argus

Hmm. There’s been a lot of bombastic speaking at these so-called “immigration” protests, including not-a-few references to the “Reconquista” and that “Los Angeles is ours” and other such nonsense. In light of the thought-threads such statements spawns, I did some historical refreshing. The history of the United States’ acquisition of the southwestern territories is interesting, to say the least. The Mexican-American War (1846-1848) was ultimately sparked by the annexation as a state of the rebellious former Mexican province of Texas. Polk essentially taunted the Mexican army by sending U.S. troops to disputed territory on the Mexico-Texas border (they were building a fort, no less), and thus the war began. Many more complex steps led to that point, so that’s definitely the short version.

The resolution of the conflict, however, has the most bearing on where we are today. All along, Washington D.C. had been angling to obtain the territory that became California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Nevada. Just-elected President Polk sent diplomat John Slidell to handle negotiations for the purchase, offering up to $30 million. Slidell was turned away by the in-turmoil Mexican government, and in the vacuum the war began. So the aims of the U.S. were not in doubt after the conflict: the end of hostilities was formalized as the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which stipulated that the U.S. would take over the desired territory (see link for map) in exchange for $15 million, as well as the forgiving of some $3.25 million in debt that Mexico supposedly owed the United States. The Gadsden Purchase (1853) created the present-day southern borders of Arizona and New Mexico in exchange for $10 million.

While the reasoning behind the United States’ desire for the land is founded in what may be arguable rationale (e.g., manifest destiny), the laws of classical sovereignty are pretty straightforward: the U.S. took the land by decisive military force, which in and of itself is historically the end of the discussion. Further tipping the scales, the U.S. compensated Mexico for the territory taken (Mexicans would probably say that no compensation would be enough) to the tune of $18.25 million — in 2005, about $361.7 million. The Gadsden Purchase was a follow-up deal designed to further address Mexico’s sense of inadequate compensation for their losses seven years earlier, as well as to secure land for a railroad right-of-way — for $10 million, which in 2005 dollars is about $221.7 million.

So to the illegal aliens that want to “retake” the southwest for Mexico, I would say:

• that ship has sailed: you’re about 158 years too late.
• bring it on: you’ve got to come forcefully take the land, occupy it, and drive Americans out — frankly, I’d like to see you try. I can think of nothing else that would better unify the country on the so-called “immigration debate”.
• pay up: since “fairness” seems to be a theme of the protests, Ma Mexico had better be willing to fork over that original sale price (inflation adjusted, of course) of $583 million — actually, to be really fair to our citizens we’ll need to tack on a low low interest rate of 3%, so make that $583 million + $53.09 billion = $53.67 billion.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, April 18th, 2006 at 12:15:48 pm and is filed under Commentary, Political. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.