IndexIntroductionProperty disputes in Mexico are a source of contentionThe phenomenon of the American West and its impact on Mexican-American land ownershipThe undocumented colonization of the American WestThe Discrimination against Mexican-Americans has resulted in loss of land and pride The role of the United States government in exacerbating bigotry against Mexican Americans Factors that contributed to the segregation of Mexican Americans and who was to blame Conclusions Works Cited Introduction Mexican Americans have a long and colorful history dating back hundreds of years. Over nearly a century, Mexican-Americans have created a distinct identity. They are divided into two groups: those who are new to the United States and those who are first- or second-generation Americans due to their parents' decades-long immigration to the United States. Then there are Mexican Americans, whose ancestors came to the United States when it was still under Spanish or Mexican rule. Mexican Americans have fought for property rights in the United States since the 1800s and for the annexation of more countries in the United States that once belonged to Mexico. There are two sides to this argument. The first argument is that Mexican Americans were granted safety, freedom, citizenship, and peace in the United States after more states became part of the country. They were allowed to remain on their property and had the opportunity to claim American citizenship if they desired. They were welcomed into the United States. The second aspect of this argument is that because the United States has not made a systematic attempt to incorporate the Mexican approach to property into the system, the legal system has failed Mexicans living in America. Furthermore, the United States failed to address prejudices against Mexican-Americans and colonization, which led to repeated cycles of oppression that can still be witnessed today. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essayProperty disputes in Mexico are a source of contentionThe contradictory notions that Americans and Mexicans have about land ownership are one of the reasons they existed and There are still problems with the land that was provided to Mexicans in America when their country lost territory in favor of the United States. Mexicans favor the “informal” system of land ownership, which is based on connections and patronage, while Americans are more concerned with the distinction between public and private ownership, as well as whether or not an individual has complete authority over a piece. owned. The easiest way to understand Mexican land grants is to look at them in the historical, social, and cultural context in which they were created. The business practices of the Mexican people in the 1800s were based more on mutual trust than on official documents. Contracts between two people or groups undertaking a transaction were almost never devalued; they were instead verbal because one person's word was as valid as that of others. The American justice system, on the other hand, was and continues to be unwilling to understand this aspect of Mexican society. While the Mexican land grant system is based on Spanish civil law, the American system is more formal and rigorous and based on English common law. Perhaps this explains why the two are so irreconcilable, and why today's lawyers and property owners have such difficulty understanding the system. The reluctance of the US government to recognize theMexican agreements on real estate has sometimes been motivated by ulterior intentions. While Mexican usufruct rights allow landowners to use common land resources as they see fit, the American tax does just the opposite. If the U.S. legal system had granted landowners their usufruct rights in the same way as the Mexican system, they would have been denied access to the property's resources. As a result, the usufruct rights were declared unenforceable under US law. The fundamental underlying issue between the two sides has so far been and continues to be what Montoya calls “translation”. The land was rightfully theirs in the eyes of the Mexican people; the procedures followed to obtain it made it legally and entirely their property. Unfortunately, the legal system in the United States does not recognize these practices. The system has its own set of conditions on what it takes to be entitled to property, which are in no way connected to what Mexicans consider property rights. Both sides believe they are right, as the winner is selected exclusively by the party that has the most say in the current situation, namely in the US justice system. The Phenomenon of the American West and Its Impact on Mexican-American Land Ownership The fact that the American West was seen as a vast uncivilized and populated land up for grabs opened the way for disputes over property rights. It was as if the Mexican landowners who had lived there before the Anglo-Americans had gone unnoticed. This made it more likely that they would be driven out without a fight. The Anglo-American settlers simply did not accept or respect the land ownership system of the Mexican people. This perpetuated the idea that the land was open to all, that there were no established institutions that they had to deal with, that no one was harmed in the course of their settlement, and that they acquired the land in a transparent and unacceptable manner. This worked against Mexican Americans in court cases because the misconception spread so widely that it effectively replaced reality. The Undocumented Colonization of the American West Residents of the acquired territories, namely Texas, California, Colorado, and New Mexico, were welcomed into the American territory on an equal footing; they gained the same representation in Congress as their Anglo-American counterparts and were even allowed to vote. As the Mexican-American population grew in size, it became more visible in American politics. However, it emerged that some dubious tactics were used, as well as some forms of coercion. Colonizing simply means being conquered by a stronger foreign force. Colonization has several general characteristics: the colonizer arrives in peace, disguised as a friendly stranger bearing Trojan-like gifts. Little by little he asserts himself and soon the roles are reversed and he is in command. The next step is to claim whatever catches its attention, screaming with the same fervor as the natives and complaining if it is taken away. He instigates change and tries to modify his environment until it suits him. He then invites his people, who quickly exhaust and dominate the resources that were once the natives' lifeline. In this light, Mexican Americans were colonized. The plight of thousands of Mexicans who lost their homes and lands to Anglo-American settlers received little attention because it was considered incredible that the new and free America, which preached so much about freedom and equality forall people, would be the homeland of such a vice. Some people viewed the expansion of the Mexican immigrant population as a social concern and attempted to eliminate what they saw as the bad features of Mexican-American life. According to a school pamphlet, Americanization through homemaking was the key to social harmony by enrolling Mexican girls in sewing, cooking, and cleaning lessons. For young Mexican immigrant women, this book by Pearl Idelia Ellis describes educational programs on home economics and citizenship. It symbolizes America's "melting pot" immigration policy and demonstrates how assimilation can occur at home. Sewing, food, family finance, home care, preschool child care, parenting, home siting and interior design are discussed, as well as the significant role young Mexican women play in Americanization of Mexican immigrants. Discrimination against Mexican Americans resulted in loss of land and pride. The American War was fought from 1846 to 1848 after the United States conquered Texas in 1845. The Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo was signed at the end of the two-year conflict, and Mexico lost Texas to the United States. Mexico ceded more territory with the Gadsden Purchase of 1853, which included present-day New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada, Utah, and sections of Wyoming. Initially, Mexicans living in these territories had newly acquired U.S. citizenship as a refuge from General Santa Anna's dictatorial government. Additionally, the US government offered to protect the Mexican people's camps, which were known to have been looted. There was also peace, which had long eluded the region; the Mexicans knew that if they didn't have to keep fighting all the time, they would be able to settle down and generate wealth. However, things did not go as they first appeared. Although the treaty included provisions ensuring that landowners would be able to maintain their properties, the U.S. government failed to uphold the final part of the agreement. The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was amended by Congress to remove protection from Mexicans. Article 10 of the original treaty, which specified that the U.S. government was obligated to honor land grants made to Mexicans living in regions ceded to the government, was repealed. The other article that was changed was Article Eight, which said that Mexicans who remained in America for one year after the cession could choose to become full American citizens or preserve their Mexican citizenship. However, this was changed to an indefinite period of time to obtain US citizenship, with Congress determining the duration. Thousands more Mexicans lost their property as a result of these changes when they filed their claims in state and federal courts. These generally ignorant or semi-literate landowners were helpless in the face of the legal system. Many of these people have lost their land due to the legal fees they have had to pay to fight for the right to keep their properties. The U.S. Government's Role in Exacerbating Bigotry Against Mexican Americans The Mexican people were left without a source of income and no way to support themselves after losing their property. In their own country, Mexicans had become fugitives. The United States government has failed to intervene to stop the abuses perpetrated against the Mexican people. As more and more Anglo-Americans took over thesurrendered lands, the government stood by, purchasing the territory that properly belonged to the Mexicans and putting it to its own use. In the American West there began to be a reorganization of social classes based on who was richest and had the most power. The landowners were the elite; they owned ranches and were in the cattle business. Then there were people who owned smaller plots of land, known as "rancheros". They had modest herds of cattle and horses that they relied on for survival. The landless, also known as "peons", "vaqueros" and "teamers", were the basis of the social structure. This lowest group in the hierarchy appeared to be nothing more than slaves. They had no property of their own and were often employed by ranch owners. They resided in shacks in the same compound as the main "hacienda" where they worked, but quite far away. They didn't even have access to building materials, so they had to make do with mud for walls and whatever straw material they could find for roofs. It was an extremely degrading existence. The legal system has completely failed the Mexican-American population, not only in terms of land loss, but also in terms of its failure to protect their basic human rights. Aside from the continued segregation of Mexican Americans, which eventually escalated into overt racism, there have been hundreds of incidents of unjustified violence against members of these communities. There has never been any compensation for the victims and their cases have never been heard in a court. In most of the American West, Mexican Americans were denied this privilege, despite being citizens just like everyone else at the time. Factors that contributed to the segregation of Mexican Americans and who was to blame? The lives of Mexican workers were literally not their own. Own. Jose Alamillo remembers his upbringing in Southern California, where he lived with his parents, who worked on a limoneira farm. The farm, which was and continues to be the largest lemon company in the country, relied primarily on Mexican immigrants for labor. According to Alamillo, his family lived in a house owned by the same company that grew lemons. The all-pervasive corporation owned the grocery store where they purchased their groceries, as well as the entertainment venues they visited. Working in the lemon groves was not easy. The work was seasonal and there were times of the year when the author's mother had to do extra work in people's homes to meet their financial obligations. The author claims that during the fruit season, when there was packing, his mother had to work day and night with only short breaks in between. His father had to get up on the coldest nights so he could go and keep the rubbing pots lit so the fruit wouldn't be ruined by the cold. The workers' working conditions were dangerous to their health and the long hours left them exhausted. What's worse is that the compensation paid to the workers for their work was terrible. It wasn't even enough to keep the workers' families afloat. Because workers purchased their goods from a company-owned store, the farm had complete control over the prices set, as well as rent, leaving workers subject to exorbitant fees. Workers loved their free time; those few hours of respite in which they could enjoy their independence. The workers formed very close community relationships because of their shared misery. They celebrated holidays, weddings and birthdays with considerable pomp and ceremony. It was as if these moments, like rare diamonds of joy, represented.