The Cry of Dolores marked the beginning of the long and bloody Mexican War of Independence, which would not conclude until 1821. Millions were killed or displaced in this long conflict. During his trial, Hidalgo seemed to understand what he had wrought and recanted his actions, perhaps foreseeing the bloodbath to come. The Cry of Dolores was the spark that ignited the tinderbox of long pent-up resentment of the Spanish in Mexico. Taxes had been raised to pay for fiascoes like the disastrous (for Spain) 1805 Battle of Trafalgar and in 1808 Napoleon invaded Spain, deposed the king and placed his brother Joseph Bonaparte on the throne.
He was once known as an outlaw. He was once involved in writing Meixco’s history. Pancho Villa, formally named as Doroteo Arango Arámbula(fn), was an extremely successful Mexican revolutionary leader, he had won battle after battle in the revolution and made monumental contribution in political, social economic reforms. Yet along the long march for the revolutionary victory, he constantly changed his belief in respect of revolution. Ultimately, how did his career as a revolutionary leader ended with such a fiasco?
This topic is relevant because Mexico City is the center of the political decisions in the country and important reforms have been implemented in the last decade to increase citizen participation through mechanisms established in the new laws. Even though democracy and citizen participation has been part of the Latin American political system for a long time, countries like Mexico are still struggling to have the right mechanisms and motivations for citizen involvement in public issues, mainly because of the lack of an authentic democratic tradition and a history of strong centralist governments. In this paper I will analyze the particular situation of citizen participation in Mexico City, and will consider Delegación Cuajimalpa as my case study. From the data retrieved I will investigate if the recent efforts have been successful in increasing citizen participation and as a consequence increase the citizen’s quality of life and safety. BACKGROUND It is relevant for the purpose of this study, to give a brief explanation of the historical background of citizen participation and democracy in Mexico, in order to understand the reason why such political system has had difficulties to prosper in the region after all these years of hard efforts.
President Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna, the president of Mexico at the time, started to move the governmental system of Mexico towards a dictatorship. This in conjunction with the annulment of the constitution of 1824 early in the year of 1835 cause compelled large numbers of federalists to revolt. Though Texas was a part of Mexico at the time, many of its residents were used to a federalist government paired with vast amounts of freedoms. One of these freedoms that these residents missed the most was freedom, and the right, to own slaves. The Texians became quite displeased with Mexico’s shift towards centralism and their abolition of slavery in 1831.
Henry had done this so he could abolish the Council Learned in Law, meaning that he could cancel 175 bonds his father had put in place with his Nobles. This made Henry extremely popular; a big difference from his father, and also meant that he could have rich Nobles, leading to a powerful army and glorious court. This first aim set the trend that showed how Henry would have a very different reign from his father. In June 1509 Henry married
Eleven people were killed and the radicals were given a huge propaganda boost by referring to the event as ‘Peterloo’, in a grim analogy with the Duke of Wellington's famous victory over Napoleon at Waterloo four years earlier. This shows that the government did think Britain was on the verge of a revolution if they had to have authorities to disperse the crowd by force. This also shows the unrest Britain had as a whole, to the way Britain was governed. In response to the Duke of Wellington’s return to government, reform leaders made plans to bring the country to a halt by having their supporters withdraw funds from the banks, using the slogan: ‘To stop the Duke, go for Gold’. The crisis was averted.
The production of federal agencies to control every aspect of the political and economic life of citizens and individual states was seen as an aggressive step to control the state and citizen under the might of the Federal Government. The public was very concerned of the socialistic steps taken by the Federal Government to regulate business and state government (Document B). Besides regulation, the government was given power to negotiate the issues between the labor and management in businesses. This first step towards a nationalized economy is expressed shows that the Federal government had overstepped its constitutional boundaries (Document F and G). The public were very weary of these actions by the Roosevelt Administration as the advancing of socialism in America.
All Russian governments in this period faced strong opposition to their regime with the period as a whole punctuated by riots, disturbances and revolutions. Political change was expected in Russia during this period, particularly during the Tsarist regime where the growth of the revolutionary intelligentsia, ironically an effect of the Great Reforms, led many to question the need for a Tsar or a royal family at all. The first main success of political opposition is widely considered to be the assassination of Alexander II at the hands of the People’s Will in 1881. Although they assassinated their Tsar, it is very likely this did not actually lead to their desired outcome, it being greater political freedom/democracy. Many historians have said Alexander II was considering the formation of a parliament in Russia.
http://www.history.com/topics/rafael-trujillo In 1930, a group of rebels under the leadership of Rafael Estrella Urena planned to overthrow Dominican President Horacio Vasquez for disregarding the constitution by extending his presidential term. General Trujillo, with whom Urena had previously made an arrangement, held his troops back as the revolution unfolded, maintaining his neutrality. With Vasquez in exile and the power of government up for grabs, Trujillo eliminated his political rivals through intimidation or force and won the next presidential election unchallenged, ushering in the “Era of Trujillo.” Within months of taking over the presidency, the capital city of Santo Domingo was virtually destroyed and 2,000 people were killed by
A breakdown in parliament then occurred because Charles realized the parliamentary attack on Buckingham was increasing so in 1625 dissolved his first Parliament in order to protect his close companion. The close relationship of Charles and The Duke of Buckingham enabled Buckingham to have security and potential access to more than Charles realised. The Cadiz Expedition is a prime example of Buckingham failures. Both Charles and Buckingham decided to attack one of Spain’s main ports to destroy as many of the Spanish fleet as possible. (Troops were raised but mostly untrained).