Mexican Revolution

Although there were armed conflicts in mexico over land and worker rights, the real revolution came from the power vacuum left by porfirio diaz and the USA attempting to control who ruled the country. Had the US ambassador not order President Madero killed, the revolution would not have happened.

>>1657115
Didn't the revolution continue after Madero was elected?

it was lead by peasant warlords (caudillos), its aim was land reform first and foremost and there were socialists and communists but not the main influence

Can anyone recommend some books about the subject?

Also, wasn't this a pretty well photographed conflict?

File: revolucionmexicana.jpg (159KB, 766x504px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 766x504px

TRAIN WARFARE

>>1656992
>Was it intended to be a socialist or communist revolution like Cuba
No, although there were some communists fighting, like Zapata. Basically, (as always) there was no middle class and the poor couldn't own land and thus had no chance at moving up the socio-economic ladder. The whole thing was about land. Unsurprisingly, with the masses on the side of the revolution it succeeded and thrust what would become the PRI into power for the next 70-80 fucking years. The PRI WAS socialist, the only socialist party in the Americas to be tolerated by the US in fact, but this was really only nominally outside of nationalizing certain industries and disallowing foreign investment. With the loss of PRI to technocrats, the reversal of the land reforms, and the resumption of foreign investment in Mexico, Mexico looks more like Porfirio Diaz envisioned every day. I can unironically say that the PRI and the Revolution retarded Mexican progress for 80 years.

>>1657467
Judas at the Jockey Club is probably the best book to sum up the causes of the revolution.

File: image.jpg (99KB, 639x635px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 639x635px

>>1656992
It's was more of anarchist revolution since many of revolutionary leaders where influenced by anarchism(Especially Zapata). It was pretty communist/socialist since many peasants and workers where standing up against there landowners and the state.

>>1658890
>It was pretty communist/socialist since many peasants and workers where standing up against there landowners and the state
>all peasant revolts are communist
Are you retarded?

>Mexican revolutionaries

>>1658901
I meant to say how it was pretty much communist since revolutionaries where influence by communism and anarchism that they led peasant and workers revolt across landowners.

>>1658922
>communism and anarchism
Very few. Only Zapata and Villa really and they made rather small contributions to the Revolution outside of the Plan de Ayala (Villa also almost fucking doomed the Revolution with his border raids). The vast majority were either liberal republicans or progressive republicans like Madero.