A Tale of Two Countries

Here in America where history is taken to be a most boring subject we tend to think our country and its wonderful freedoms developed spontaneously around the time of the tea party. Likewise, we look at Mexico and see a land of violence, drugs and corruption with limited freedoms. Without remembering a little bit of history, it's hard to understand how our two neighboring countries developed the way they did. It is important, since if you look at any two border towns sitting side by side you will find stark differences in infant mortality, income, political determination, longevity, and yes, to quote Donald Trump, individual determination. Why? My guess it's largely due to political differences, and that has a warning for both our countries.

Mexico, until recently, was run by the elites, and organized for the elites. The common man had little political determination (you can vote for anyone so long as they are PRI) and the system was set up to allow maximum exploitation for the good of the elites. The US, by comparison, gave much more freedom to everyone and allowed the common man a say in who was in charge. What is interesting, and what most everyone forgets (or never learned) is that both Mexico and America started out exactly the same way.

Both Mexico and the US were founded by European powers intent on extracting the maximum of wealth from the new continent for the good of the ruling elite at the expense of the new colonists and native people. Remember Cortez and his galleons? The Spanish colonies Mexico, Central and South America, enslaved the natives, set (a few of) the colonists as ruling powers, and extracted everything, gold, silver, crops, they could. England tried exactly the same in America. Remember Pocahontas saving John Smith? Smith was out amongst the natives because Powhatan wouldn't come into the Virginia colony, and Smith was trying to coerce him into coming by for a visit. The English were trying to copy the Spanish practice of capturing the local chief and holding him for ransom to extract all the resources of the natives. Cortez would capture the local chief and ransom him for a room full of gold and two of silver, but he would never let the chief free until all the people were enslaved. Fortunately, the natives of North America were a bit more wary, and the technique never worked.

So instead, the ruling elite of the English colonies forced the settlers into indentured servitude. If the natives couldn't be harnessed to create wealth, the common man would have to do. With an entire continent to disappear into, the prospect of years of slavery paled in comparison. We forget that in the Virginia colony, the penalty for giving resources to the natives, or running away to live off the land like the natives, was death. Again fortunately, there was a lot of land to disappear into, and the whole operation failed. And that was what set the stage for American colonies that operated for the benefit of everyone, not just the elites.

So perhaps if the Spaniards had not been so successful in their methods, or if the natives had been a bit more resistant, the people of Mexico, Central and South America might have more freedoms and more prosperity.

And it also provides a cautionary tale for America. If the trends of concentrating wealth in the hands of the elite continue, and if those elites continue to shape our government to suit their purposes, the ultimate end will probably be a decline in wealth, health, and well being for all.