October 29, 2012 by aalanis3
Growing up in a Mexican American household, I always heard my parents reference figures such as Emiliano Zapata and Pancho Villa. Unfortunately, grade school in America does not go too much into detail about Hispanic war figures, much less revolutionaries. Now that I have read more on these figures, I am surprised to find that many important figures are perceived negatively because of the way in which they took on their revolutions. Pancho Villa was a general in the Mexican Revolution. According to Wikipedia, Villa and his supporters seized hacienda land for distribution to peasants and soldiers. He robbed and commandeered trains, and, like the other revolutionary generals, printed money to pay for his cause. Villa’s men and supporters became known as Villistas during the revolution from 1910 to 1920. His involvement in the revolution of Mexico, as well as in politics, made him a prominent figure in the country. He continued his quest for equalization of peasants and soldiers until 1920, which is when he retired. He was later assassinated when he wanted to enter the political world once again. It has been 75 years after his death, and the debate still goes as to whether Villa was a courageous patriot, a dangerous criminal, or a mixture of both. He was considered a criminal because he killed many at point blank in his attempt to create equality in his nation. The question here is: do his ends justify his means? Whether or not people agree or disagree with his reasoning, one thing most people agree on is that he is a very prominent figure in the Latino culture due to his strong commitment to Revolution. Villa is a part of several museums of culture in Mexico and even in some in the US. His legacy remains engraved in those who choose to learn details about the Mexican Revolution.