The Mexican Revolution

Abstract

Adolfo Gilly is a native of Argentina who became a political prisoner in 1966 at Lecumberri Prison and remained there until the Mexican Supreme Court revoked his conviction for “subversion” six years later. While detained, Gilly wrote the Spanish language edition of this book, which became a legendary hit after its 1971 release, eventually reaching an eighth edition by January 1977. Like a breath of fresh air after the harsh repression of Tlatelolco, and responding to widespread disgust with the ruling system, Gilly’s book passionately disputed the official history of the revolution in a leftist and even postmodern framework. The new edition, a smooth page-turner, retains its strong Marxist analysis of the 1910 – 20 civil war and benefits from a fine translation by Patrick Camiller as well as a foreword by Friedrich Katz. Gilly makes several solid conclusions, such as pointing out that U.S. influence did not become the decisive factor in determining the outcome of the revolution. Although he criticizes Venustiano Carranza consistently, Gilly reiterates frequently the powerful appeal of carrancista nationalism in terms of its strident international policy. The author points out correctly that Carranza opposed the Pershing Expedition “from the very beginning” (p. 224). The chapter on Mexico City in 1914 is the most interesting portion of this book because of Gilly’s illuminating discussion concerning the decline of the Convention government. Although he favors Emiliano Zapata and Pancho Villa throughout his study, Gilly is not reluctant to point out their errors as well as castigate their bureaucratic supporters in the muddled Convention experiment.Despite the author’s determination to analyze the outcome of the revolution, his lack of interest in current or past scholarship leads him to state such mistakes as asserting that once Porfirio Díaz consolidated his power in 1884, “it became the norm to repress any form of labor organization”(p. 35). It is a shame that Gilly did not read the late David Walker’s study of labor organizations during the Porfiriato, but Gilly is not much of a researcher. There are few endnotes, a great many of which are devoted to Katz or John Womack, and no bibliography. There are frequent factual errors, such as stating that the Madero family came from San Luis Potosí and that a revolution broke out in Portugal in 1909 (actually 1910), and that Morelos was the most modern industrial region in Mexico by 1910 when, as Bill Meyers has shown, the Laguna region actually enjoyed that honor. Furthermore, Gilly states that Zapata controlled the southern portion of Mexico, overlooking the southeast. Despite Gilly’s assertion that Carranza never ceased labeling Zapata as a bandit, there is not a single reference to such a statement in the Carranza archive. Gilly also makes it appear that there was a love feast between the northern masses and Villa’s army, when in fact commoners often feared Villa. Despite what Gilly claims, Villa did not oppose the U.S. invasion of Veracruz. Gilly’s discussion of the 1914 Carranza-Zapata negotiations is muddled; the Carranza land reform decree of January 6, 1915, did not reflect the disastrous Ley Lerdo legislation that the juaristas unveiled earlier.Several modifications could have improved this study. The author overuses the term peasant, which should have been defined carefully. To characterize Villa’s army as a peasant force is an oversimplification; Gilly does not seem to understand that many rural inhabitants wanted to own their own land rather than work ejidos (communally owned lands). He should have developed the rise to power of the CROM (Confeder-ación Regional Obrero Mexicana) labor organization instead of constantly emphasizing the Casa del Obrero Mundial. Although Carranza eventually repressed the Casa, Gilly should have put into context Carranza’s opposition to their general strike when the Carrizal battle with the Pershing forces took place only a month earlier. His discussion of the 1917 constitution does not mention Pastor Rouaix and other individuals who were key in formulating Article 27. The role of women during the revolution is virually ignored. Finally, I doubt that Carranza exterminated half the population of Morelos, as Gilly claims.In summary, Gilly’s book fails to contribute much to the history of the Mexican Revolution because of its weak documentary foundation. Although Gilly claims that his new periodization is a fresh approach, emphasizing the 1914 alliance of Villa and Zapata in Mexico City, others have actually done the same thing.