Blog 4: Power and Corruption

After discussing several leaders throughout Mexico's history, especially Santa Anna and Porfirio Díaz, it makes me think about how power can corrupt. When we learned about both, Anna and Diaz, we talked about how they came into power to make a better Mexico and had a large amount of support from the people. Diaz established himself as a winning general in the Battle of Puebla and had an overall favorable image. He came into power to bring growth to Mexico through political stability and the encouragement foreign investments. One of the defining views Diaz had was the belief that Mexican leaders should be "one and done" and no re-election. Overall, he seems like a great leader that had Mexicans interest at heart and truly wanted Mexico to be a better country.

In time, there seems to be a relationship between power and corruption. The longer Diaz stayed in office he began to contradict some of his original viewpoints that got him into office. Diaz changed the laws so that he could stay in power and used fraud ensure that he won election after election. Once he got older, he assigned a weak Vice President, Ramon Corral, to act like his puppet. 

I wonder if and how Mexico's history would have changed if corruption did not occur? What if Diaz set a precedent for a presidential term by stepping down? I believe that Mexico would have seen more growth if leaders did not put their personal interest first before the Mexican people. Leave a comment of your thoughts on whether Mexican leaders acted as an obstacle toward the growth of the country.