darateo (Pancho Villa) worked as a farmhand raped one of his sisters. Jose got hold of a revolver and killed him. And he fled to a state where the peasants were waging an armed struggle against their owners.
      There was an article on VO about him. A cool guy walked along it, without any quotes, I liked it hi
  8. +6
    8 January 2024 10: 28
    Quote: Skif3216
    Well, the author of the article is good, historical, but it’s better not to touch on the same topics, otherwise freedom of speech and conscience is flourishing in our country, and for a euphemism on a poster like “no voble” you can get away with a fine, but for such an allusion you will be subject to discredit . As they used to say during the union, we live in “such” times.


    So we are writing about US puppets ;)
  9. +4
    8 January 2024 10: 32
    I’ll add my old story about one of Diaz’s comrades-in-arms, widely known in narrow circles - the same Mondragon whose rifle.

    Sequence of events:
    1) the Saint-Chamond company, a subsidiary of the Hotchkiss corporation, is developing a 75-mm light rapid-fire field gun (general designer - Emile Rimayo)
    2) Mexico announces a competition for a 75 mm rapid-fire field gun with very similar characteristics
    3) the talented inventor Colonel Mondragon, by some coincidence the assistant inspector of artillery in Mexico, registers a patent for a 75-mm rapid-fire gun, which is also quite coincidentally identical to the Saint-Chamond cannon, minus minor changes in the carriage
    4) this patented system wins a crushing victory in the competition, as the only “national” Mexican model, and in no way inferior to other eminent competitors
    5) since there is nowhere to produce it in Mexico, on the initiative of the Mexican patriot Mondragon, a competition is announced for the production of the system, with a rigid price ceiling, even more stringent requirements for delivery times and completely draconian fines for non-fulfillment
    6) Saint-Chamon wins the unconditional victory in this competition, since only this company, quite by chance, had completely ready-made production equipment
    7) Colonel Mondragon basks in the people's love, like a true icon of Mexico and the savior of the people's money from the evil gringos. Well, a little bit - in patent royalties from each gun, and after a few years he buys himself the rank of general and the position of artillery inspector.

    I will add that, however, he later made the classic mistake of any makhrov or bashi-bazuk, that the easiest way to kill a political rival is without fooling your head, and everyone will be grateful to you for it.
  10. +4
    8 January 2024 12: 18
    It turns out that Andrey Sarmatov There are articles about other dictators. I'll definitely read it recourse Sorry, I didn’t read it earlier, I rarely visit request Must be instructive and informative pieces. Thank you, dear Author.
  11. +2
    8 January 2024 14: 59
    The author seems to be deliberately drawing analogies with currently existing regimes.
    Sometimes even to the detriment of historical truth.

    Although one analogy is very similar.
    The “opposition” in the person of Nicholas Zúñiga is almost a complete twin of Zhirinovsky.
    The eternal second candidate in all elections, Diaz, and also a lawyer by training, also made shocking and sometimes self-fulfilling predictions, but Diaz did not allow him to create his own party.
    And the main difference is that he successfully survived Diaz and his regime and continued to regularly participate in elections until 1924.
  12. +2
    8 January 2024 21: 28
    Also on topic:
    L. Vershinin
    ...Actually, I was going to answer everyone who asked why I said almost nothing about Estrada Cabrera in the book about Central America.

    For those who don’t know, there was such a president in Guatemala. He appeared, essentially, out of nowhere, by accident, and sat in the chair for as many as five terms, a full 24 years, during which time he ruined the country into dust. His childhood friends stole everything, Guatemala’s authority in the world fell below zero, the population, intimidated by the security forces and chattered by the media, idolized the leader, and 300 thousand voters regularly gave him 10 million votes.

    Everything ends, however. The “genius Pope”, growing old, went into the illusory world, no longer understanding much of what was going on in the real world, and when for the “lower classes” life became worse than death, and the “higher classes” needed absolution, the evil grandfather was thrown out of the palace and brought to justice . But they could not convict:
    the examination showed that the patient had gone crazy, and the old man ended his days in a madhouse. But what’s interesting is that the great Miguel Angel Asturias, author of the brilliant “Señor President,” an undisputed classic, Nobel laureate of those years when she was not yet a mocker, who served as a court clerk, later recalled: “I saw him every day. And I discovered that , without a doubt, people like him have a special power over people. To such an extent that while he was in custody, people were whispering: “No, this cannot be Estrada Cabrera. The real Estrada Cabrera has escaped. This is some poor old man whom They locked us here."
    https://t.me/putnik1lv/5438
  13. +1
    8 January 2024 22: 29
    After reading the article I remembered Pelevin winked
    Several times I tried to start a conversation on this topic, but Kapustin reacted rather strangely - he giggled, and, as if continuing some kind of conversation that was not started with me, he answered extremely mysteriously:
    - For such statements, Markian Stepanovich, you would have immediately thundered two hundred and eighty-two, and hard ...
    I remembered this figure because Kapustin repeated it every time I tried to discuss with him the troubles of Russia and find out what resolution our damned questions received in the future.
  14. 0
    9 January 2024 14: 48
    Forward to the Mexican rake... Alas, our panchavilla exploded on the plane. With the help of a grenade - well, to be sure and the ends will be in the water. Or
    I received an offer I couldn’t refuse.

    And so - one-on-one according to the Mexican pattern.
    I hope to die BEFORE the civil war.