Reconquista? ABSOLUT-ly! (ABQ Journal comment on Michelle Malkin and illegal immigration)

The Albuquerque Journal ^ | April 4, 2008 | Bruce Daniels

[CedarDave]

The latest Internet outrage is a vodka maker's ad showing a pre-1848 North America.

Not too long ago, Janet Murguia, president and CEO of the National Council of La Raza, blasted some television commentators (mentioning Pat Buchanan and CNN's Lou Dobbs and Glenn Beck by name) for demonizing Latino immigrants, legal and illegal alike, during the current heated immigration debate.

At La Raza's Web site, www.wecanstopthehate.org, among the "code words" used to smear Latinos is "La Reconquista" -- the supposed reconquest of territory that once belonged to Mexico that was sold to the United States at gunpoint following the Mexican War.

Now, if accusing Mexican immigrants of trying to retake those lands -- including California, Arizona, New Mexico and parts of Colorado and Nevada -- is hate speech, what does La Raza make of a new ad from Absolut Vodka, now appearing on billboards and magazines in Mexico and the Internet?

Anti-illegal immigration firebrand Michelle Malkin has been stoking outrage (here and here) over the ad that shows a large swath of the U.S. Southwest as part of Mexico (under the words "IN AN ABSOLUT WORLD"), even inviting a photoshopped alternative.

"Reconquista," according to La Raza, is "an antiquated metaphor used by Chicano scholars in the 1960s to refer to a mythical `Aztlan' in the Southwest. Although it is difficult to find anyone in the Latino community outside of a few student groups or fringe groups that have ever espoused this idea, it appears to be gaining far more attention and notoriety in the context of the current immigration debate than it ever did as a scholarly doctrine."

[CedarDave]

Original:

Better:

Later in the article, Daniels repeats the first, benign, definition of Reconquista from Wikipedia:

The term Reconquista (in English, "reconquest") was popularized by Mexican writers Carlos Fuentes and Elena Poniatowska to describe the demographic and cultural reemergence of Mexicans in the Southwestern United States.

He conveniently leaves out and does not mention the second meaning which is typical of liberal journalistic bias:

A movement hoping to grant ownership of certain land areas in the Southwestern United States to Mexico, Mexicans, or Mexican-Americans. The premise of this reconquest is an historical claim to the land prior to the presence of European-Americans. The term does not make a claim for Spaniard-Europeans, but rather, for Mexicans, the majority of whom are mixed-blood and full-blood indigenous-blooded people.

[Grunthor]

Original:

X

Better:

X

I fail to see the difference.

[skeeter]

The term does not make a claim for Spaniard-Europeans, but rather, for Mexicans, the majority of whom are mixed-blood and full-blood indigenous-blooded people.

Indigenous to southern Mexico, not the SW USA, BTW.

[reagan_fanatic]

LOVE the photoshopped one. That one I could live with (maybe add some barbed wire on top and seed the ground below with claymores, too.)

[VR-21]

"The term Reconquista (in English, "reconquest") was popularized by Mexican writers Carlos Fuentes and Elena Poniatowska to describe the demographic and cultural reemergence of Mexicans in the Southwestern United States.

I guess that saying "popularized" makes the statement legitimate, but the term actually originated when the Moors were driven out of Al Andalus (Spain) in 1492.

[AreaMan]

...Chicano scholars...

I would soil myself laughing at this concept if some people didn't take it seriously.

Chicano scholar is like saying a "Flat Earth Scientist" or "Pig Latin Linguist"

[ladtx]

...the supposed reconquest of territory that once belonged to Mexico that was sold to the United States at gunpoint following the Mexican War.

Errrr - Bruce it's called terms of surrender.

[CedarDave]

Thinks, they showed up on my preview. I guess Michelle doesn’t allow hot links. Both are seen at her web page:

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/04/03/absolut-photoshop-how-about-a-fence/

[Grunthor]

Just took a look.

Let the boycott begin.

[Andyman]

As FReeper LS indicated in his book, many Europeans suggested that the Mexicans would be in Washington D.C. in the six weeks after the was started. We look back as if it was the current US against the current Mexico, not the USA and Mexico of the 1840s.

[sheana]

I like the 2nd one, especially if what looks like a fence was a canal (like Panama). Would stop all our problems and can you imagine the tourism, housing, shops, etc,?

[FreedomPoster]

Courtesy of Travis McGee:

“The True History of the Southwest, 101”

The amount of historical idiocy and fallacies surrounding the history of the Southwest is staggering, chief among them the “Aztlan” fairy tales. What’s the truth? How did the Spanish Europeans conquer the Southwest? The “conquistadores” (that means “conquerors”) did it with the lance, and the lash.

For example, in 1541 Coronado entered present-day New Mexico (which included present-day Arizona during the Spanish era) searching for the “lost cities of gold.” One of his first actions upon meeting the natives was to burn 100s of them alive in their dwellings, for not handing over suspected horse thieves. That is how Spain conquered the natives of the present US Southwest—not with hugs and kisses. It was certainly no love-fest between long-lost brown-skinned soul-mates, as it is often portrayed today by the delusional Aztlaners, who spin the “new bronze race of Mestizos” toro-mierda.

By 1821, Mexico City was strong enough to overthrow the even more decrepit and ineffectual Spanish rule. However, the distant provinces of the current U.S. Southwest were far beyond the reach of the authority of the independent but strife-torn government of Mexico City. These distant northern provinces received neither military protection nor needed levels of trade from the south. Under Spanish rule, trade with the USA was forbidden, but at least Spain provided trade and Army protection from hostile Indians. Under Mexican abandonment and neglect, the Southwest received neither trade nor protection from Mexico City.

For example, Comanches and Apaches ran rampant in the 1830s in this power vacuum created by Mexican neglect, burning scores of major ranches that had been active for hundreds of years and massacring their inhabitants. Mexico City could neither defend nor keep the allegiance of its nominal subjects in these regions. Nor did it provide needed levels of trade to sustain the prior Spanish-era standard of living. Mexican governmental influence atrophied, withered and died at the same time that American pathfinders were opening up new routes into the region.

Increasingly, a growing United States of America was making inroads into the Southwest, via ships into California, and via gigantic wagon trains of trade goods over the Santa Fe Trail from St. Louis. The standard of living of the SPANISH in these provinces subsequently increased enormously, which is why they did not support Mexico City in the 1846-48 war. In fact, the Spanish-speaking inhabitants of the Southwest NEVER considered themselves “Mexicans” at all, ever. They went, in their own eyes, from SPANISH directly to AMERICAN. To this very day, if you want a punch in the nose, just call an Hispanic native of New Mexico a “Mexican!”

So how long did Mexico City have even nominal jurisdiction (in their eyes) over the American Southwest? For only 25 years, during which they had no effective control, and the area slipped backwards by every measure until the arrival of the Americans. The SPANISH inhabitants of the Southwest NEVER transferred their loyalty to Mexico City, because all they received from the chaotic Mexican government was misrule, neglect, and unchecked Indian raids.

Since then, how long has the area been under firm American control? For 150 continuous years, during which time the former Spanish inhabitants of the region, now American citizens, have prospered beyond the wildest dreams of the Mexicans still stuck in Mexico. To compare the infrastructure, roads, schools, hospitals etc of the two regions is to understand the truth. The Mexican government has been mired in graft, corruption, nepotism and chaos from the very start until today. The ordinary Mexican peons have been trampled and abused, while only the super-rich elites have thrived. This is why millions of Mexicans want to escape from Mexico today, to enjoy the benefits of living in America that they can never hope to obtain in Mexico.

And because today Mexico is a corrupt third-world pest-hole, (despite having more millionaires and billionaires than Great Britain), we are now supposed to let any Mexican from Chiapas, Michoacan or Yucatan march into the American Southwest, and make some “historical claim” of a right to live there?

From where does this absurd idea spring?

At what point in history did Indians and Mestizos from Zacatecas or Durango stake a claim on the American Southwest? Neither they nor their ancestors ever lived for one single day in the American Southwest. The Spanish living in the Southwest in 1846 stayed there, and became Americans by the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. There were no Spanish inhabitants of the Southwest who were marched to the border and driven into Mexico. It didn’t happen. The SPANISH in the Southwest welcomed American citizenship, which brought stability, protection from Indian raids, and a vast increase in their standard of living with the increase in trade.

In summary, NO current inhabitants of Mexico have ANY claim on even one single inch of the Southwest!

NOT ONE citizen of Mexico is sneaking into the USA to reclaim property their ancestors were deprived of, NOT ONE.

They are criminal invaders and colonizers, pure and simple.

It’s time Americans learned the true history, as a counter to the prevalent Aztlaner fairy tales.

[TLI]

Errrr - Bruce it's called terms of surrender.

And since we held all the Mexican territory south of Texas up to and including Mexico city, we did not necessarily need to pay them at all. Perhaps next time we will not be such "nice guys."

[Dane]

You reactionaries are so funny. It's an Absolut vodka ad and also it is in English, and the ad basically states get yourself snockered on Absolut and your dream will come true in an alcoholic euphoria.

That said the marketing at Absolut did a brilliant job, they are getting tons of free publicity, for very little cost.

I wouldn't be surprised if michelle malkin is getting a kickback.

[Billthedrill]

Although it is difficult to find anyone in the Latino community outside of a few student groups or fringe groups that have ever espoused this idea, it appears to be gaining far more attention and notoriety in the context of the current immigration debate than it ever did as a scholarly doctrine.

How "difficult" is a Google search? I got 883,000 hits and it took 0.21 seconds. The author's clear implication is that the issue is imaginary, which is quite simply a falsehood.

The author calls on us to "just chill out," but I'm afraid ignoring the problem isn't going to make it go away. Controlled immigration is the sign of a healthy country. Uncontrolled immigration is its death knell.

[iopscusa]

I wouldn’t be surprised if DANE is getting a kickback/sarc.

[wastedyears]

Yeah, because I enjoy seeing foreign people taking over my country.

/major sarcasm

[Farmer Dean]

Agreed.I won’t drink that swill anyway,give me a good Kentucky bourbon.

[Maceman]

For those of you who want to let the Absolut Vodka people know how disgusted you are by their appallingly offensive Mexican marketing campaign, here is a list of e-mail addresses for people at Absolut who ought to hear from you:

Ketil.Eriksen@absolut.se - Ketil Eriksen, President V&S ABSOLUT Spirits
Anna.malmhake@absolut.se - Anna Malmhake, Global Brand Director, V&S ABSOLUT Spirits
tim.murphy@absolut.com - Tim Murphy, VP Marketing, Absolut Spirits Company, Inc.
jeffrey.moran@absolut.com - Jeffrey Moran, Director of Public Relations and Events, Absolut Spirits Company, Inc.
karl-johan.bogefors@absolut.se - Karl-Johan Bogefors, Global PR Manager, V&S ABSOLUT Spirits

[Prokopton]

and the ad basically states get yourself snockered on Absolut and your dream will come true in an alcoholic euphoria.

Somehow I don't think you got this delusion from anything the owners of the Absolut brand might have said. On the other hand, it is difficult to make a statement as silly as yours while sober.