Comments by "Kat 1515" (@Kat-fq4ei) on "Knowledgia"
channel.
-
16
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Mexico didn't have a chance. No treasury upon independence. No modern weapons. No unity or patriotism. Mexico owed money to France, Spain and Great Britain... The outer northern territories California, Texas and New Mexico which included Arizona didn't join Hidalgo in his fight for independence, neither did they participate in Mexico City's political dynamics or battles with Spain. They wanted independence from Mexico, were too far from Mexico City, the heart and core. And closer to the USA. In fact Spain had Treaty'd Florida and Louisiana and Spain was in the process of negotiations with American M Austin for land grant American settlers in Texas. Had Spain not claimed the territories of New Spain in the 1500s there would never have been a Mexico. It was all Spains, Great Britains, France, Russian explorations, land claims, land disputes, treaties, purchases, borders, war, conquest. Mexico lost the lands it claimed in no time of 2 decades. What is Mexico today is land returned by the USA. Spain didn't recognize Mexican independence or turn over lands to Mexico under any treaty. Spain took lands underhandedly, claimed lands under its Estados Unidos Mexicanos, made the people Mexican citizens. Great video...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Actually what is Mexico today is lands returned to Mexico under the Treaty of GH.
Upon its becoming a nation 1824, Mexico had deep seated internal problems and a deeply ingrained mixed culture along with the ingrained religion of the land , catholicism, Spanish language and racist issues from within its own peoples. The USA was Protestant. Mexico hated Anglo Americans, the gringo. Many still do. Had the USA taken all of Mexico it would have had a mess to reckon with including revolutions. The USA conquered Mexico, got the lands it wanted. And New Spains history which were many separate territories, from California to Florida, Cuba, today's Mexico, Central America, Caribbeans, Phillipines, plus. As it turned out, USA annexed California and SW were not ancestrally Mexico. Only claimed by the Mexican government for 25 years.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@navy4735 Generally historians do not make clear distinction between Tenochititlan, todays Mexico City, from the nation, Mexico, and misleading, as most folks don't know the history as this videos presentation. The closest to "Mexico" centuries ago was what Spaniards referred as valley of Mexico or the Kingdom of Mexico Territory in what the mexica called Tenochititlan. 300 years after Spains ruling power, Mexico was born from several New Spain Territories. So there was no Mexico, Estados Unidos Mexicanos, until 1824. Yet, its more than often historians, educaters, writes refer to Mexico the nation 1824 as if it had always been , when in fact it was Mexico City which existed in the 1500s. New Spain was referred to by Territory or towns identification, clearly recorded in Catholic genealogical records where New Spains subjects were born, married, died in Spain or New Spain. Not Mexico, unless it was Mexico City.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Mexican history is upside down. California barely had Mexican soldiers and USA military defeated California and moved on. Blood was shed on both sides as is the case in all wars since the beginningoftime. As in war, there is a conqueror who takes the spoils . Land is not stolen, land is controlled. Some Mexican factions make excuses of victimization, yet are only victims of the Mexican government. If Mexico wanted twin and keep its lands it should have fought harder, instead of giving up after only two years. This part of New Spain, central Mexico today fought Spain for ten years. Independent Mexico didn't fight hard enough... Losing the annexed north territories ,were unincorporated to Mexicos main. Mexico claimed these lands on a document , Estados Unidos Mexicanos 1824 which were never Treaty'd to Mexico from Spain... Mexico didn't control these north distant lands or bring support for its high taxes. Americans settled these northern isolated lands simultaneously with Mexican government officials transplanting north. And many Californios, Nuevomexicanos and Tejanos wanted independence from Mexico. In fact, they never fought for Mexican independence and lands are not ancestrally Mexico. 1848 south of the borderians were not ancestrally rooted in anywhere USA and lost no lands. Mexico ate up 25 million dollars real estate money which it desperately needed. Did Mexico's unpaid starving soldiers get a dime of this money, foreign payback was more important than soldiers. The soldiers were used as they knew it. Point to the sty in your own eye instead of pointing to the USA. There were no stolen lands, this is nothing but propaganda. In fact these lands inherently belong to Navaho, Ute, Mohave, Shasta, Chumash, Piaute, Pueblo, Comanche plus many northern USA tribes who still live in their sovereign lands and some of those protected under the Treaty of GH in California and SW , allowed to stay in centuries homeland and become US citizens still live in their lands. Mexican history needs catching up...
1
-
1
-
@guillersl9510 yes it sounds very familiar... Before the Texas Revolution, the Mexican government arranged for Mexican land grant American settlers in Texas with Austin, whose father M Austin earlier had arranged for American Spanish land grants settlers in Texas under Spain. Texas was sparsely populated with Spanish Colonial Period Spanish settlers since early 1700s and unconquered Indians raiding all over Texas upon Mexican independence and Mexico needed settlers of which those from Sonora or Sinaloans were not interested in settling in the far desert wilderness frontier during the 25 year Mexican Period 1821-1846. During this Period, the young Mexico opened Spains closely guarded borders of over two and a half centuries. The new Republic of Mexico government 1824 allowed commercial trade to the far west California and SW on the Santa Fe Trail from USA Missouri. American Mountain men fur traders were hustling away in the fur trade also and not illegally. Mexico was changing tariffs on goods brought from US America. And Anglo Texans settlers became legal Mexican citizens.
Illegally these Americans did not enter Mexico, they were Mexican citizens under Mexico's constitution which Santa Ana ripped leaving Mexico a lawless nation. Leading to the Alamo rebellion. Followed by Santa Ana's capture by the USA military, by which Santa Ana's own soldiers turned him in, to American military during the San Jacinto Battle, a Texas American settler victory. Leading to the independent Republic of Texas, on now Texas land by conquest. Which later was annexed to the USA. The land in dispute between Mexico and the US was where American soldiers had entered when Mexico started the War. Disputed land is not illegal entry. Texans entry to New Mexico was a boundry issue. And California entry was part of Mexico opening the borders.
Face it, many Mexicans enter the United States because they want to be Americans, like their friends and primos, brothers and familia who had already been in the USA. And have no need to return to their land or culture. Americans don't enter Mexico by the millions illegally to where Mexicans find repulse by their tax dollars going to fed, house, school, medicate, foreign residents.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@robertwilsoniii2048 Actually, Californios, Nuevomexicanos and Tejanos of the Spanish Colonial Period didn't identify with Mexico City, weren't party to Hidalgos plight for New Spains independence and did not participate in Mexico City's political dynamics or battles against Spain. There was a difference as Nuevomexicanos refused to ally with Mexico's army to battle the Comanche and didn't forewarn Mexico of upcoming Comanche attack in Chihuahua. Mexicans government officials faced resistance in these distant territories and under the Apatzingan constitution 1814, these territories were not Mexico. Mexico justice claimed the territories under its 1824 constitution. Spain didn't acknowledge Mexican independence or transfer any lands to Mexico under any treaty. So Spain had Treaty'd Florida and Louisiana by Mexican independence. If not, Mexico would have claimed them too, as Mexicans.... Mexico was lands in north America left over from New Spains territories. Mexico also claimed parts of Central America and lost those too. Californios, Nuevomexicanos and Tejanos of the Spanish Colonial Period became US citizens under the Treaty of Hidalgo and permitted to remain in the homeland under Territorial USA or statehood. During the Mexican Period 1821-1846, Sonorans or Sinaloans didn't leave their homelands to settle in the isolated northern territories. They remained Mexican citizens and some migrated to border areas after the Mexican War establishing border towns along with Anglo Americans. In fact, in northern NM, where few Mexicans immigrated to, the culture remained Spanish heritage. New Spain was different from New England as the Colonies were only 13, and compacted in size. New Spain was far and wide, different geographies, histories, tribes, politics, peoples and mixed cultures in most territories. Californios were incorporated to Anglo Americans or Mexican cultures after the Mexican Period with Mexicans moving in, same with Tejanos, with few traces of a Spanish heritage.
Texas and Mexico were taken by typical battles and an international War. And conquered. Same as any other wars in history. Blood was shed on both sides. California and SW are not ancestrally Mexico. In fact, those from south of the border in today's Mexico have no ancestral roots in any where USA. They are immigrants.
1
-
1
-
Mexicans didn't take it back as California, New Mexico , Texas weren't ancestrally Mexico to begin with. The USA took New Mexico by just entering Santa Fe and claiming it. Not one Mexican soldier in sight, not one shot was fired. Next the USA easily took California with hardly a Mexicans soldier in sight . Why because Mexicans were never from California or the SW. Two hundred years ago Mexicans had no need for the desert wilderness, with hundreds of wild unconquered raiding Indians attacking villages in California, New Mexico or Texas after Mexican independence. Independent Mexico brought American settlers with land grants to Texas which needec a population, and a handful of Mexican soldiers under land grants to encourage settlers in California. Took bravery and integrity to live in the isolated far north . It was tough Spanish Colonists with guts who toiled the soil and fought off the Indians for love of the land since 1598 on these far northern New Spain outposts to guard against Russian and French intrusion during the Spanish Colonial Period. Same with Texas American settlers during the following Mexican Period who toiled the land and fought the Comanche and the Mexican gaining Texas independence. South of the borderians never had ancestral roots in California or SW. And migrated after the USA subjugated the California and SW Indians who never identified as Mexican, you know, the Comanche. Apache, Kiowa who hated and terrorized Sonora and Sinaloa. And all those other northern tribes Mohave, Chumash, Ute, Shasta, Piaut, Shoshone plus many tribes nothing Mexican. There's nothing to reclaim or nothing stolen. It's coveting your neighbors land as Mexicans only looked north after USA westward movement. No one goes south, Mexico lost those lands too... If California, New Mexico, Texas lands were still an isolated wilderness desert , Mexico would look pretty good.
,..
1
-
Not so, that part of New Spain, what is central Mexico today battled Spain for 10 years. Under the Apatzingan constitution Mexico's first, California, New Mexico and Texas are not Mexico. In fact these northern New Spain territories did not join Hidalgo in his plight for independence or participated with Mexico City in its political dynamics and battles against Spain. Mexico claimed independence in 1821. Spain had already Treaty'd off Louisiana and Florida. Spain did not recognize Mexican independence and Spains King refused to sign the Treaty of Cordova. Spain never Treaty'd any lands over to Mexico and battles continued another decade. Mexico claimed what was left over of New Spains lands in north America under Estados Unidos Mexicanos constitution 1824. Mexico's borders changed 4 times within 4 decade. From no border as there was no Mexico, the Apatzingan claims borded, the 1824 border unrecognized by Spain and the 1848 border of which Mexico had lost all of its lands to the USA after only 25 years as a proclaimed nation and lost the annexed the far isolated northern territories which were unincorporated by Mexicos main and parts of Central America. California, New Mexico, Texas are not ancestrally Mexico. Mexico claimed for a brief time known as the SW Mexican Period during which Mexico's government tried to populate the distant desert wilderness with little success except for Americans in Texas with Mexican land grants and a handful of Mexican soldiers in California also with Mexican land grants to encourage settlers. These Mexican soldiers were hardly an army of any means to hold of American soldiers and California like New Mexico were easily taken during the Mexican War. And were separate from the Californios, Nuevomexicanos and Tejanos who had lived in these territories since 1598, Spaniard colonists under the 275 years Spanish Colonial Period and Spanish land grants. To one day after 1824 learn by Mexican government officials who moved north, of a new Mexican citizenship. Mexican government was met with resistance. Also the Comanche, Navajo, Ute, Mohave, Shasta, Chumash Apache plus many northern tribes who never innately knew themselves to be either Mexican or American tribes during the Mexican Period and some of these aggressive tribes fought fiercely and terrorized Sonora and Sinaloa after the Mexican government moved north to their inherent lands. California and SW are not ancestrally Mexico. 25 years is a mountain of a molehill..
1
-
1
-
1