“My Decision ” During the press conference, I learned / observed many things about Mexican political leaders. I learned how a few of them wanted the best for Mexico, while some just robbed the country of its wealth. I observed how some leaders which wanted the best for Mexico, tried their hardest, but were unsuccessful to help the economy since Mexico was so such a sever debt, that they practically made no difference to the Mexican economy. The poor were still poor, and the desired middle class that Mexico wanted to create wasn’t forming. Mainly due to the lack of capital; industrialization never began; it caused Mexico to stay behind in the modern technological world. Out of all the leaders in the conference I would choose Miguel Hidalgo.
He seemed to me the only true leader that cared for Mexico. Sure his personal life was a bit wild, but he helped during the struggle to help gain Mexico its independence from Spain. Now regarding the decision in Chiapas, I feel that Miguel would, favor the peasants and that they should receive their land. That the government shouldn’t be allowed to control the land.
That if farmers independently compete with each other, to make a profit, and actually pay their taxes, it would be beneficial in the long run for the Mexican government to give the peasants the land they desire. By keeping it as a government own property, the peasants are lazy to work the land, and only receive 15-20% of whatever is grown on it. This is not right at all, so this is why I agree with Miguel Hidalgo, land for the peasants is the way to go.
The Essay on Naxalbari Movement Land Peasants Government
Introduction It was exactly 35 years ago in 1967 that a minor clash between a police force and a group of armed peasants took place in an obscure corner of West Bengal. But it unleashed a force of events, which escalated over the years into a political movement that derived its name from that area and brought about far-reaching changes in India's socio-cultural scene. Today it evokes a variety of ...
