Modification de The Mexican Revolution: 1910 - 1940

The Mexican revolution was a whirlwind of change and unexpected events. The sudden disappearance of charismatic and influential figures left power vacuums that were often filled by new factions or individuals seeking to promote their own agendas. Each time a leader was eliminated, it created an opportunity for others to rise to power, but it also added another layer of uncertainty to an already chaotic political landscape. The successive assassinations of key leaders also reinforced the idea that no leader was really safe, no matter how powerful or influential. This may have discouraged some from pursuing radical initiatives or putting themselves forward, for fear of becoming the next target. On the other hand, it may have encouraged others to adopt more brutal tactics or to act quickly, knowing that their time in power could be limited. In addition, Mexico was a country with deep regional, social and economic divisions. These divisions were often reflected in the revolutionary factions themselves. Without a strong, unified leadership to guide the country, these divisions became more pronounced. Entire regions, such as the North with Pancho Villa and the South with Emiliano Zapata, had their own agendas and visions for Mexico's future, further complicating efforts to establish a unified leadership. In the end, the Mexican revolution was not just a struggle against the old Díaz regime, but also a battle to define Mexico's identity and future. Internal conflicts, exacerbated by the deaths of key leaders, prolonged this turbulent period and made the transition to a new order all the more complex.

Northern Mexico, in particular the states of Chihuahua, Coahuila and Sonora, was the economic heartland of the country at the time, thanks to agriculture, livestock farming, mining and industry. These states were also close to the United States, which facilitated trade and investment. As a result, the region had seen the emergence of an influential local bourgeois class that, over time, felt alienated by Díaz's centralising and nepotistic policies. Francisco Madero, from a wealthy landowning family in Coahuila, was a reflection of this northern bourgeoisie. Although he personally benefited from the Porfirian period, Madero was also influenced by liberal and democratic ideas, and strongly opposed the autocratic continuity of Díaz. When Madero was arrested for daring to run against Díaz in the 1910 elections, it fuelled anger and discontent among his supporters. When the Plan de San Luis Potosí was proclaimed, it quickly won the support of various groups who had grievances against the Díaz regime, and not just in the north. However, it was in the north that the revolt quickly gained momentum, thanks to leaders such as Pascual Orozco and Pancho Villa. Both of these leaders, although initially supportive of Madero, also had their own visions for Mexico.

In 1913, Victoriano Huerta orchestrated a coup d'état against Francisco Madero, establishing a regime reminiscent in many ways of the authoritarianism of Porfirio Díaz. However, the atmosphere in Mexico had changed, and Huerta was unable to recreate the relative calm of the Porfiriato. In the north, Alvaro Obregón and Venustiano Carranza mobilised large armed forces against him, while in the centre, the influential Emiliano Zapata and his Zapatista troops demanded agrarian justice. But it was not only on the battlefields that Huerta was challenged. In the urban centres, growing social unrest was emerging. Workers and craftsmen, often organised into unions, took to the streets to express their frustration at social injustice and demand reform. They were supported and often influenced by an emerging intelligentsia, a class of educated intellectuals who aspired to more than just economic modernisation. This new class of thinkers firmly rejected positivism, the dominant ideology of the Porfiriato, which valued science and progress at the expense of the rights and traditions of the masses. Instead, these intellectuals advocated a mixture of socialist, nationalist and indigenous ideas, calling for a revolution that was not only political but also cultural. In this atmosphere of social and ideological ferment, Huerta's regime, with its attempts to restore the old order, appeared out of step and ultimately unsustainable. The combination of these diverse forces would eventually precipitate its downfall.

The Plan de Guadalupe, announced in 1914, represented a pivotal moment in the Mexican revolution. Drawn up under the leadership of Venustiano Carranza, the plan expressed the total rejection of the government of Victoriano Huerta, considered illegitimate after overthrowing Francisco Madero. Carranza, who had already gained political experience as governor of Coahuila and as a member of Madero's cabinet, was one of the most influential revolutionary leaders in the north of the country. The Guadalupe Plan was not only a declaration against Huerta, but also established Carranza as the "First Chief" of the Constitutionalist Army, responsible for restoring constitutional order in Mexico. The document reaffirmed the principles of the 1857 Constitution and called for new elections to be called once Huerta was deposed. Interestingly, the plan did not contain any radical social or economic proposals. Indeed, it was more of a political declaration aimed at restoring constitutional order than a comprehensive vision for remaking Mexican society. Nevertheless, its proclamation was a crucial step towards Huerta's impeachment and Carranza's rise to power.