‘Manifest Destiny’: Prepare for U.S. Preventive War on Mexico (La Jornada, Mexico)

Do Mexican citizens need to prepare themselves for a preventive war from across their Northern border? For Mexico’s La Jornada, former Mexican general and governor Jorge Carrillo Olea warns that given Mexico’s continuing weakness and the danger criminal gangs and general disorder pose to the the United States, the U.S. notion of ‘Manifest Destiny’, which is responsible for the loss of huge portions of Mexican territory, is likely to reassert itself after the elections in November, and result in a major conflict.

For La Jornada, retired general and former governor of the state of Morlos, Jorge Carrillo Olea, writes in small part:

Historically, in their eyes, our country has evolved from “their backyard” into an inconvenient neighbor, and hence, a danger to their domestic security. We are a neighbor regarded as without the capacity to control its destiny. They cannot tolerate that. They have a very clear identity, historically, currently and for the future. They will not tolerate a threat from across their indefensible southern border. And they are already extremely disturbed about a criminal invasion and migration.

They are distressed about how petty, medium and major criminal activity originating from Mexico is taking root in their cities. They have a historic doctrine that they define themselves by and will not abandon: Manifest Destiny. We don’t fit into that definition – there is no room for us in it – and they will ensure that we don’t get in the way. In days gone by this took the form of territorial appropriation, whereas today there are other methods of imposition and subjugation.

Manifest Destiny, formulated in the middle of the 19th century (By John L. O’Sullivan of the Democratic Review, July 1845), also had British Oregon in its sights, and revealed an expansionist doctrine that coincided with a nascent Mexican state with little strength. It is true that we were robbed; it is also true that we were not yet a consolidated nation capable of self-government.

READ ON IN ENGLISH OR SPANISH AT WORLDMEETS.US, your most trusted translator and aggregator of foreign news and views about our nation.

Author: WILLIAM KERN (Worldmeets.US)

Founder and Managing Editor of Worldmeets.US

4 Comments

  1. These guys are still freaked out by a long-dead 19th century dogma? Maybe they should get a grip on reality and do something about the rabid mess their country is in instead of shaking their sticks at the past.

  2. I think they’re more worried about their future based on our past. And maybe they have good reason. We did, after all, invade GRENADA pop. 100,000 in 1983.

    Perhaps we can still convince Texas to secede and take care of the problem.

  3. Other than his contention that we supported Pancho Villa (we sent an army led by Pershing to try to capture him), I don’t see much that is wrong with the essay. It does behoove the Mexican people to worry about lawlessness and possible U.S. intervention (see the Pancho Villa episode once again).

    Meanwhile, any means of convincing the people that they kind of need to get their house in order (drug cartels, porous borders, etc.) is probably useful–if somewhat alarmist.

    Looking at things from an historical standpoint, I’m actually somewhat surprised that the Mexicans didn’t ask to become part of the U.S. It might have lifted their standard of living, if nothing else.

  4. Gucci sent their fall/winter 2012/2013 collection down the Milan Fashion Week runway today and it featured a much darker, more gothic and vampire-like color palette than what was shown by the iconic design house for fall 2011. One year ago Gucci Outlet showed bright colors and blocked them together, helping to explode the current color blocking trend. For fall 2012, Gucci moved away from the trend they started and let black rule the runway.

Submit a Comment