The
New Manifest Destiny
by
Ryan McMaken
On
April 21st, 1836, Sam Houston of the Texas Republic mounted
a surprise attack on Mexican General and Dictator Santa Anna near
Galveston Bay. Santa Anna was captured and forced to sign documents
surrendering his army and recognizing the independence of the Republic
of Texas. Thus ended an independence movement that had grown out
of a careless immigration policy enacted a decade before.
The
immigration problem that Texas posed to the Mexican government in
the 1830s is instructive to us today and serves as an excellent
reminder of the central role of demographics in the maintenance
of sovereign societies.
Mexico’s
northern frontier had always been a problem for Mexico. Having a
small non-indigenous population and an incessantly unstable political
environment, Mexico found it very difficult to populate the northern
provinces with their own citizens. To alleviate the problem, the
Mexican government decided that it would open the areas in what
is now Texas to immigration from the United States. Immigrants were
required to adopt Mexican citizenship and (although rarely enforced)
to respect the 1824 Mexican ban on slavery.
Immigrants
from the United States poured into the area, and by 1835, over three-fourths
of Mexican citizens in what is now east Texas were of American origin
and largely Protestant as well. The Mexican government had attempted
to stop the flood of immigrants in 1830 by halting immigration and
setting up administrative districts to impose new customs duties.
The halt in immigration was largely ineffective however, since Mexicans
of American extraction were numerous enough to control many of the
local institutions and did little to prevent further immigration.
The end result was a small minority of Catholic and Spanish-speaking
citizens in the region by the time Texas declared its independence
in 1835.
The
example of Texas is so useful because it clearly shows us that when
dealing with issues of immigration, the point in time in which it
becomes clear that immigration is a problem, it may already be too
late. As the "American-Mexicans" of the 1830s showed us,
it can prove exceedingly difficult to enforce any meaningful immigration
policy when the machinery of government is controlled by those who
stand to gain from even more unlimited immigration.
The
Mexican government should have really known better than to swing
the doors open to Protestant and English-speaking Americans when
they couldn’t even begin to populate the area with anyone hailing
from any parts of New Spain. It didn’t take long before Mexico’s
open borders policy had produced a situation where almost 23,000
of the 30,000 people in Texas were more interested in being a part
of the Protestant-Anglo society of the United States than in being
a part of Mexico’s Catholic and Hispanic culture. It took little
more than the demographic shift to make Texas an independent country,
and then a part of the United States.
The
implications for our own immigration policies 170 years later are
obvious. Unless efforts are taken to ensure that American citizens
partial to an American way of life (which admittedly contains many
valuable Hispanic influences) are kept in the majority, the American
Southwest may prove to become our own Texas problem in another generation.
Now
some of you may undoubtedly say that such a prospect would serve
us right for having stolen Mexico’s northern frontier in the first
place. While the annexation of Texas and the related war with Mexico
in the 1840s was quite possibly America at its militant worst, it
does not make sense for modern Americans who are not responsible
for America’s missteps 150 years ago to simply forfeit their own
control of local democratic institutions because of an historical
debate. The fact of the matter is that Texas and the American Southwest
are currently American regions that practice a way of life that
has little resemblance to the Mexican way of life. This is not a
question of one culture being superior to another, but one of the
foolishness of abandoning control of one’s own society.
The
Mexicans freely admit that they were foolish to call in Americans
to settle a region of Mexico that they were not able to settle themselves.
It is difficult to understand, therefore, why so many Americans
fail to see that the effects of immigration are real, long lasting,
and unpredictable. Surely, had the Mexican government foreseen the
effects of immigration into Texas, they would have stopped it. Why
are we so unwilling to learn from their misfortune and err on the
safe side?
It
appears that in the modern immigration debate, the Mexicans are
the only ones who know what they are doing. They certainly appreciate
the lessons of the past and know that local control of the politics
in the Southwestern United States can have far reaching effects
for Mexicans still in Mexico. It is the politics of Manifest Destiny
revisited, except this time, the joke’s on us.
August
31, 2001
Ryan
McMaken [send him mail]
is a public relations man in Denver, Colorado. You can visit his
Rocky Mountain news site at WesternMercury.com.
Copyright
2001 LewRockwell.com
Ryan
McMaken Archives
|