Jordyn Byers
HST 447
03/07/13

The Porfiriato
Judas at the Jockey Club
BY: William H. Beezley

The Porfiriato

The theme of the 19th century was “change,” and countries around the world had begun to see revolution and modernization. Societies began to shift from tradition and old beliefs were replaced with new ones. However, an adjustment that extreme was sure to present it’s fair share of opposing opinions from the countries people. Whereas Mexico was no exception, and likewise to other revolutions, conflicting political views had divided the country. However, having just ended a war, the country was left in a period of belated reform and was in need of rapid industrialization and urban growth to ensure the rest of the world did not leave them behind. For instance, in William H. Beezley’s Judas at the Jockey Club, the most notable examples under the rule of Porfirio Diaz between 1876 and 1910 are explained, amid Mexico’s political and social transformation. Though these transformations ultimately led to Mexican modernization, the reform came at the expense of its people. Whereas the nation’s inhabitants had split into two groups, the wealthy, who favored reform, and the poor, who held traditional methods close. This domestic conflict only made the pressure to implement change more difficult as it became a necessity for survival in the new world. Diaz’s plan to synonymously restore order and change to a broken country thrived upon positive ideals, which were believed to modernize the country as an economic powerhouse through mandatory reform and foreign investments. The country’s social stability and economy predominantly suffered in the post war, and as Diaz rose to power in 1876, the society had divided amongst the elite liberals and the poor conservatives. Diaz along with the elite class supported the industrial modernization of Mexico, and additionally assumed a European lifestyle, that felt social modernization should respectfully trail along with this. Yet, with a split society, this posed easier said that. The “ordinary aspects of life,” in Judas at the Jockey Club, are examined through normality such as sport, work, celebration, and daily civilian life to illustrate the colossal gap of the two main social classes in Mexican society. Yet, despite the opposing views, modernity was understood as a need by all and “seldom in history has there been a people with a more unanimous, more anguished, more determined aspiration” for peace. (Oxford) Modernity brought hope of safety, but the actual implementation resulted in an uncertain and indistinct social alteration. Diaz claimed power with a main and overall objective to modernize Mexico. His strategy enforced a Positivism theory, which emphasized “order and progress.” Diaz felt that with order, progress would subsequently follow. Under the influence of advisors known as cientificos, "scientific" development theorists, Porfirians established an economic policy based on encouragement of foreign investment. Since, as most, during this time, believed that science and technology was the answer to a need for economic, social, and political stability. Subsequently the excelling nations, such as Britain, felt “that all Mexico needed was capital investment and applied technology.” Mexican elites fully endorsed this concept, however the problem lied within Mexican countryside, the poor. Whereas, the poor favored traditional methods of life such as, “food, clothing, and shelter—seemed stone age, primitive, and backward” in the eyes of Europe, Diaz, and other foreign investors (Beezley, 71). The traditional meaning behind societal labor had nonindustrial Mexico feeling that new methods were needless. “Work involved more than labor; it included a sense of accomplishment,” and the society felt it, “ helped strengthen family ties and community solidarity through shared tasks and celebration.” (Beezley, 78) Alongside the presentation of modern machinery, came the introduction of sports. During the time of reform, sports held significance equal to the new technology, whereas it became a means to measure societal gain. For instance the bicycle proved immediate popularity, but it was seen as sophisticated and classy and accepted amongst the elite. Nonetheless proving that modernity would enlarge the societal gap regardless of what the changes, and fundamentally favored the rich at the price of the poor.

Observers at the time, who had familiarized themselves with the United States and Britain, blamed Mexico’s lethargic industrial progress on the lack of modern technology (Beezley, 67.) Though, since it was the lower class that refused to acknowledge modern techniques to carry out the day, the wealthy improved their economic condition and the poor found themselves falling further into desolation. Liberal Porfirians took action against traditional Mexico, with hopes of convincing them otherwise, by restricting the Catholic Church, taking the land for foreign investors, and sustaining societal jurisdiction. Yet, at the time, nothing was viewed as wrong since the underlying motive was positivism and for the greater good of the country. Any growth or expansion from this “order” and “progress” was a product of the volatile Porfirian government, consisting of Diaz’s own patronage team, relations and deals within the elite. Thus, modernization within Mexico had exploited the working class, and had foreign investors and the upper class reaping the benefits. Since they had been reluctantly thrust into a more modern existence, lower class civilians struggled to preserve their beloved customs, such as Juda burnings. Juda burnings, which was a practice of placing face images of political figures on the Judas to burn as a way of self-expression, became a societal symbol to the communal working class. The burnings held celebration significance, but they also presented an opportunity for those who were suffering to assert their feelings about the oppression, which signified the nation’s collective disorder. Although the Porfiriato Period was seen by many as an evil dictatorship and as one of Mexico's darker times, the reign of Porfirio Diaz was a time of overall growth and stability in Mexico. Though a lot of the nation had felt the burden that followed the implement of such a large rapid change, it was needed to get the country back on track with the rest of the world. During the Porfiriato, Mexico was prioritized for modernization and industrialization in which people were exploited in order to gain foreign investing attention. Whereas the forced labor brought a rebellious nation, that consisted of a country completely divided. William H. Beezley’s Judas at the Jockey Club, expresses many events to highlight the dark times amid the Porfiriato between 1876 and 1910. Beezley successfully demonstrates the circumstances with accounts of “ordinary aspects of life,” examined through daily activities such as sport, work, celebration, and daily civilian life. This method of description allows for the illustration of how immense the gap between the two main social classes was in Mexican society. Which only made achieving Diaz’s hope of modernity more strenuous on a population desperate for change. For Diaz, the initial installment of such a plan to simultaneously bring order and change to a shattered country seemed impractical. But through his positive ideals, shared amongst foreigners and elite, the country eventually grew as an economic dynamo though originally mandatory reform took a large toll on the working class, foreign investments eventually brought the country up to speed.

WORKS CITED

Beezley, William H. Judas at the Jockey Club and Other Episodes of Porfirian Mexico. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1987. eBook.

Beezley, William H., and Michael C. Meyer. The Oxford History of Mexico. New York: Oxford UP, 2010.