Recovering Radical Tejas: Mexican revolutionaries against settler-colonial capitalism
Racist populations have lived in Texas (or Tejas as it was originally called as part of Mexico) since the onset of Spanish colonization, only to escalate in intensity during Anglo colonization. This reality has indisputably remained the unfortunate reality for non-white Texans. The state continues to be controlled and dominated by a very reactionary minority of people whose actions reverberate across the country. I would argue that Texas is now the vanguard of the settler colonial project. This reality is not new but a continuity from the period studied in this project. The goal is to demonstrate that a radical alternative has been imagined, debated, and that many people have been moved to action for this better world for over a hundred years regardless of the state’s hostility.
Even when the violence against non-white communities in the borderlands reached its apex at the beginning of the twentieth century, people continued to advocate for an alternative society and fought to accomplish it. I present this project as a reminder to those who continue to face today’s manifestations of social injustice in Texas that there is a tradition of revolutionary and radical politics that should be recovered, studied, and revered. This project serves to demonstrate to outside observers that reactionary politics are not universally accepted in the state. From the beginning, the colonial project has had its detractors, critics, and challengers. Despite what many believe, people from Texas have and continue to fight for a radically different world.
Radicalism of the written word
Texas Mexicans have long been characterized as less radical or more inclined to capitulate to nationalist and assimilationist pressures. If one focuses on the political strategies of Texas Mexicans in the middle and late twentieth century, one will find plenty of evidence that verifies this characterization.[1] But at the same time, it also true that there are examples of radical perspectives and organizing that occurred concurrently with these more conservative approaches throughout the period.[2]
Many of the characterizations are, in reality, a projection of contemporary mainstream political activism in the state in an attempt to establish continuity between Mexico Texan activists of the past and those who lead the struggle for Chicano rights in the state today. Discovering, documenting, and sharing these moments of radical activism in Texas in second half of the twentieth century is an important project. It demonstrates to contemporary Texan Chicano activists that we have locally and organically developed radical perspectives and solutions to our unfortunate reality in the state.
But scholarship has centered the Chicano movement as the focus of radical Mexican politics in the US. Some scholars have worked with earlier periods of Mexican political movements in Texas but most of this scholarship has focuses on anti-Anglo sentiment and violence. This is important, of course, as it demonstrates anti-colonial sentiment and consciousness. However, I argue that Mexicans in Texas at onset of the twentieth century may have actually reached their apex in terms of radical political thought. A popular assertion today among leftists is that “the left begins at anti-capitalism.” If we hold this to be true, then Mexicans living in Texas during the period of the Mexican Revolution (1910-1920) demonstrated a widespread proliferation of anti-capitalist, leftwing consciousness. Texas Mexicans were discussing anti-capitalist ideas and demonstrating great sympathy to socialism, communism, and anarchism in Texas newspapers throughout the period. This was not only the case in explicitly leftist newspapers, but also in everyday, run-of-the-mill newspapers that did not have explicit political goals or intentions.
A such, in the case of everyday newspapers, radical political commentary is sometimes observable in the reporting or in a journalist’s political analysis. However, it is mostly present in the commentary section where readers write in to share their ideas. Of course, radical perspectives should be expected in radical newspapers such as the anarchist Regeneración or any Wobbly publication, but the preponderance of radical perspectives in everyday newspapers shows that consciousness was not relegated to a niche group of individuals. Rather, radical perspectives were widespread throughout the Mexican population in Texas with the ability to read and write. This fact does point to a shortcoming in the use of newspapers: it is true that many Mexicans, arguably most, were not able to read or write during this period. Their perspectives are documented in writing. But scholars have shown that even illiterate people engaged with newspapers.
It was common for literate community members to read them to those who did not possess the ability. So, although they might not have been able to personally write and share their perspectives, it does not completely discount the fact that there may have been people without the ability to read with political consciousness and sympathies.
With all of their limitations, newspapers illustrate much more than political and ideological perspectives. They also report on moments when these ideas materialized into action. Strikes and insurrection by people of Mexican descent were also covered by newspapers. Consequently, they also showed when the opposing side, whether vigilante settlers or the settler state itself, reacted to revolutionary action through incarceration or the outright extermination of Mexican people in the state; both the active participants and collateral civilians. Spanish language Texan newspapers from this period also shed light on the transnational discussion between Mexicans in Mexico and their US based counterparts.
Regeneración does this best as it was originally a Mexico-based publication by and for Mexicans residing in Mexico. Eventually, the Flores Magón brothers were forced to flee into exile in Texas where they reestablished their newspaper in San Antonio. Now in the US, the newspaper’s audience grew to include US-based Mexican readership and the paper expanded its concerns to include the issues of the diaspora north of the border. But Regeneración was not the only newspaper that addressed both populations of Mexicans and their ideas. Local, Spanish language newspapers also shared stories about the revolutionary upheaval in Mexico and the many radical strains of thought that resulted. Papers from this period show that revolution was not only a concern for Mexicans in Mexico but for instead for Greater Mexico: anywhere Mexicans were present in large numbers, the conversation about revolution remained an important topic. Mexico and its diaspora, then, spoke to each other and learned from how they both related to and interpreted the various thoughts and perspectives on revolutionary activity.
Radical Discourse Across Borders
The second decade of the twentieth century was a tumultuous one. The Mexican Revolution jumpstarted the decade of upheaval. The insurrection lasted the entire ten years and inspired many revolutionaries around the world. A few years later, Europe and its empires erupted into full scale militarized conflict. This war presented an opportunity for communists in Russia to secure arguably one of the greatest victories over an established ruling class at the end of the decade. Mexicans everywhere were privy to and deeply concerned with all these developments. Mexicans in Texas were motivated by and simultaneously influenced revolutionaries south of the border. But their analysis did not end with localized politics.
The early twentieth century was the apex of internationalist socialist politics. Many revolutionaries saw class struggle as a worldwide endeavor, and they followed international anti-capitalist worker’s movements very closely. Newspapers not only communicated worldwide events and manifestations, but they also provided an avenue for Texas-Mexicans to form and share their personal analysis of these events. Many of these analyses were developed through leftist, explicitly anti-capitalist frameworks. Sometimes these pieces were written by and represented the thoughts of one person, but other times they spoke for an entire group of people. Regardless of whether these thought pieces represented one person or an entire organization, they demonstrate that leftist ideas were rooted in Mexico-Texan communities and that their adherents were very much invested in the international discussion over anti-capitalist, revolutionary politics.
Leftist ideas were rooted in Mexico-Texan communities and…their adherents were very much invested in the international discussion over anti-capitalist, revolutionary politics.
One such example of collective, anti-capitalist thought came out of a San Antonio newspaper, El Imparcial de Texas. In November of 1918, the final year of World War I, Mexican typographers published a piece in the newspaper titled “Los Tipografos Mexicanos Se Ponen A La Cabeza del Movimiento Obrero Organizado.”[3] Typographers of Mexican descent residing in the Texan cities of San Antonio and Laredo organized themselves into a labor union and published this piece in which they positioned themselves as the vanguard of the labor movement in Texas. At a moment where The Great War was coming to a close, these trade workers formed and communicated an incisive critique of the war and the United States’ participation in it. These workers argued that “workers who reside in the US, and especially Mexican workers, are placed in a very compromised position [as a result of the war].”[4] In this publication, the workers announced the creation of their union and their goals. These workers were explicitly anarchists: they identified with the mutualist interpretation of those politics. It is true that mutualism is not necessarily the most radical manifestation of anarchism, but it is still grounded firmly in the anarchist theory. The typographers argued that capitalists were to blame for the war and they took aim at US-based capitalists in particular. They communicated how war is detrimental to the interests of workers. It is clear that these workers maintained strong anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist beliefs and they saw themselves as part of larger struggle for a better society. In communicating themselves as the vanguard of workers, they saw themselves at the forefront of the movement and made a strong attempt to position themselves as such.
For Mexicans living in Texas, radical politics were not only a domestic issue. The question of Mexicans from both sides border maintaining a conversation about revolutionary ideas was a pressing concern for revolutionaries at the time. We do not have to project onto historical actors a desire for international dialogue. The sharing of ideas was not coincidental: radical Mexicans from both sides of the border wrote to newspapers acknowledging the revolutionary, transnational discussion with explicit desires to participate in it. Most of this conversation was had in the commentary section of Spanish language newspapers, a section typically reserved for readers to have their ideas published for a broader audience. Sometimes these comments communicated who the author was, but more often than not the authors remained anonymous. This was the case for the comment published in Spanish version of The El Paso Morning Times the day after new year in 1918.
In what resembles a contemporary Op-Ed section, an anonymous author published a piece titled “Movimiento de las Ideas” (The Movement of Ideas). The title leaves no room for speculating intent. The author opens his commentary by address the impact of the ongoing revolution in Mexico, not just for Mexicans, but for “all civilized people.”[5] He acknowledges that the revolution is scary, but at the same time, argues that it is instrumental for subverting the old order of society; destroying its institutions.[6]
The author’s stated objective for revolution is socialism.[7] But we must not take this at face value, nor would it be wise to project contemporary definitions of socialism to what this writer is advocating for. We must remember that there were many interpretations of socialism in the early twentieth century. Given his desire for a complete destruction of the old, it does not seem that the author desires to adopt a reformist approach to social change. The author likely argued for socialism as a goal because they viewed it as a transitional moment between capitalism and communism. We can deduce that communism was likely what the author was envisioning as their long-term aspiration. This conclusion is further supported by author when he argues that the “philosophy and economy of capitalism finds itself in a state of crises.”[8] The rest of the note engages in a lively discussion about positivism and other philosophies originating from Europe. In addressing and communicating their perspective on European philosophers, all of which are from non-Spanish backgrounds, it is safe to say that the author possessed access to the foremost writings of the time. They were likely multilingual. It’s clear that they had a privilege that many Mexicans in the region did not, but they took it upon themselves to outline communist analysis in a locally circulated newspaper. He had an audience. Every day, working-class people read or had this opinion piece read to them. As such, its in conversation with European philosophers as much as with working class Texas-Mexicans. Communist Mexicans were doing their best to reach as many people as they could.
Turning Ideas into Reality
Evidence of revolutionary thought on the part of Texas Mexicans is not limited to manifestos, thought pieces, or leftist analysis published in newspapers. The most radical manifestation of revolutionary thought was when it when theory turned into practice. Clearly, Mexicans south of border responded to revolutionary ideas by fomenting insurrection. But despite attempts to use the border to seal off revolutionary action and relegate it to Mexico, Mexicans living in Texas mobilized to materialize their revolutionary ideas in formal US territory.
Much of the revolutionary action from this period was not necessarily based on a strong understanding of leftist ideology. Instead, it was an organic response to Anglo colonization. Mexicans living in Texas were experiencing the process of dispossession and proletarianization; their assets were stripped from them while they were simultaneously being transformed into a highly exploitable labor force. This process required violence on the part of both the state and vigilante violence. Many Mexicans, then, understandably responded with violence of their own. This type of struggle is important and not to be discounted: it is thoroughly radical and, in many ways, revolutionary. But, like many other movements within the greater Mexican Revolution, these moments of armed struggle were not thoroughly informed by leftist theory or ideology.
Because most scholarship on revolutionary action in the Texas borderlands during this period has focused on this type of armed struggle, we lose sight of how Mexican revolutionaries in Texas also contributed to the anti-colonial and anti-capitalist struggle. They did so while informed by very developed praxis and they had a plan for society if they achieved success. This faction of Mexican revolutionaries was not only concerned with their immediate gains but they maintained dialogue with other internationalists and workers interested in the global demise of capitalism. If studied in the context of the global struggle against capitalism and imperialism, Anarchist and Communist Mexicans in Texas are significant for bringing these revolutionary ideas and actions to a space that represented the vanguard of settler colonialism during this period.
Anarchist and Communist Mexicans in Texas are significant for bringing these revolutionary ideas and actions to a space that represented the vanguard of settler colonialism during this period.
Anarchist Mexican revolutionaries faced very strong repression for organizing and propagandizing in Texas. It was common for government actors in the state to incarcerate organizers in an effort to thwart subversive activity. But Mexican anarchists did not accept reactionary response without protest. Two major organizations represented Anarchist Mexican revolutionaries in Texas at the time, the Mexican Liberal Party and the Industrial Workers of the World. On November 27th of 1913, La Prensa, a Spanish-language newspaper published in San Antonio reported that both of these organizations were involved in an attempted jailbreak to free two political prisoners hailing from both of the organizations.[9] The newspaper was not particularly sympathetic to J.A. Hernandez and Eustolio Garcia, the two prisoners being held at the country prison in Carrizo Springs, Texas. Ironically, these two Mexican anarchists were travelling through South Texas attempting to organize a rescue plan for fourteen other comrades that were being held in Dimitt County jail.
The article doesn’t mention whether or not police found the anarchists attempting to liberate Hernandez and Garcia, but it is clear that the very least they foiled a plot to liberate more comrades. The article recognizes that challenges faced by the state in facing Mexican revolutionaries. Despite apprehending the PLM’s leader, Ricardo Flores Magón and transporting him to different prisons across the country, Flores Magón’s influence remained powerful and the author of the article even suspects that Flores Magón might have been behind both of these attempts to free Mexican anarchist organizers. It is clear that incarceration temporarily thwarted intended action and forced anarchist to focus their resources on recovering comrades, but even so, their ideas and organization could not be defeated solely through incarceration.
Spanish speakers and newspapers were not the only entities concerned with the actions of revolutionary Mexicans in Texas. Anarchists of all backgrounds were very attentive to developments occurring in the borderlands. The IWW in particular, not only documented actions in Texas by Mexicans but also were very much involved in organizing them, either directly through their union or indirectly through members attempting to agitate existing unions. In April of 1913, one such action took place in El Paso at the local smelter. A massive, 600 worker strike erupted in the plant. Fernando Palomares, an IWW member, led the strike despite having already spent over a year in prison for revolutionary activities. Another Mexican, J.M. Ybarra, also helped organize the strike as the secretary[10] The workers, of course, were concerned with immediate gains, but they were also looking to make greater gains for the working class.
Palomares believed that “winning this strike will be the means of organizing large unions of Mexicans all over Texas and the South.”[11] The IWW, while not an explicitly Mexican organization by any means, had a sizable following in Texas and also maintained a history of cooperation with the PLM, the other big Anarchist organization pushing anti-capitalist ideas and bringing Mexicans together for collective gains. This strike demonstrates just how large and influential anarchist labor organizing was in Texas and how, compared to conventional unions, the IWW was very much invested in Mexican workers and struggled for the liberation of Mexicans throughout Texas and the US in general.
The revolutionaries aligned with Ricardo Flores Magón, or Magonistas, are sometimes discussed primarily as labor activists but their actions went far beyond union politics. For a period of time before and during the formal period of the Mexican Revolution, Magón’s followers spanned both sides of the border and their revolutionary capabilities were expansive. Magón essentially led an entire militia, well-armed and capable of defeating both state actors and challenging revolutionary sects. The Magonistas were very organized. On September 1st of 1911, it was reported that a shipment of arms originating from New York was destined to the Magonistas at the border. It was intercepted by Texan secret police in El Paso.[12] A couple weeks later, on September 19th, Magonistas fought a battle with federal Mexican troops between Brownsville and Reynosa. They handily defeated the federal troops as they sustained no losses compared to the six injured and one deceased on the part of the Mexican state.[13] Naturally, the Texas Rangers maintained great concern over these activities and sought to capture any and all Magonistas they could find after the skirmish.[14]
Mexican authorities viewed the Magonistas as a foreign threat, and as such, they appealed to the US government to clamp down on anarchist activities. Dealing with the Mexican government and competing revolutionaries was challenging enough and, as such, dealing with a much more well-equipped US military. Most actions, then, were organized on the US side and carried out on the Mexican side. In addition to armed campaigns, expropriations of land and capital—along with kidnappings—were common practices for the US-based Magonistas acting on the Mexican side of the border.
Reactionary Response: Incarceration and Assassination as a Means to Destroy
While local papers placed imprisoned anarchist revolutionaries in a negative light, Regeneración reported on imprisoned revolutionaries and communicated the evils committed by white settlers and the state of Texas. The anarchist newspaper illustrated the horrific extremes that white Texans went to in order to subjugate the revolutionary Mexican population. Incarceration was the focus of most of these reports, but Regeneración also covered other atrocities experiences by Mexicans organizing in the state. On October 23rd, 1915, Ricardo Flores Magón published a piece on the revolutionary struggle in Texas. Jesús M. Rangel, Eugenio Alzalde, Charles Cline, José Abraham Cisneros, Domingo R. Rosas, Miguel P. Martínez, Bernardino Mendoza, Pedro Perales, Jesús González, Leonardo Vázquez, Lino González, and Luz Mendoza all found themselves incarcerated in the state for revolutionary activities at the time of publication.[15]
Much of this article was written to raise awareness for the prisoners, but Flores Magón also shared that revolutionaries had fallen victim to torture and assassination. In this article, Flores Magón mentions the assassination of Lucio R. Ortiz, a comrade that had also been captured and incarcerated by the Texas state. Flores Magón feared that the same fate would fall upon the rest of the comrades that have been stripped of their freedom. He stressed the condition of revolutionary captives: death threats, trampling by horse, blows from the butts of rifles, kicks to the torso, among other forms of brutality so intense that many of the prisoners “lose consciousness.”[16] In addition to the frequent subjection to torture, conditions in the prisons were intentionally horrific. Prisoners were placed in cells infested with “lice, bedbugs, fleas, and other parasites…”[17] Finally, when white settlers found imprisonment and torture to in insufficient in repressing Mexican insurgency, they resorted to extermination in the most barbaric ways. Flores Magón reports that anarchist prisoners were “[tied] around a pole, in which the meat of a human being, of a Mexican, was charred over a slow fire, whose complaints and laments are answered with laughter, with insult, with saliva.”[18] While Flores Magón does not specify why settlers resorted to such violent treatment and spectacle, it safe to deduce that those who felt most threated by Mexican insurgency in Texas wanted to send a clear messages to those sympathetic to revolutionary ideals and action.
Four months later, the situation in Texas had not improved. Incarcerated Mexicans remained in a very critical situation, and it was clear that support for these comrades was not forthcoming. Flores Magón grew exasperated at the crisis in Texas. On New Year, 1916, he again addressed the conditions faced my jailed anarchist Mexicans in the state.[19] He published this piece, titled “Texas Barbarism,” as a call for support from revolutionary Mexicans everywhere.[20]
In the article, Flores Magón pleas fellow anarchist organizers to raise awareness for jailed comrades and calls out other publications for remaining silent about the abuses experienced by these fellow Mexicans. The article details the typical abuses that anarchist organizers faced in Texas. Anarchists Rangel, de la Torre, Garcia, Perales, Martinez, Alzalde, and Cisneros were incarcerated for their activities. In the same war the Lucio Ortiz was assassinated while incarcerated in Perry Landing, Texas, Flores Magón feared the same destiny for Perales. It is not clear in which ways assassinated comrade were killed but based on the descriptions of the conditions that anarchists were subjected to upon detainment, one can suspect that they died as a result of torture and neglect. Reports of Perales’ situation described daily beatings that brought him close to death. Miguel Martinez also received corporal punishment, in his case, Flores Magón reported 50 blows had been delt to him in just one instance of abuse.
If these revolutionaries did not succumb to blows from their overseers, they may have died from the lack of sustenance or a combination of both. Prisoner Adolfo de la Torre communicated that food was extremely scarce. Prisoners appeared “…thin, pale, with bony, round faces, sunken eyes, thin and hard hair like pig bristle.” The lack of food was compounded by intentional exposure. Prisoners were clothed in “…canvas and without underwear. The shoes were as hard as wood; they were given no socks and in the middle of winter they had to work in the mud, struggling with cold, dying of fatigue and hunger.”[21] It is not clear whether all prisoners or just anarchist prisoners were subjected to these conditions, but regardless, its apparent that the Texas government intended to make an example out of anarchists in the state. At the very least, they were indifferent if the political prisoners survived. Alternatively, they may have even intended to push some of them to death.
The impact of Mexican anti-capitalist revolutionaries
In this study, I made a distinction between run-of-the-mill revolutionaries and those who operated based on anti-capitalist ideas and frameworks. This time period had many different strains of revolutionary thought and action across the world. Mexico was no exception and, if anything, Mexicans were on the vanguard of revolutionary movements worldwide. Within the Mexican case, there is an observable rift between those revolutionaries concerned with democratization, land reform, and finally, those most advocating for anti-capitalism in the form of socialism, communism, and anarchism. A critic of this approach may argue that I am prescribing contemporary analytical categories to these historical actors. I argue that this is not the case.
Mexican anti-capitalist revolutionaries viewed themselves as distinct from other types of revolutionaries. They knew that their project was one of a complete and thorough restructuring of society, not an attempt to just change who was in power or to address social issues through reform. Anarchist revolutionaries observed and communicated a distinction between themselves and other types of Mexican revolutionaries. It was not just a difference in goals, but also how governments responded to their organizing and actions. Flores Magón, for example, argues that because they were “fighting against Capital, Authority, and the Clergy, and for being anarchists, we were condemned.”[22]
Anarchists new very well that they were not being persecuted as revolutionaries, but instead, specifically as anarchists. He goes on to say that “if we had declared that we were going to fight in favor of Carranza, we would not have stepped foot in Texas prisons.”[23] Anarchists new very well that revolution against the established order did not always run contrary to US interests. There was widespread awareness that the US had thrown their support behind numerous revolutionaries in their attempt to influence the ultimate outcome of the political instability in Mexico.[24] Agitating for revolutionary anti-capitalism put them in a position against a system, and not a particular regime, and this made them more vulnerable. In Texas, they found repression for their ideas for every front: the United States, the Mexican state, even from other revolutionaries—first through direct armed conflict with different sects of revolutionists and later through repression once said revolutionaries came to power.[25]
Mexicans, on both side of the border, were on the vanguard of revolutionary activity and they cooperated with each other to reach their goals.
In spite of so much opposition in both countries, anti-capitalist Mexican and Tejano revolutionary organizations maintained membership well into the hundreds in Texas. If the analysis is broadened to the greater borderlands, then the numbers are considerably greater. Mexicans, on both side of the border, were on the vanguard of revolutionary activity and they cooperated with each other to reach their goals. While they were ultimately unsuccessful in overthrowing capitalism and the bourgeois state, they did have many moments of success.
They acquired funds to continue the armed struggle by kidnapping capitalists and landlords. In armed struggle, they defeated conservative revolutionaries and state actors on numerous occasions. They led some of the largest and most militant strikes in Mexico and Texas. These revolutionaries may not have instituted communism, but it would be difficult to argue that their activities bore no influence on the living and working conditions of Mexicans in the borderlands. Their influence on the ultimate outcome of the Mexican Revolution is even more clear. Had more moderates not felt the pressure of radicals across the land, they may never have instituted the radical social reforms that came to characterize post-Revolutionary Mexico. Finally, these revolutionaries served as an inspiration for those who sought a better world everywhere, including revolutionary Russia and Anarchist Spain.
NOTES
[1] Schutze, The Accommodation: The Politics of Race in an American City, 98.
[2] Hinojosa, Apostles of Change: Latino Radical Politics, Church Occupations, and the Fight to Save the Barrio, 120.
[3] “Los Tipografos Mexicanos Se Ponen A La Cabeza Del Movimiento Obrero Organizado.”
[4] Ibid.
[5] “Movimiento de las Ideas.” Original quote: “De esta Guerra tremenda, que ha puesto en conmoción a todos los pueblos civilizados…”
[6] Ibid, “que ha subvertido todos los valores sociales, que amenaza todas las antiguas instituciones, que parece como un derrumbamiento de todo lo viejo…”
[7] Ibid, “Ya hay síntomas que acusan dos de las mas importantes, de las mas trascendentales; una de la espiritualidades religiosas, u otra es el despertamiento formidable de las ideas socialistas.”
[8] “Movimiento de las Ideas.” “Dos cosas se hallan en inmensa crisis; el materialismo en la filosofía y el capitalismo en la organización económica y política.”
[9] “Pretendian Libertar a Los Contrabandistas de Carrizo Springs.”
[10] “El Paso Smelter Tied Up Tight.”
[11] Ibid.
[12] “Actividad de Los Magonistas En El Norte.”
[13] “Los Magonistas Siguen Activos En La Frontera.”
[14] Ibid.
[15] Flores Magon, “¡Basta…!”
[16] Ibid., “Los castigos que se imponen a los presos son tan brutales, que muchos infelices pierden el conocimiento.”
[17] Flores Magón, “¡Basta…!”, “…piojos, chinches, pulgas y de cuanto parasito…”
[18] Ibid., “…al rededor de un poste en que a fuego lento se achicharran las carnes de un ser humano, de un mexicano, cuyas quejas y lamentos son contestados con la risotada, con la injuria, con la saliva”
[19] Flores Magón, “Barbarie Texana.”
[20] Ibid.
[21] Flores Magón, “Barbarie Texana.”
[22] Flores Magón, “Barbarie Texana.” “luchar contra el Capital, la Autoridad y el Clero, y por ser anarquistas fueron condenados”
[23] Ibid., “Si hubieran declarado que iban a luchar en favor de Carranza no habrían pisado los campos penales de Texas.”
[24] Friedrich, The Secret War in Mexico; Europe, the United States and the Mexican Revolution, 44-45, 49.
[25] “Tamaulipas En Rebelion;” “Combate Entre Los Maderistas y Magonistas.” Radical Magonistas and moderate Maderistas clashed in Mexico and spilled into Texas. Combatants fought near Mission, Texas, and then sought refuge in the Texas countryside. They fought again a few days later.
Richard Velázquez Perales is a Chicano socialist of indigenous descent residing in New Haven, Connecticut. He writes about 20th century Mexican and Chicano history, with a particular focus on post-revolutionary, rural Mexico.
