Al Grito de Guerra: the Second Mexican Revolution

Here are some photographs that I found of Gordillo in 1994 or a few years before.

8_elba_con_salinas.jpg


7_elba_copn_zedillo1.jpg


6_elba_con_salinas_y_zedillo.jpg


elba_esther_gordillo.jpg
 
With the boost Ledo will get in the international media, it would be pretty much very reckless though an unsuccessful attempt I could see happening

I'm just going off the fact that a lot of DFS and cartel guys have a lot to lose if someone wants to crack down on corruption. Those groups tend to attract more reckless, violent triggermen, and I can see someone giving the go ahead for a hit on Ledo.
 
I'm just going off the fact that a lot of DFS and cartel guys have a lot to lose if someone wants to crack down on corruption. Those groups tend to attract more reckless, violent triggermen, and I can see someone giving the go ahead for a hit on Ledo.
Or even someone doing it on the logic that hey, taking the initiative looks great at your quarterly review.
 
First of all, I must congratulate the author of this timeline, @Roberto El Rey , for a work as fantastic as it is impressive. Following my usual habit, I have silently followed the development of the timeline, which provided to me knowledge and entertainment in equal measure. Unfortunately, I have seen it necessary to interrupt my plans for admiration from afar, in view of the forced rupture of the suspension of disbelief (that unspoken contract between author and reader) generated with regard to Venezuela. Because I doubt that this stress to plausibility is intentional on the part of the author, I set out to develop a criticism, which aspires to be constructive, in regards to points that cause questions or detract from the credibility of a timeline, on the other hand, has demonstrated a high level of excellence. The aforementioned criticism will be presented in the form of a list, which is as follows:

  1. Chávez´s Coup: OTL, it happened in February 4th, 1992. In this timeline, it was in June, 1991. That is 9 months earlier. Why? It would be curious that the worsening of the situation in Mexico, and an alleged milder Caracazo, have improved Chávez's conditions to operate against the government. OTL, Chávez was involved in a political, revolutionary movement (MBR-200) inside the military since 1982, and was under suspicion by his superiors since at least 1988. By 1989, his movement was declining, but revived due to the Caracazo. According to Chávez's own testimony, the coup leaders only obtained enough resources to consider giving a go to the desired military insurrection in August 91. In fact, Chávez had barely received command of a crucial parachute battalion on the previous month, after solving the small problem of having originally been assigned to the Army Supply Service after completing the Command and General Staff course. It is around this time that the Post-Coup Transition Government Project was also prepared, of which he was co-author. Originally, the plan for the coup was to use as cover the preparation of Operation Caribe (Venezuela´s collaboration in a multinational military intervention with the aim of restoring President Aristide´s government in Haiti, that was being developed in September 1991) and bring down Perez´s government when they recieved the orders to enact it. However, that Operation was never implemented. After that, Chávez wanted to act in December 10th 1991 (Air Force Day), but they desisted a week before D-Day (They believed that the conditions weren´t there and that the result would be a massacre). February 4th 1992 was believed to be the last chance before someone got cold feet and/or military intelligence discovered them. Unless butterflies have affected Venezuela more seriously than seen before, June 1991 is too early for a coup. Simply, they still don´t have all pieces in position, then, or even a written plan for the day after, beyond an idea.
  2. Hugo, Failed Hero: Although, Chávez´s charisma was undeniable, but it is also undeniable that his situation would have been very different if he had fleed after the coup, and if the coup was as unpopular as depicted in this timeline. To start, Chávez, to the Venezuelan people, was a nobody before the coup. He only became a popular hero due to his television atocusment annnouncing the surrender of the coupists(The famous "Por Ahora.../For Now..."), in which, unlike the political class of the country, he assumed responsability for his actions. Without that speech, and with him fleeing the country, Chávez would not be an hero. He would have been seen as a coward, who irresponsably abandoned his comrades to their destiny; no more than another infamous, grey coupist who tried to bring down Venezuelan democracy, and would have been forgotten by nearly everyone if it wasn´t for his death in Mexico, which demonstrated that he was something worse: an agent of Castro. The only way for him to getting something near OTL´s myth with the Venezuelan Left is for him to do a speech on TV about continuing the fight by going guerrilla, and disappearing until his mexican demise. If the idea is for the coupists to inspire the people like they did in OTL, the coup must be as popular as in OTL, and the leaders to come from it, will come from those who remained, not the ones who escaped to Cuba. And it is not guaranteed. After all, CAP suffered another coup in November 1992 OTL, but the officials involved with it never achieved the level of popularity and success that the ones behind the February Coup did. Of course, that may be because Chávez and co. did it first, but I imagine that what happened with the November coupists until Chávez´s rise to power, could serve as as an example of what could have happened to those who OTL were behind the February Coup if their attempt had been less popular.
  3. The Megalomaniac Adventures of Hugo, Castro´s Asset in Mexico: An early coup is weird, but butterflies can explain it. Chávez escaping, may be somewhat out of character. The Cubans being involved with the coup can help explain some differences, and the aforementioned butterflies make it plausible, but (unless your source is an anti-castrist that belives that Fidel Castro is behind everything bad or leftist in Latin America , yes even now that he is dead) that is something that did not happen OTL. Suspension of disbelief is not broken by Castro sending Hugo to Mexico to make him useful, or Chávez going there to fight. What breaks it is the reason why Chávez wants to go there. One thing is to say that he appeared to have abandoned his home country to try and set himself up as a petty king in a Cuban puppet state. Another is to say that was his plan all along. Chávez was not a megalomaniac. If he had a complex, it was messianic. Heir of Bolívar, Saviour of Venezuela, Redentor of Latin America, He being the People and the People being Him, that was how he was seen by his followers and probably how he saw himself... in 2012. I would say that in 1991, he would have seen himself at least as the first two. From what we know from his writings, and later testimonies, given by himself and others who knew him at the time, his mission, his vision, his belief, everything turned around Venezuela. For Chávez, México would never be the Endgame. Like Che Guevara or Francisco de Miranda, examples that he knew well, Chávez would see his Mexican adventure as only an step for his plans to come back and do the Revolution in his homeland (or to rule it, if you think that bad of him).
  4. Ramón J. Velásquez, President: I could not to help notice this detail in the 1993 Venezuelan Presidential Elections wikibox. OTL Velásquez became president after, and because, CAP became so unpopular that his own party threw him under the bus, by allowing his impeachment. In previous comments, the author had given the impression that CAP had achieved a less hated, more stable presidency. Him being impeached as OTL, means that well, that impression was wrong, and that throwing his neoliberal package to the dust bin, while imitating Salinas the Better did not solve his political problems.
  5. Where is Caldera?: This is weird, because there was something of a hype, that he was going to appear, called him the father of Venezuelan Democracy (I am sorry to say that, in fact, that title was given during the IV Republic to Rómulo Betancourt, and not even COPEI disputed it) and be important... And then, in the post about the elections that he won OTL, he is not there, nor his party. OTL, he was the only establishment politician who benefited from the February 4th Coup´s aftermath, by doing a popular speech critizing the situation of the county ("you can't ask a hungry people to defend democracy") and dismissing the accusation from CAP that the coup was an attempt at presidential assasination too. This was done during the session of the National Congress, that CAP asked to be convene after the coup, with the objective of suspending constitutional guarantees, and where the congressmen were demostrating unanimity in supporting the president, until Caldera spoke. Later, due to irreconcilable differences and internal conflicts, Caldera self-excluded from COPEI, the party of which he was the founder, and formed a heterogeneous coalition of small parties around him and his new creation: the party Convergencia Nacional (National Convergence). This coalition, called by the Venezuelans, "El Chiripero" (alluding to the chiripa, a small roach that lives in large concentrations among the garbage accumulated in homes. Chiripero being the name of an agglomeration or group of chiripas. Like a chiripero, Caldera´s Coalition was formed by parties that would be as small as bugs compared with the titans of AD and COPEI: easy to crush if they go alone, but very difficult if they go in a group.) ended up winning the 1993 elections and breaking the dominance of the two great parties over the presidency. Although a COPEI victory, in the case of Caldera not running as a candidate, it is plausible, his absence, either as a COPEI or Convergencia candidate, is really strange. Only one thing is certain ... Venezuela in this timeline, with Alvarez Paz, has its first president from the State of Zulia, and COPEI has tied with AD in the bipartisan competition to provide Drunk Presidents to the Nation (OTL, AD won 1 to 0 with Lusinchi).
  6. The third time lucky: Leandro Mora as a presidential candidate is weird, bearing in mind that he was known for the atypicality of having twice refused to run for his party's presidential candidacy (curiously, it was in the two elections in which CAP became the candidate). Here is an article (in Spanish) by Rafael Poleo, a journalist who knew the man, and explained the reasons why he rejected those offers. Sadly, apparently the most newsworthy thing he did after being President of Congress was passing away, so I don't have an easy source to glimpse if he would have been interested in being a candidate once CAP had fallen out of favor.
7. PSP: The most implausible thing in this 1993 Venezuelan Elections, the PSP is practically impossible, and deserving of its own sub-list. I will proceed to demonstrate why with such sub-list:
  • Founders: They are supposed to be the followers of ITTL Chávez and his coup. Leaving aside the question asked earlier if this Chávez would have had enough supporters at all, and assuming that these are those who supported not necessarily the figure of Chávez, but the coup in general, several problems arise. First, the MBR-200 movement, although it had sought collaboration with related civil movements and parties, was mainly a MILITARY movement. Its most important leaders during the 1993 elections are imprisoned, and as the ITTL coup is unpopular, there will be no protests and pressure seeking freedom for them, a presidential pardon that neither CAP, Velásquez, nor Alvarez Paz will grant. Caldera did it because there was a popular movement in favor of such a measure, and, at the beginning of his mandate, he needed the support of the Venezuelan left against the old bipartisan parties. Obviously, that happened in 1994, after the elections. And even if the leaders of the MBR-200 had been allowed to participate, directly or indirectly, they would not have wanted to. In OTL 1993, Chávez and his companions rather called for abstention, since they considered that participating in the elections consisted in giving legitimacy to the corrupt system built by the Punto Fijo Pact. Only one of them, Francisco Arias Cárdenas, disagreed. While OTL Chávez´s movement fully and formally entered electoral politics in 1997, Arias Cárdenas participated earlier, becoming governor of Zulia State in 1995, with the pre-existent leftist party La Causa Radical, in which Aristobulo Isturiz was active.
  • Name: While Chávez and his comrades were clearly located on, and involved with, the far left of Venezuelan politics, the emphasis on the socialist character of the Revolution is something that came much later than 1992. Then, the emphasis was in nationalism. Chávez, like Castro, only officially proclaimed the socialist nature of his Revolution once he entered the United States' blacklist (2005). As an anecdote, in the recall campaign (2004), a Chavista slogan was "It is not communism, it is humanism". Also, the idea of a party, instead of a movement, only came to Chávez in 2007, when he created the PSUV. Therefore, if the party is a creature of the MBR-200, it would not call itself something like Partido Socialista Popular. In fact, the PSUV was the first party in Venezuela to call itself Partido Socialista, if I remember correctly. Instead, they would call themselves a Movement, and/or try to put Bolivarian in the name, fail because using the name of the Father of the Country is against electoral law, and then select something else. OTL, they called themselves the Fifth Republic Movement (Movimiento V República, MVR).
  • Candidate: It is too early for Aristobulo Isturiz to be presidential candidate, and then, he only became involved with Chávez since 1998. In 1993, he had barely been elected mayor of the Federal District in December of the previous year, with the party La Causa Radical. OTL most succesful far-left candidate in the 1993 elections was Andres Velásquez, then governor of Bolivar State since 1989 , and also from La Causa R. In fact, at the time, there was the rumour that he was the real winner of the elections, that there was a fraud in favor of Caldera, and that Velásquez should had contested the results.
  • Electoral Result: In Venezuela, that characteristic leftist tradition of splitting was truly honoured, with the far-left being being composed by multiple chiripas, too weak to represent a danger to AD or COPEI winning the elections. By the 1990s, however, the old parties were so discredited by the crisis into which bipartisanship had brought the country, that more leftist parties started to have a chance. So much so, that as I mentioned earlier, there were those who believed that Velasquez had won in '93. However, that success didn´t came with unity. In '93, for example, instead of supporting Velásquez, leftist parties like MAS (Movement for Socialism-Movimiento Al Socialismo), MEP (Electoral Movement of the People-Movimiento Electoral del Pueblo), and the far-left party per excellance, the PCV (Partido Comunista de Venezuela-Communist Party of Venezuela) became part of Caldera´s Chiripero. It was Chávez, in 1998, who united all of those leftist parties behind a single presidential nomination (his), and led them to final victory. In fact, he used the same coalition trick that his predecessor. So then, how Isturiz got 27%, when Velásquez got 21% OTL? There is only two possibilities. One, they did it alone (with every other leftist party going their own way), like Radical Cause did OTL, but then, Isturiz ITTL is not a better candidate than Velásquez. Two, with Caldera not running, the PSP became ITTL Convergencia and Chiripero, gathering the support of the leftist members of OTL Chiripero. However, if that is what happened, Isturiz would have won the election, instead of getting third place. Also, Istúriz is definitely neither Chávez nor Caldera, in terms of charisma and recognition by the population in 1993. And all this is assuming that Radical Cause ends up supporting Istúriz and the PSP, when it is most likely that Velásquez will expel Istúriz from LCR and launch his own candidacy, condemning the left permanently. My suggestion? The PSP is a no go. Replace Istúriz with Velásquez, and the PSP with LCR, as in OTL, then make Velásquéz unable to organize a leftist Chiripero, so he still loses (He however gets the support of one or two leftist parties, and anti-system votes that otherwise would had gone to Caldera, explaining the better result). In 1998, you can go with Arias Cárdenas as President, if you want a charismatic chavista in power, but he probably would remain in prison if Alvarez Paz is elected. Istúriz 1998, is a lot more possible than in 1993. However, keep in mind that in OTL, by then he had formed a splitter party called PPT (Fatherland For All-Patria Para Todos) in 1997.

Well, I think that's all. Regarding the rest of the most recent update, I will comment that:

  1. it is surprising, although in retrospect it should not be, that Bartlett has chosen as his successor the only one that can give a run for his money (literally) to himself and Salinas The Lesser, regarding Institutional corruption. The PRI at its finest, ladies and gentlemen!
  2. It says a lot about AH.com the fact that all the comments so far are about Gordillo, while the murder of El Chapo goes unnoticed.
 
Last edited:
First of all, I must congratulate the author of this timeline, @Roberto El Rey , for a work as fantastic as it is impressive. Following my usual habit, I have silently followed the development of the timeline, which provided to me knowledge and entertainment in equal measure. Unfortunately, I have seen it necessary to interrupt my plans for admiration from afar, in view of the forced rupture of the suspension of disbelief (that unspoken contract between author and reader) generated with regard to Venezuela. Because I doubt that this stress to plausibility is intentional on the part of the author, I set out to develop a criticism, which aspires to be constructive, in regards to points that cause questions or detract from the credibility of a timeline, on the other hand, has demonstrated a high level of excellence. The aforementioned criticism will be presented in the form of a list, which is as follows:

I was wondering when there would be some major inaccuracies/implausibilities to the timeline.

The bigger the timelines get, the higher the risk for some minor or major mistakes. You would need multiple people working on one alternate timeline to reduce that risk.


  1. It says a lot about AH.com the fact that all the comments so far are about Gordillo, while the murder of El Chapo goes unnoticed.

And what would that be?


Some thoughts about Gordillo and El Chapo:

Gordillo as the next President of Mexico threw me off, in both a good and bad way. It was a great plot-twist and I know it's not impossible for that to happen, but the decision by Bartlett came across as a bit too desperate and somewhat anachronistic.

I admit that reading about El Chapo's death didn't phase me at first and it probably should have. My lack of reaction to his early death was probably because I know very little about him other than what the news media have reported about him.
 
I would assume it's that AH.com is hyperfocused on the (relatively) obscure politician while the internationally-famous drug lord is ignored.
El Chapo's death didn't phase me, and I'm just more focused on the political scene since, as I've said before, I really don't know much about PRI shenanigans (at the very least post-WWII now, before I just didn't really learn much about Mexican history after the Revolution.)
 
Salinas has some chutzpah running off with all that money that's supposed to keep his party's grip on power. Also, you paint a fantastic picture of a nation that once had a stab at greatness coming apart at the seams under the oppressive rule of a decaying corrupt regime. Keep it up!
Mexico is not done yet. While it may be suffering under the heel of a corrupt regime, it will be reborn through revolution and rise to become the great power it was destined to be!
Hey, I didn't say anything. I'm sure former President Salinas came by his wealth through entirely legitimate and non-embezzlement-related means and will spend it in a way that benefits humanity as a whole hahahaha no Raúl Salinas de Gortari is like if Gordon Gecko and Donald Nixon were the same person

Although like @CountDVB said, Mexico is definitely not done yet. Bartlett and the PRI's shenanigans notwithstanding, Mexico will rise again to greatness!

I thought members of the Catholic clergy in Mexico were constitutionally forbidden from holding political office in Mexico? Still, I am glad to see Ruiz García’s character mentioned. :)

Indeed they are—but the Zapatistas, for all that they purport to be a legitimate Mexican state, have bigger things to worry about here than constitutional prohibitions.

Umm... why are you including meta-fictional characters from Breaking Bad into this story? Or do the names and actions of the characters not matter and its more of a fun Easter egg, similar to your inclusion of Andy Dufrense?
Yep, that's it! I initially considered having Eladio Vuente be included in Bartlett's meeting with the top drug lords, but I figured that might be a little too meta.
I like how the update implies that the only thing that kept us from becoming the Breaking Bad universe was Cuahtémoc Cárdenas' wife getting in the wrong car at the wrong time.
Bro at a certain point I actually was wondering to myself whether I could get away with making Walter White [Redacted future President but you probably already know who]'s Secretary of Education.

(Fun fact: I've never actually watched Breaking Bad.)

Gordillo looks like an evil grandma who has not gracefully accepted her aging.
If you think she looks bad in that photo from 25 years ago, Google Image search her now. She's a walking PSA about the downsides of plastic surgery.

A killer line in a fantastic update.

More seriously, I'm interested to see how the Muñoz Ledo presidency turns out (obviously the PRI can still theoretically pull this one off, but it's seeming more and more unlikely). He's going to appoint some PAN members to his cabinet, he himself seems sort of center-left, and a bunch of left-wingers are also supporting him. Obviously dismantling the PRI machine is going to be his first priority, but on other issues, he's got a pretty fragile coalition. So that ought to be fun.
Porfirio Muñoz Ledo is indeed a left-leaning politician—in OTL, he left the PRI in 1990 to join Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas's center-left splitter party, the PRD, and he currently serves as a member of the Chamber of Deputies for AMLO's predominantly left-wing MORENA coalition.

If does become President in TTL (no spoilers here!), he'll be helped by the fact that the PAN is more politically moderate in TTL. In 1988, the PAN had some strength in the north of Mexico, but its popularity was more centered around individual figures like Luis H. Álvarez and Ernesto Ruffo Appel, and it lacked a dedicated core of political organizers. Since 1991, the party has pragmatically chosen to wed itself to the most powerful mobilizing forces in the region, which happen to be Sergio Aguayo's human rights movement and the independent unions in Acuña and the other border cities. The PAN's official platform remains generally conservative, but the general "feel" of the party as it is presented to the masses is being influenced by Sergio Aguayo's personally moderate stances and the unions' heavily social-democratic vibe. So a Muñoz Ledo cabinet won't necessarily be the unwieldy, Team of Rivals-esque balancing act that it would seem to suggest.

That is of course if he wins...

...which he probably will barring someone just deciding to drop all pretenses of democracy and puts a hit on him.
Someone is gonna put a hit on him.
With the boost Ledo will get in the international media, it would be pretty much very reckless though an unsuccessful attempt I could see happening

Hey, this is the same regime that possibly killed both Celeste Batel and Archbishop Posadas. They certainly aren't above using murder as a last resort.

I'm just going off the fact that a lot of DFS and cartel guys have a lot to lose if someone wants to crack down on corruption. Those groups tend to attract more reckless, violent triggermen, and I can see someone giving the go ahead for a hit on Ledo.
Or even someone doing it on the logic that hey, taking the initiative looks great at your quarterly review.
In terms of security, one huge advantage Muñoz Ledo has is that the Army is secretly on his side, as General Gutiérrez Rebollo told a terrified CIA agent in the last narrative chapter. The problem is that if he is elected President, there will be limits to how much he can really do to root out drug-related corruption because the Army is counting on access to that sweet, sweet drug money in exchange for their support.

I was wondering when there would be some major inaccuracies/implausibilities to the timeline.

The bigger the timelines get, the higher the risk for some minor or major mistakes. You would need multiple people working on one alternate timeline to reduce that risk.
Yeah, there's also the fact that my research into Venezuela was far more cursory than my research into Mexico (this is, after all, a Mexico-centric timeline), so I'm bound to have missed a lot of important nuances.
Some thoughts about Gordillo and El Chapo:

Gordillo as the next President of Mexico threw me off, in both a good and bad way. It was a great plot-twist and I know it's not impossible for that to happen, but the decision by Bartlett came across as a bit too desperate and somewhat anachronistic.
How so @Allochronian?

The aforementioned criticism will be presented in the form of a list, which is as follows:
Wow, that's a lot to take in. Thank you for the constructive criticism @Danifa94! I'll address these critiques in a separate post so as not to crowd this one out too much.
 

I just thought that the idea of the PRI endorsing a female candidate for the Mexican Presidency would be too implausible.

I asked someone who lived in Mexico and is familiar with the political landscape if the PRI has ever supported a woman to be president.

The response I got was, "No, because they're too macho-istic to do such a thing."
 
I just thought that the idea of the PRI endorsing a female candidate for the Mexican Presidency would be too implausible.

I asked someone who lived in Mexico and is familiar with the political landscape if the PRI has ever supported a woman to be president.

The response I got was, "No, because they're too macho-istic to do such a thing."
Maybe in normal times the Party would have objected but as we see, this is not normal times. Bartlett is facing almost mutiny in the DFS and the Armed Forces and his own party. He is trying to save himself from the Americans, the Cartels, his own people and does not care about machismo.
 
Maybe in normal times the Party would have objected but as we see, this is not normal times. Bartlett is facing almost mutiny in the DFS and the Armed Forces and his own party. He is trying to save himself from the Americans, the Cartels, his own people and does not care about machismo.
At this rate, he'd appoint a jar of foot powder as his successor if he thought it'd keep his head attached.
 
First, I want to say that I'm truly loving this timeline, kudos to the author. In my long-dead Central America revolutionary timeline, I hoped to engage with Mexico a bit, but the level of research and knowledge that you've put into this is incredibly impressive.

Speaking of Central America, I'd love to hear more about what's going on there. The civil wars are nearing their end with effective guerrilla defeats, but there wasn't a final peace agreement signed in El Salvador until 1992 and Guatemala until 1996. I can't imagine that a complete meltdown in Mexico doesn't have some knock-on effects there. The assassination of the Archbishop several updates back reminds me pretty strongly of the Romero assassination. Meanwhile, there was the transition to rule by the Nicaraguan opposition in 1990, which probably goes similarly, but who knows? Regardless, I'd like to hear more about what you have planned.

Relatedly, Porfirio Muñoz Ledo and Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas remind me a whole lot of Pedro Chamorro: a man who was, to a large extent, of the system he was running against. Chamorro came from an old Conservative family and was far from a radical, but he saw the Somozas as so crass, brutal and openly corrupt that he was willing to risk a whole lot and reject the system as it was to destroy the regime he was as ruining it.
 
Relatedly, Porfirio Muñoz Ledo and Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas remind me a whole lot of Pedro Chamorro: a man who was, to a large extent, of the system he was running against. Chamorro came from an old Conservative family and was far from a radical, but he saw the Somozas as so crass, brutal and openly corrupt that he was willing to risk a whole lot and reject the system as it was to destroy the regime he was as ruining it.

The Somozas plundered earthquake relief money from their own people. That is a level of shitty that is almost impossible to describe.
 
The Somozas plundered earthquake relief money from their own people. That is a level of shitty that is almost impossible to describe.

Yeah, they were some of the shittiest people the U.S. ever supported. Just the scum of the Earth.

My timeline opened with Tachito dying in the Managua earthquake, so at least we got that revenge. One of these days, I'll have to revive it, with some major tweaks.
 
I just thought that the idea of the PRI endorsing a female candidate for the Mexican Presidency would be too implausible.

I asked someone who lived in Mexico and is familiar with the political landscape if the PRI has ever supported a woman to be president.

The response I got was, "No, because they're too macho-istic to do such a thing."
Maybe in normal times the Party would have objected but as we see, this is not normal times. Bartlett is facing almost mutiny in the DFS and the Armed Forces and his own party. He is trying to save himself from the Americans, the Cartels, his own people and does not care about machismo.
Basically what @traveller76 said. President Bartlett has decided that Elba Esther Gordillo is the best candidate, and if the party doesn't like it, they can shove it. Even under normal circumstances, the President's right to pick his successor was such a hallowed tradition within the PRI that if Luis Echeverría or Adolfo López Mateos had somehow decided they want a woman to be President, the party elders would have swallowed their reservations and make it happen without public objection. That being said, as odious as misogyny is, it certainly won't hurt PML's chances in the election...

First, I want to say that I'm truly loving this timeline, kudos to the author. In my long-dead Central America revolutionary timeline, I hoped to engage with Mexico a bit, but the level of research and knowledge that you've put into this is incredibly impressive.
Thanks @azander12! I'm happy you're enjoying it, hopefully the rest of the story lives up to your expectations!

Speaking of Central America, I'd love to hear more about what's going on there. The civil wars are nearing their end with effective guerrilla defeats, but there wasn't a final peace agreement signed in El Salvador until 1992 and Guatemala until 1996. I can't imagine that a complete meltdown in Mexico doesn't have some knock-on effects there. The assassination of the Archbishop several updates back reminds me pretty strongly of the Romero assassination. Meanwhile, there was the transition to rule by the Nicaraguan opposition in 1990, which probably goes similarly, but who knows? Regardless, I'd like to hear more about what you have planned.
To be entirely honest, I really didn't have much planned in detail for the world outside Mexico, as my now-obvious mistakes regarding Venezuela can attest (expect a hefty retcon of that post sometime soon!). With Guatemala, I did briefly mention in a previous, non-story post that Jorge Serrano's self-coup doesn't happen in 1993, because the formation of a communist rebel state right on Guatemala's doorstep and the resulting red scare gave Serrano just enough political strength to avoid feeling the need to self-coup. Serrano is still in President of Guatemala by early 1994, meaning the negotiations didn't get the shot in the arm they received under de Leon. But Serrano is riding an unstable horse indeed, with a large majority of the public harshly opposed to his regime and continuing violence from the URNG. To make matters worse, if he wants to stay president, he's going to have to get re-elected in November, and Serrano will have to get re-elected in November, and he's facing a strong challenge from athlete Alberto Flores Asturias. It's safe to say that whatever happens in Mexico this coming August will strongly influence the election in Guatemala...

As for El Salvador, the civil war ends pretty much on schedule. By the time the Selva Rebellion broke out in TTL, peace negotiations were far enough underway that they went through despite a mild red scare in El Salvador. The only significant difference is that the Peace Accords are signed not in Mexico City (for pretty obvious reasons), but in Maracaibo. Same goes for the transfer of power in Nicaragua—Violeta Chamorro is still elected President in 1990, and after naming Elba Esther Gordillo as his successor, Bartlett quietly grumbles to himself about how he won't be able to say he installed the first elected female head of state in the Americas.

Sorry I don't have much else to say for the moment about Latin America. What I can say, though, is that after the main story is finished, I'll be posting more worldbuilding details over in my test thread, so you can look forward to seeing some more exposition on Central America over there!
 
Last edited:
Top