La Tierra Fortunada: A Better, and Nicer, Mexico.

[Iñaki]

Originally posted by Vault Boy
I can imagine a similar situation happening to the Central American countries happening if Mexico had acted like the U.S. did OTL on the 19th and early 20th century on them (provided that Mexico would be as strong as the United States).

Well at least would have some more historical and cultural links than with the United States.
I think that Mexico would not be so strong, or better said not so imperial like the United States of OTL (to get this Mexico should be capable of develop a navy with capacity of projecting power in all the oceans of the Earth).
Although could be the presence of a stronger Mexico could be capable of resurrecting the United Provinces of Central America to counter the possible menace of Mexico.

 

[Iñaki]

Originally posted by Vault boy
And it's unlikely we get Mexico like this in the future of this timeline, I think.

I know, Mexico merits a better path, TTL will avoid a serie of facts that permitted in OTL this situation.

 

[The Uchronian]

The reason the Comanche owned Texas was that they could outshoot us. Their bow could shoot faster than our guns - and they had as much practice at shooting fast from their nomadic lifestyle as the longbowman had during its era of dominance. It's also why the Mongols were so dominant in Eurasia.

That would last until Mr. Colt developed a repeating pistol. That's why he has semidivine status here...

For sure, my man, for sure.

I like your TL and wish it luck. Lord knows Mexico was as unlucky as you can get OTL...

Heh, thanks. This is actually something I've thought about on and off for a little while, but only within the past 4-5 months or so, did I really start forming anything concrete

A nation that deserves far better luck than in OTL.

If at least we could avoid this in the future of TTL, it would be a very good thing

Very true.

Having a massive inferiority complex and a powerful but self serving and less-than-helpful northern neighbour for most of its history didn't do wonders to Mexico.

I can imagine a similar situation happening to the Central American countries happening if Mexico had acted like the U.S. did OTL on the 19th and early 20th century on them (provided that Mexico would be as strong as the United States).

And it's unlikely we get Mexico like this in the future of this timeline, I think.

Yeah. Now, to be fairly honest, Mexico still isn't going to be problem free; there's the problem of Santa Anna in the near-term, and, later on, the possibility of further conflict with the U.S.

Well at least would have some more historical and cultural links than with the United States.
I think that Mexico would not be so strong, or better said not so imperial like the United States of OTL (to get this Mexico should be capable of develop a navy with capacity of projecting power in all the oceans of the Earth).
Although could be the presence of a stronger Mexico could be capable of resurrecting the United Provinces of Central America to counter the possible menace of Mexico.

That very well could happen. Maybe the Central American confederation could last a little longer than it did IOTL as well.

I know, Mexico merits a better path, TTL will avoid a serie of facts that permitted in OTL this situation.

Certainly, I hope to make Mexico far better off overall, than it was IOTL. There is, however, a bit of a trade-off in the works; some parts of the United States, are going to have some serious trouble to worry about, especially after the end of TTL's Civil War.....

 

[Vault boy]

Yeah. Now, to be fairly honest, Mexico still isn't going to be problem free; there's the problem of Santa Anna in the near-term, and, later on, the possibility of further conflict with the U.S.



That very well could happen. Maybe the Central American confederation could last a little longer than it did IOTL as well.



Certainly, I hope to make Mexico far better off overall, than it was IOTL. There is, however, a bit of a trade-off in the works; some parts of the United States, are going to have some serious trouble to worry about, especially after the end of TTL's Civil War.....

Well, asking for a problem-free Mexico is just impossible. Even ignoring the issue about Santa Anna, you have the Liberals instigating civil wars every time they lost an election that they just couldn't properly rig.

And as for the UPCA, I see it easier if the U.S. and Mexico end up turning it up as a personal playground for proxy wars, as Mexico would not want an united Central America (that, or they will try to gobble Guatemala at least), but the U.S. would want somewhere where it would be a pain in the ass for Mexico later on. Besides, there's no sense of national romantic unity between all of the states after how disastrous was the first UPCA and how every province wanted to have their largest city as the capital.

 

[The Uchronian]

Well, asking for a problem-free Mexico is just impossible. Even ignoring the issue about Santa Anna, you have the Liberals instigating civil wars every time they lost an election that they just couldn't properly rig.

Yes, that may be so, but I can tell you that'll going to be coming to an end long before the end of the century. How? Stay tuned.....

And as for the UPCA, I see it easier if the U.S. and Mexico end up turning it up as a personal playground for proxy wars, as Mexico would not want an united Central America (that, or they will try to gobble Guatemala at least), but the U.S. would want somewhere where it would be a pain in the ass for Mexico later on. Besides, there's no sense of national romantic unity between all of the states after how disastrous was the first UPCA and how every province wanted to have their largest city as the capital.

Maybe so. And hopefully, I'll be able to finish 1840 sometime soon; this U.S. election is going to be controversial for a long time to come.....

 

[The Uchronian]

Here's another sample for you guys. A nice little tidbit, btw: the Harrison campaign does really well at first, but hits a few snags and then begins to unravel. The culprit? Mainly, John Tyler, or rather, the gaffes of John Tyler.....

***

This is an excerpt from “Lipinsky's Election Encyclopedia, 12th Edition: 1804-1996”. Authored by Norman Lipinsky, Jr. © 1997, Lipinsky Bros. Publishing, Naperville. Ill.

The Election of 1840

The 1840 election would be looked back on as one of the most controversial ones in the entire history of the United States, perhaps on par even with 1824's fiasco.[51]

Martin Van Buren, though not exactly universally unpopular, had had to deal with more than his fair share of criticism, particularly over his handling of the Panic of 1837, and to some voters, the Whigs were looking more and more palatable every day. But despite Van Buren's lack of enthusiastic support, however, the Democrats had little choice but to re-nominate him for the Presidency; nobody else in the party was willing to volunteer for the candidacy at the time. And then there was the brand-new anti-slavery Liberty Party, which had some promising potential as a wild card that might be able to help swing the election either way.....

There were 2 other contenders for the Presidency in 1840:

William Henry Harrison, hero of the War of 1812, and the first governor of the Indiana Territory, was riding on the tide of discontentment which had swollen up from the failed policies of the Jackson administration, and due to his increasing popularity, as well as his promising stances on fixing the economy and dealing with Mexico, and not to mention the distrust of his chief rival Henry Clay by many in the Whig Party hierarchy, won the nomination for the Whig Party's candidacy and set out to prove his worth to the American people, and several famous slogans, such as “Tippecanoe and Tyler, too”, were born out of their campaign.

James G.[Gillespie] Birney, of the aforementioned Liberty Party, had had a rather interesting background: he was born in Kentucky in 1792 to an Irish immigrant, who became an affluent planter in Mercer County, and had lost his mother at a young age, to be raised by an aunt who'd come over from Scotland. Birney was close to his father but had become anti-slavery from a young age, including from a Baptist minister named David Barrow, whom Birney regarded as a major influence amongst those outside his family. He also became good friends with future Vice-President George M. Dallas, and in 1815, while working as a lawyer, worked for Henry Clay when he was running for Congress, and he was then a Democratic-Republican. As his interest in politics deepened, so did his questioning of the Peculiar Institution. He later became mayor of Huntsville, Alabama, and also became a major supporter of the American Colonization Society. However, though, Birney became increasingly troubled about the thought of his children coming of age in a slave state and moved back to Danville, in 1832.
Birney's final turn towards abolitionism occurred in 1834 after correspondence with Theodore Weld, a preacher who organized the Lane Seminary debates. After a series of unfortunate events while living in Cincinnati, he decided to uproot his family and move to New York after joining the American Anti-Slavery Society. And during the spring of 1840, the Liberty Party came into existence in New York. Though Birney predicted that he wouldn't win, he sought to make an impact, anyway; armed with the money of the Tappan brothers, his expertise in the printing business, and a newly-former grassroots campaign, the infant Liberty Party bravely trotted forward and 1840 was to be the first of its many campaigns.....

***

This excerpt was taken from “1840: The Election That Shaped 19th Century America”, by Donald J. Epperson. (c) 1977 Altona Press, Denver, Colo.

1840 was, without a doubt, one of the toughest election seasons in U.S. History. Martin Van Buren, though not exactly popular by this point, was a man who had begun to reshape his image and rethink many of his past policies. His opponent, William Henry Harrison, was riding a tide of discontentment that had occurred in the wake of the disastrous crash of 1837, and had begun to take a proto-populist approach[51], making Van Buren's job even tougher....

During the first half of the election season, Van Buren's campaign struggled to make ends meet, while William Harrison's fortunes continued in a favorable direction, and for a while, it was thought by some that he'd be a shoo-in for the Presidency. However, though, the Harrison campaign would eventually run into a few problems later on, and problems, that Van Buren would capitalize on, in nearly every case.

John Tyler, in particular, though stately in mannerisms and appearance, would later become the centerpiece of gossip for many people, especially in the North, through a series of unfortunate events, including some which may have seriously jeopardized the Harrison campaign, by themselves.

The first of what was to be several scandals, occurred in June of 1840, when it was revealed that Tyler, following the death of his first wife, Letitia Christian, on December 27th of the previous year, married Julia Gardiner, a woman many years his junior and a friend of his son Robert's wife, Priscilla, in late April, only 4 months after Letitia's passing. It did cause some chiding to be directed towards President Tyler, though this controversy was rather minor compared to others that would follow over the next few months.....

And there you go. I can tell you this much right now, fellas: John Tyler is about to end up being a walking gaffe machine.....a 19th century Mitt Romney with a Southern accent, and an attitude to boot.

 

[Iñaki]

Nice to see another update

 

[The Uchronian]

Nice to see another update

Thanks, although I'm still finishing it up.

TBH, I'll probably have to keep the 1840 election season as short & sweet as possible. But I can guarantee the ending will surprise a LOT of people.

 

[Vault boy]

Well, I was expecting something about Mexico, but nonetheless, this will help out later on figuring out what will happen in the U.S.

I am expecting a new update soon enough.

 

[The Uchronian]

Well, I was expecting something about Mexico, but nonetheless, this will help out later on figuring out what will happen in the U.S.

I am expecting a new update soon enough.

Thanks. I wanted to update before tomorrow night but bnfortunately, I had to re-install my operating system(Ubuntu 11.04), and I lost all my bookmarked Mexico references so I'll have to start from scratch again.

 

[The Uchronian]

Hey there! Chapter 1's finally done!

Well, folks, I've finally gotten the first chapter of the series done, at last; hope you like the ending to the 1840 election.....and also, I even threw in a quick little Easter special, too.

***

This excerpt was taken from “1840: The Election That Shaped 19th Century America”, by Donald J. Epperson. (c) 1977 Altona Press, Denver, Colo.

1840 was, without a doubt, one of the toughest election seasons in U.S. History. Martin Van Buren, though not exactly popular by this point, was a man who had begun to reshape his image and rethink many of his past policies. His opponent, William Henry Harrison, was riding a tide of discontentment that had occurred in the wake of the disastrous crash of 1837, and had begun to take a proto-populist approach[51], making Van Buren's job even tougher....

During the first half of the election season, Van Buren's campaign struggled to make ends meet, while William Harrison's fortunes continued in a favorable direction, and for a while, it was thought by some that he'd be a shoo-in for the Presidency. However, though, the Harrison campaign would eventually run into a few problems later on, and problems, that Van Buren would capitalize on, in nearly every case[52].

John Tyler, in particular, though stately in mannerisms and appearance, would later become the centerpiece of gossip for many people, especially in the North, through a series of unfortunate events, including some which may have seriously jeopardized the Harrison campaign, by themselves.

The first of what was to be several scandals, occurred in June of 1840, when it was revealed that Tyler, following the death of his first wife, Letitia Christian, on December 27th of the previous year, married Julia Gardiner, a woman many years his junior[53] and a friend of his son Robert's wife, Priscilla, in late April, only 4 months after Letitia's passing. It did cause some chiding to be directed towards President Tyler, though this controversy was rather minor compared to others that would follow over the next few months.

In late July, it was discovered that Tyler had personally paid several newspapers to run fake “editorials” supposedly “revealing” things about James G. Birney that were purely intended to slander the man after the two came across each other during their respective rallies in Cincinnati, Ohio, in early June, over an argument about slavery. An embarrassed Harrison tried to cover up the scandal and he himself bribed several of the country's biggest newspapers to keep them quiet, though one paper in Philadelphia still ran with it anyway, even with the bribe.

Things didn't really begin to unravel until towards the end of the summer for the Harrison campaign, but when they did, it eventually became a non-stop domino train of gaffes and blunders of all sorts.

Tragically, the cascade may have started when John Tyler learned that his eldest daughter Mary's husband, Henry Lightfoot Jones, had died of yellow fever in mid-August, and Mary, who had just given birth to twins, Robert Tyler, and Letitia Marie, that June, was herself getting rather ill[53]. The children had been moved into the care of her brother Robert, by request of Mary herself.

John Tyler had taken a bit of a liking to Henry Jones and was a bit hard-hit by his death, not to mention the prospect of losing his daughter as well. At a Whig Party meeting, in Richmond on August 21st, before he was to speak, he ended up partaking of a little too much drink in the parlor room. His speech, a rather short one, went fine, but when the questions started to be asked, some of his responses were a bit interesting[54], to say the least....

*

Quotes by John Tyler, Aug. 21st, 1840.

“Planters are people, too, my friend.”-In response to a question, and following remark, made by an anti-slavery fellow Whig.[54a]

“I'm not troubled by the concerns of the poor. Let the good Lord take care of 'em.”-Tyler's response to a question of what to do with the poorest Americans, particularly those families hardest hit by the Panic of '37. [54b]

“Now, I do wish, as much as anyone, that Martin Van Buren had been a successful leader, because surely, is it not true that we all wish for America to succeed? It is not so? But Van Buren has failed us, my friends; his policies have given way to disappointment and financial desolation. We cannot accept failure from our leaders. We must not. And that's why my colleague, William Harrison, is the man for the job. Because he knows how to achieve things, and achieve them well. And goddamn, am I proud of ol' Tippecanoe.....”[54c]

*

This excerpt was taken from “1840: The Election That Shaped 19th Century America”, by Donald J. Epperson. (c) 1977 Altona Press, Denver, Colo.

…..Tyler's semi-inebriated ramblings during the Richmond convention, surprisingly, did little to harm his standing amongst his more enthusiastic supporters; unfortunately, however, many other Whigs were somewhat alienated from him, and a mollified William Harrison had to deal with yet more bad press; Harrison later decided to keep Tyler under the spotlight, hoping to avoid any more incidents.

Meanwhile, Van Buren's hadn't been exactly been mistake & controversy free, either: Some of his disdainful remarks towards certain fellow Democrats whom he had a dislike for hadn't sat well with some, especially many moderates. He was also reproached by Jacksonians for what seemed to be a lack of willingness to stand by his old beliefs, and began to lose quite a bit of support in the South, especially Virginia and the Carolinas, Jackson's home turf.....[55]

*
This excerpt was taken from “1840: The Election That Shaped 19th Century America”, by Donald J. Epperson. (c) 1977 Altona Press, Denver, Colo.

By the end of September, both campaigns were fiercely neck-and-neck, with neither side really gaining much over the other. However, though, one trend began to become rather noticeable; Van Buren's support was solidifying amongst Northerners, while Harrison was becoming more and more dependent on the South to carry him to the White House. However, though, there would be one last blunder on the part of John Tyler that might have help seal his running mate's fate[56a].

During Harrison's last major Upper South campaign run in Baltimore on October 7th, Tyler was walking towards a hostel where he was to be staying, when he spotted a younger man on a corner on Conway Street passing out flyers. Tyler inquired as to the nature of the material, and the younger man showed him; Tyler became immediately dismayed to find out that this was campaign material for the Liberty Party. He began to behave in a somewhat bullish manner towards the man, who politely asked Tyler to leave him be. Tyler instead became more aggressive, and the other man, now slightly irritated, asked him to leave him alone again; Tyler took that as a sign of disrespect and then pushed the younger man slightly. He, in turn, had responded with a few obscenities, and that's when a now enraged Tyler took a hard left look and punched the other man squarely on the temple. Tyler had to be restrained by his entourage, who had been at a nearby cafe just across the street, before he did any worse damage to the man. This incident was to be forever known as the Baltimore Scandal, and Tyler became the first Vice-Presidential candidate to spend time in prison, even though it was only until the next morning.[56b]

Upon hearing of this, William Harrison requested that Tyler retire from the campaign trail and go home to be with his family, which Tyler reluctantly obliged[56c]. Harrison, meanwhile, struggled to maintain his image with voters, particularly many of those up north, who'd grown weary of his running mate.

Martin Van Buren, meanwhile, made one last rush to Missouri and Arkansas on the 20th, hoping to regain support from prospective voters in those states, having neglected the West for some time; to his relief, the last-minute blitz actually worked, as his opponent had never gone west of the Mississippi at all.....[57]

As the election drew to a close, it was already apparent to many that neither side had much of an advantage over the other and that the results were bound to be a close call; that prediction was looked upon in later years as understated; in a few states, the race was so close, that recounts were requested to ensure no mistakes in the results; in fact, Pennsylvania ballots were all recounted, twice! To be sure, both sides had their fingers crossed, and the fact that James G. Birney's dark horse Liberty Party had had a quite remarkable & impressive showing during the season, only complicated matters....[58a]

The popular vote was seemingly too close to call, so the Electoral College met in late November, and many hoped it would bring an end to the season. There was, however, a major problem: by an amazing statistical coincidence, both of the candidates had received 147 electoral votes, exactly. What truly complicated the matter is that both candidates had also won 13 states; and neither side was willing to budge as all 26 delegates voted with their party. This presented a truly major problem for Congress because both of the built-in failsafe measures hadn't worked as hoped, and tensions were starting to build up in both parties, and accusations started to fly. However, though, it was eventually decided to fall back on the popular vote to see who would be elected President that year....[58b]


After the votes were counted, the results were eventually made public. Although Harrison had put up a remarkably valiant fight, John Tyler's several gaffes, some of his own blunders, and an expected showing for James G. Birney had ultimately done too much harm to his campaign.[59]

….Despite the odds against him, Martin Van Buren had won the 1840 election by just 8,000 votes[60], and was therefore re-elected for a second term in the White House, to the disappointment of not just many Whigs, but many Jacksonian Democrats as well, who felt as if they'd been backstabbed by Van Buren[61].

Whatever the case, this election was sure to be about as controversial, and influential as 1824 had been for many years to come; not only did it help kickstart the trend of the North-South political divide[62a], but it even inspired a proposal for a new Constitutional Amendment[62b].....

[51] For sure.

[52]Probably should have done more of this IOTL.

[53]Can you say, 'Redenbacher', anyone?

[54]Yup.

[54a], [54b], [54c]-All based on Mitt Romney quotes, by the way. Bonus points if you can find which ones.

[55] Especially since he started turning away from Jacksonian policy.

[56a]No pun intended.

[56b]Shades of Preston Brooks/Charles Sumner, if you know what I mean.....

[56c]After all, he did have a dying daughter to attend to.....

[57]Dunno if this happened IOTL, as well.

[58a], [58b] Try to imagine what could have happened in 2012 if Obama and Romney had tied.

[59]Betcha you didn't see that coming, didja?

[60]I don't think any OTL election ever cut it this close outside of Gore vs. Bush in 2000.

[61]This is only the beginning, ladies and gentlemen. Van Buren is about to start ditching the Jacksonians altogether pretty soon.

[62a]Not that there weren't already some differences but the 1840 election is going to make that a lot worse.

[62b]This will be revealed later on, so stay tuned.

And here's the Easter Special in question. It's a little short, but I hope you like it.

**
Intermission #1: An Easter Reflection.

Kinderhook, New York
Apr. 11th, 1841

Martin Van Buren was glad to be back in his hometown after a dreadfully tiring year of electioneering. Having won another term in office, Van Buren hoped that he'd be warmly welcomed back here for the Easter celebrations. To his relief, he was; in fact, even some local Whigs had turned up.

“So, Mr. President,” said one of the patrons, “what'cha gonna do about the economy?”

“I've done some thinking,” said the President, “and I now realize that Jackson had it all wrong. We do need a national bank to help keep our economy running smoothly.”

“Will you curb the influence of the bankers?”, asked another man.

“Yes, I shall.” replied the President. “The Founders did warn us against allowing monied interests to dominate our government, and I now realize that I was foolish to follow in Jackson's footsteps in that regard.”

“What about Texas?”, inquired a short and pale Dutchman.

“Well, to be honest with you, I believe we ought to wait and see if the situation resolves itself. But if that little would-be Napoleon in Mexico, Santa Anna, starts to make any foolish moves, he'll be the first to understand that no one trifles with America without a fight. Because to fool with America, is to tempt fate itself.”, said Van Buren, with applause from the crowd.

“Alright, but what about the slavers?”, said the first man.

Van Buren replied,”We can encourage more Yankees to settle westward, to counter any possibility of a slaver-dominated Texas. I believe some of you may have heard of a man named Lysander Spooner?”

“Yes, I do recall,”, said the second man, “A cousin of mine told me about him and that he was going to Texas to join his party. And from what he's been telling me, they seem to be doing mighty fine down there, thus far.”

“Then we can use the success of Spooner's colony as an example.”, said the President, 'And hope that the colony doesn't get razed by angry planters, Santa Anna, or the Indians in the meantime', he thought silently.

“Sounds good to me,”, said the Dutchman, “I've been itching for some adventure already.”.

“Yeah, if you can survive crazy slaver lynch mobs, Mexicans with a grudge, and Indian arrows flying at you, I'd say you'd be good to go then.”, said the first man, eliciting chuckles from several men in the room, himself included.

15 minutes later, the bartender brought drinks to the table where Van Buren and several other men, including the three he'd just conversed with; they toasted each other, and then the others broke out in song:

“For he's a jolly good fellow, for he's a jolly good fellow
For he's a jolly good fellow (pause), which nobody can deny
Which nobody can deny, which nobody can deny
For he's a jolly good fellow, for he's a jolly good fellow
For he's a jolly good fellow (pause), which nobody can deny!”

“Congratulations, Mr. President!”, they all cheered. Van Buren smiled, feeling redeemed at last. The minute he got back to Washington, he'd start changing things for good.

*

Somewhere in Virginia
April 11, 1841

John Tyler was a man going through the worst days of his life; first he lost his son-in-law to yellow fever. Then he was humiliated by James G. Birney, and the whippersnapper in Baltimore, and abandoned by the Whig Party, and now had to deal with the loss of his beloved daughter, Mary. As he kneeled at the graves of Mary and her husband Henry, he uttered a short prayer, and then after he was done, began to turn away. And as he started off for home, he began to wonder: 'Perhaps someone's trying to tell me something. Maybe, just maybe, I need to think about what I've done and said this past year and a half and reflect on it, and perhaps, dare I say it, make amends for my sins and errors.'. And with that, Tyler began put his thoughts into serious consideration.....

*

North Bend, Ohio
April 4, 1841

William Henry Harrison was not necessarily the happiest man in America, but neither was he depressed, either: he did love living in North Bend, and with his family. And watching the younger children of his son John Scott at play pleased him, and served to comfort him against the defeat of a lifetime. Sitting on the front porch, he sipped some old hard cider that he'd bought from a store a few miles out of town. 'At least I still have my cabin, and my family. A content man, I certainly am.', he thought to himself, ironically. Indeed, what more could one want?

*

Happy Easter. More to come sometime....hopefully relatively soon.

 

[Vault boy]

For some reason, Tyler's drunk ramblings caused me to crack up.

So, do I see an incoming civil war?

 

[The Uchronian]

For some reason, Tyler's drunk ramblings caused me to crack up.

So, do I see an incoming civil war?

Nope, TTL's *Civil War's still about 20 years off. There's definitely going to be some reprecussions, though, including, possibly something drastic.....

In any case, I'll try to get back to Mexico in chapter 2, though I've got plenty of source compiling to do, however.

 

[The Uchronian]

Chapter 2: Beginnings of the Texas-Mexican War, 1st part.

Part of the dialogue here, or at least the style of it, was inspired by a "For All Nails" vignette written by our very own Jonathan Edelstein and is a sign of things to come.....

Colegio Alberto Cardenas
Ciudad Torres, Michoacan
May 4, 1979

It was a bright and sunny Friday afternoon in Ciudad Torres. The sun stood high in a clear and cloudless sky, and 22-year-old Francisco Toricella sat on a bench finishing off a lunch of lightly breaded jerk chicken with a slightly spicy mole sauce, with fritas Francesas and a soda on the side.
It was 12:48 and classes were about to start soon, so Francisco decided to finish his meal quickly, and threw his plate in the trash and his soda bottle in a recycling container. After taking a bathroom break, he decided to go back in the building and chat with his friends, and maybe daydream a little about his girlfriend Juanita, who he was going to visit on Saturday; the very thought of seeing her pretty, curvaceous face made him quite content indeed.

At 1:00 p.m., the bell rang, and Professor Alberto Gutierrez walked into the classroom. “Buenos dias, clase.”, he said, “I hope you're all ready to start learning, because today's assignment is one we've been preparing for some time now; a retrospective of past Amero-Mexican conflicts from 1840 until the First World War.”. “I trust you've all done some studying, though perhaps maybe some more than others.”, and some of the students chuckled a little. He winked, and continued. “Mr. Toricelli, perhaps you could start us off as to why we started off with the year 1840, last October?”.

Francisco smiled. “Well, sir, isn't that the year when U.S. President Martin Van Buren won his second term in office?”, he replied.

“That's good, Francisco,”, said Dr. Gutierrez, “though I was hoping for something a little more specific. What is one reason that Martin Van Buren's second term more positively remembered than the first, in America?”

“Because he was willing to help broker a cease-fire with Mexico after Santa Anna's troops invaded Texas without provocation in the Texas-Mexican War, instead of invading our country. He also was the first American President to engage in extensive positive dialogue with Mexican officials, which led to the establishment of the first embassy to Mexico in 1844.”, said Francisco.

“Very good, indeed. Van Buren is also well-regarded in this country as well, for that same reason. He also helped negotiate between the pro and anti-slavery factions of settlers in Texas, as well as between whites in general and Mexicanos, which resulted in less tension in that area over time.”. “Also, can anyone answer exactly why and how the Texas-Mexican War started and it's impact on American and Mexican history from that point onwards?”

One of Francisco's classmates, a taller young lady named Sabrina, answered, “The Raid on San Antonio, right? After all, that was what really ruffled Sam Houston's feathers, and what drove Texas into a tizzy.”

“Well yes, Miss Fuentes, that was indeed an important event, but it actually started just a little earlier than that, though.”

“I got it!”, said Joneta, another female classmate. “It was the invasion of Victoria and Refugio in March, 1842, and that really scared the Texans. In fact, Sam Houston actually wanted to have the archives moved out of Austin so Santa Anna's men couldn't destroy them, sparking the Archives War.”

“You learn something new every day, I suppose.”, said Sabrina, smiling. Nods of agreement came from several other students, Francisco included.

“Very good, Miss Santana. The Victoria and Refugio raids prompted the Texan government to declare war against Mexico on March 30th of 1842, although the raiders had retreated back into Mexico a couple weeks earlier. There was little major action, however, until the raid on San Antonio in September.”
“And how did America react?”, asked a swarthy and pudgy 19-year old named Benito.

“Truth be told, Mr. Gomez, there were those in the United States, even some in the Northwest, let alone many in the South and Old West, who wanted their country to intervene on Texas's behalf. But Martin Van Buren, pragmatist that he was, realized that sparking a wider war was not in the interest of the United States. Instead, as I pointed out earlier, Van Buren instead decided to help write up a cease-fire between the two countries, which eased tensions for a little while.”

“I see now. Van Buren must have been one heck of a shrewd politician.”, said Benito.

“Indeed he was.”, Dr. Gutierrez replied.

“What could have happened, Professor, if Santa Anna hadn't invaded Texas?”, asked Anita, a friend of Francisco, like Sabrina and a few others in the class.

“Very good question, Mrs. Bonilla.”, said the professor. “Nobody knows for sure, but perhaps Santa Anna's influence might have lasted a little longer, rather than his ousting in 1846, which many historians believe was partly motivated by the Texas-Mexican Wars.....”

Francisco sat as his desk, now truly interested in the class he was taking. “Yeah,”, he thought, “what if?”. And a million possibilities began to float thru his mind.....

**

Hope you enjoyed that, and I may be using some of these characters for future installments at some point.

 

[The Uchronian]

Here's another Easter egg for you, by the way.

**

J.P. Willson High School
McKinney, East Texas
Mar. 14, 1982

It was a cloudy and overcast Thursday afternoon in this still-sleepy Dallas/Ft. Worth area bedroom community of 45,000 people, and the students of Bradley Baker's 8th Grade Texas History Class were quite terribly bored at the moment; the last week had been a slow one, mainly due to Spring Break, and Mr. Baker was having a hard time keeping his students engaged. On the blackboard, he wrote: “Texas Republic Retrospective Week Two: the War of 1842”. A couple of his students gave an audible sigh, one of them putting his head down on his desk.

“Is there a problem, Jamie?” Mr. Baker asked.

“Yeah, Mr. Baker. Why we still doin' this crap, anyhow?” “Can't we go back to the exciting stuff, like Reconstruction?”

“Well, erm....yes, we will eventually, but this was a very important part of this state's history, as well as others in the region. It also had a further effect on America, and you'll see why if you pay attention enough.”

“What about the Civil War?”, asked Billy, a friend of Jamie's and another student.

“Well, Billy, without the Texas-Mexican War, or the War of 1842 as we call it, the Civil War, probably would have gone quite a bit differently that it did in our world, at least west of the Mississippi. You see, it was then that Sam Houston, as I'm sure you may recall, proved himself to be the great leader that he truly was, and his actions during these tough days would prove to be quite the testament when he began to reach for higher office, as well as at the start of the Civil War. We should always try to remember one thing; any event, big or small, can shape both the individual and his country as a whole, as the great historian Allan Stirling put it. Now, if we could turn our textbooks to page 275.....”

**

 

[Iñaki]

Good updates Caliboy.

He! and we believed that Dan Quayle was a bad United States vicepresident

 

[Iñaki]

Interesting, for a moment I thought that Texas is a independent republic in TTL but after reading the post about Texas Republic History class of 1982 I see that Texas join the Union (mention to the Civil War).

Interesting, very interesting,Van Buren like some kind of Jimmy Carter of XIX century (although without soviets).

Truly this change a lot all, so Mexico I suppose continues to maintain, at least for the moment California, Arizona and New Mexico (Mexican California should be interesting, San Francisco and Los Angeles will have a very different life compared to OTL)

And Sam Houston mention, I think that this could mean that Texas will be pro-union or at least in a situation similar to Missouri in the OTL American Civil War.

 

[The Uchronian]

Good updates Caliboy.

He! and we believed that Dan Quayle was a bad United States vicepresident

Well, I actually kinda turned Tyler into a 19th century version of Mitt Romney, but yeah, Quayle would fit, too.

Interesting, for a moment I thought that Texas is a independent republic in TTL but after reading the post about Texas Republic History class of 1982 I see that Texas join the Union (mention to the Civil War).

Interesting, very interesting,Van Buren like some kind of Jimmy Carter of XIX century (although without soviets).

Van Buren will certainly be remembered more fondly than he was IOTL, that is for sure.

Truly this change a lot all, so Mexico I suppose continues to maintain, at least for the moment California, Arizona and New Mexico (Mexican California should be interesting, San Francisco and Los Angeles will have a very different life compared to OTL)

For the moment, yes. But not for terribly long, however.....but, Arizona is going hang on for just a little while longer than it did IOTL, and the Gadsden area won't be touched for sure.

(A little spoiler for L.A.; it's going to be quite a bit better off than it was IOTL, overall, and San Francisco isn't going to have a Triad issue. Some other states, however, may not be so fortunate.....)

And Sam Houston mention, I think that this could mean that Texas will be pro-union or at least in a situation similar to Missouri in the OTL American Civil War.

Probably more like Missouri or Kentucky, but yeah. And immigration from Europe should spice things up a little, too.

 

[The Uchronian]

Just keeping the pace.

**

Taken from: “Lone Star: A Short History of the Republic of Texas”, authored by Albert Carston. (c) 1947, Lone Star University Press, Austin, TX. All rights reserved.[1]

January 1842 saw tensions across a critical tipping point as one of Santa Anna's top generals, Mariano Arista, issued a statement to the Texans that their continued defense of their independence was futile; he offered amnesty to those who remained neutral should there be an invasion but also.warned that those who resisted would be swiftly and harshly punished. Sam Houston, just re-elected president, wrote back: “We have no desire to stand down, General. You want Texas back? Come and take it, then!”.....[snip]

Finally After some weeks of saber-rattling, Santa Anna decided to make the first move towards war; on the 21st, Gen. Arista ordered his men to march north, towards a still unprepared Texas. On March 3rd, hundreds of Mexican troops were seen racing towards the cities of Refugio and Victoria. And when word reached the rest of Texas, a mass panic broke out in several cities, including Austin and San Antonio; in fact, the Texian army even retreated from San Antonio, and the Mexican army occupied it, and Goliad as well, by March 10th. President Houston ordered the militias to be withdrawn to fight on March 15th, but by then, the Mexicans had already started to retreat back towards their home country.

Even without much damage being done, the March raid caused much concern for many Texians, particularly those in the western settlements. In response to this, President Houston made a call for volunteers & monetary assistance from willing parties in the United States shortly thereafter. And on March 30th, Houston declared war on Santa Anna's Mexico. However, though, there was very little in the way of action until the month of September.....

Excerpted from a letter written by Sam Houston to Santa Anna, March 21, 1842.

“Whatever opinions you may have entertained in relation to the difficulties existing between Mexico and Texas, they cannot disprove the facts and principles involved, nor can they materially influence the decision of mankind upon the justice of our righteous cause.”

“The abuse and ribald epithets which you have applied to the citizens of this country, as well as those of the United States, the South in particular, are, to be frank, doubtless characteristic of the individual who gave them utterance. So far as the people of this country are concerned, I shall refer you to a history of facts and circumstances connected with the settlement of the country of Texas. I shall pass by with slight notice your remarks relative to the United States. So far as our origin is connected with the Americans, we are proud to hail them as our kindred – kindred in heritage, kindred in laws, kindred in all the ennobling attributes of humanity, regardless of whether they are from the North, or the South. ”

“The people of Texas were invited to migrate to this country for the purpose of enjoying equal rights and constitutional liberty. They were promised the shield of the Constitution of 1824, adopted by Mexico....Citizens of the United States had engaged in the revolution of Mexico, in 1812. They, fought gallantly in the achievement of Mexican independence, and many of them survive, and to this day occupy the soil.....On their removal here, they brought with them no aspirations or projects but such as were loyal to the Constitution of Mexico. They repelled the wild and un-civilized Indian savages ; they encountered every discomfort ; they subdued the wilderness, and converted into cultivated fields the idle waste of this now prolific territory. Their courage and enterprise achieved that which the timidity and laziness of your Spaniard ancestors had so completely neglected.”

“The Texians, enduring the annoyances and oppressions inflicted upon them, remained faithful to the Constitution of Mexico. In 1832, when an attempt was made to destroy that Constitution, and when you, sir, threw yourself forward as its avowed champion, you were sustained with all the fidelity and valor that freemen could contribute. On the avowal of your principles, and in accordance with them, the people put down the serviles of despotism at Anahuac, Velasco, and Nacogdoches. They treated the captives of that struggle with humanity, and sent them to Mexico subject to your orders. They regarded you as the friend of liberty and free institutions ; they hailed you as a benefactor of mankind ; your name and your actions were lauded, and the manifestations you had given in behalf of the nation were themes of satisfaction and delight to the Texian patriots.”

“You can well imagine the transition of feeling which ensued on your accession to power. Your subversion of the Constitution of 1824, your establishment of centralism, your conquest of Zacatecas, characterized by every act of violence, cruelty, and rapine, against your fellow countrymen, inflicted upon us the profoundest astonishment.”

“Although you are pleased to characterize our occupation of Texas and defense of our unalienable rights as the " most scandalous robbery of the present age," only one-fourth of a century ago, Mexico perpetrated a similar robbery upon the rights of the Crown of Spain. The magnitude of , and reason for, the theft may give dignity to the robbery. In that you do have the advantage.

“Heretofore you entertained the opinion that Mexico could never conquer Texas, and, if it were possible for her to drive every Texan from the soil, that Mexico could not maintain her position on the Sabine, and the retreat of her army would be the signal for the return of the Texians, who would reoccupy their homes and pursue the Mexicans as far as the Rio Grande ; and that Mexico, in preservation of the integrity of the territory which she then possessed, would gain an advantage by abandoning all hopes of conquering Texas, and direct her attention to the improvement of her internal condition.”

“In an individual so intelligent as yourself, it does seem to me that you have evinced very bad taste by adverting to the subject of slavery, in the internal affairs of this country. Your opinions, whilst here, on this subject were fully and freely avowed. You then believed that it would be of great advantage to Mexico to introduce slave labor into that country; that it would develop her resources, by enabling her to produce cotton, sugar, and coffee, for purposes of exportation ; and that without it she would be seriously retarded in her march to greatness and prosperity. Your sympathy and commiseration at present expressed, are no doubt very sincere, and I only regret that they partake so little of consistency. You boast that Mexico gave the noble and illustrious example of emancipating her slaves. The fact that she has the name of having done so, has enabled you to add another flourish to your rhetoric. But the examination of facts for one moment will disclose the truth. The slaves of Mexico, you say, were emancipated. Did you elevate them to the condition of freemen ? No, you did not; you gave them the name of freedom, but you reduced the common people to the condition of slaves It is not uncommon in Mexico for one dignitary, upon his hacienda, to control from one hundred to ten thousand human beings, in a state of bondage more abject and intolerable than the negroes on most plantations in the United States, as far as can be seen. If an individual in Mexico owes but twenty-five cents, by application to an alcalde the creditor can have him, with his family, decreed to his service, and to remain in that state of slavery until he is able to pay the debt from the wages accruing from his labor, after being compelled to subsist his dependent family ,this you call freedom ; and graciously bestow your supposed sympathy upon the African race. The Abolitionists of the present day will not feel that they are indebted to you for your support of their cause. Had some one else other than the dictator of Mexico, or the self-styled " Napoleon of the West" - the subverter of the Constitution of 1824, the projector of centralism, and the man who endeavors to reduce a nation to slavery - become their advocate, they might have been more sensible of their obligation in regards to Texas. Slavery it was entailed upon us by Mexico. So far as its increase can be prevented, our Constitution and laws have presented every obstacle. They will be maintained to the letter : and on account of slavery, Texas can incur no honest reproach.”

“You tauntingly invite Texas to cover herself anew with the Mexican flag. You certainly intend this as mockery. You denied us the enjoyment of the laws under which we came to the country. Her flag was never raised in our behalf, or has it been seen in Texas unless when displayed in an attempt at our subjugation. We know your lenity - we know your mercy - we are ready again to test your power. You have threatened to plant your banner on the banks of the Sabine. Is this done to intimidate us ? Is it done to alarm us.? Or do you deem it the most successful mode of conquest ? If the latter, it may do to amuse the people surrounding you. If to alarm us, it will amuse those conversant with the history of your last campaign. If to intimidate us, the threat is idle. We have desired peace. You have annoyed our frontier - you have harassed our citizens- you have incarcerated our traders, after your commissioners had been kindly received, and your citizens allowed the privileges of commerce in Texas without molestation - you continue aggression - you will not accord us peace. We will have it. You threaten to conquer Texas- we will war with Mexico. The issue involves the fate of nations. Destiny must determine. Its course is only known to the tribunal of Heaven. If experience of the past will authorize speculations of the future, the attitude of Mexico is more " problematical " than that of Texas. “

“In the war which will be conducted by Texas against Mexico, our incentive will not be a love of conquest ; it will be to disarm tyranny of its power. We will make no war upon Mexicans, or their religion. Our efforts shall be made in behalf of the liberties of the people, and directed against the authorities of the country, and against your principles, or lack thereof. We will exalt the condition of the people to representative freedom ; they shall choose their own rulers ; they shall possess their property in peace, and it shall not be taken from them to support an armed soldiery, for the purpose of oppression. “

“With these principles, we will march across the Rio Grande ; and believe me, sir, the standard of the single star, borne by the people of the great nation-state of Texas, shall indeed display its bright folds in liberty's triumph on the banks of the Sabine.”

[1]With apologies to OTL historian William Carey Crane.....and Sam Houston.

[2]And special thanks to FamilyTales (dot) org for the real letter: http://www.familytales.org/dbDisplay.php?id=ltr_sah5976

**

Stay tuned. September of 1842 is coming up real fast.....

 

[Vault boy]

Yay, soon the faeces' are going to hit the fan!