Have you ever considered why, despite intense activism, revolutions in democratic societies like the U.S. seem like a distant echo from our history books? Journey with us as we dissect the anatomy of revolutions and social change and peel back the layers of effective social activism, revealing that the key to enduring change lies in strategic groundwork rather than spontaneous outbursts of protest. We delve into the potency of grassroots movements, the indispensable role of education, and the power of nuanced dialogue, all while weighing the pros and cons of emotionally charged rhetoric versus the disciplined approach necessary for legislative reform. Every vote cast and voice raised is an integral step on the arduous path to progress, and our conversation underscores the pivotal role of these actions in shaping a just society.
Lastly, we reflect on the poignant story of the 1968 student-led movement in Mexico, a stirring testament to the collective call for systemic change. We recount the spirit of solidarity that unified Mexican communities, only to be met with the stark brutality of government forces during the Tlatelolco massacre. This historical event, much like the contemporary movements, reminds us of the delicate balance between the power of the people and the narratives constructed by those in power. By remembering such struggles, we safeguard the truth and honor the courage of those who stood, and continue to stand, against oppression.
Have you ever considered why, despite intense activism, revolutions in democratic societies like the U.S. seem like a distant echo from our history books? Journey with us as we dissect the anatomy of revolutions and social change and peel back the layers of effective social activism, revealing that the key to enduring change lies in strategic groundwork rather than spontaneous outbursts of protest. We delve into the potency of grassroots movements, the indispensable role of education, and the power of nuanced dialogue, all while weighing the pros and cons of emotionally charged rhetoric versus the disciplined approach necessary for legislative reform. Every vote cast and voice raised is an integral step on the arduous path to progress, and our conversation underscores the pivotal role of these actions in shaping a just society.
Lastly, we reflect on the poignant story of the 1968 student-led movement in Mexico, a stirring testament to the collective call for systemic change. We recount the spirit of solidarity that unified Mexican communities, only to be met with the stark brutality of government forces during the Tlatelolco massacre. This historical event, much like the contemporary movements, reminds us of the delicate balance between the power of the people and the narratives constructed by those in power. By remembering such struggles, we safeguard the truth and honor the courage of those who stood, and continue to stand, against oppression.
In recent years, America has really been going through it. I'd say we are experiencing a great divide in political and social ideologies that has led to an uncomfortable stagnancy in policy and progress. That threatens to launch us into the throes of chaos if something doesn't give Healthy. Discourse seems to be a thing of the past and instead has been replaced with outrage, leading to both sides of our major political parties crying to take our country back. I don't know if you've heard that, but it's all the rage these days in America.
Speaker 2:Oh, as it should be, just kidding, that's a joke.
Speaker 1:Oh, actually I'm just gonna take myself back and go hide in the woods. Well, this isn't obviously rare to American history. We've seen similar levels of discontentment lead to social movements that forever transformed the fabric of our society. Take, for example, the Civil War, where countrymen fought against countrymen over the ethics of slavery and where our country should stand, or the women's suffrage movement, where the right to vote was fought for and won. These are obviously examples of social movements that led to revolution or social change. But not all movements are successful. Man, do we need a success?
Speaker 2:We sure could use a win right about now.
Speaker 1:We're here to help you guys get that win, because today's episode we thought we'd step into some of our favorite subjects of history and sociology to shed light on the topic of revolution. We hope our listeners, regardless of the country you hail from, will gain something from this discussion and together we will work to navigate the tumultuous state of the world. I have goosebumps. I'm really setting us up. I mean we could easily flop and not be that standard, but I believe in us. So for my part, I wanted to speak just kind of to the general concept of social movements and how they can successfully lead to social change.
Speaker 1:Social movements is generally considered an organized movement or a mass mobilization to bring about change. This change could be gradual. It could be at a state level, a national level, a topic of values, what have you. But the key is it impacts a population at large when it is successful. Now, when we're talking about a revolution, if social movement is a shifting in ideological tides, a lighting of a match per se, then you could also say a revolution is the explosion following that ignition. Social movement is the cause and revolution is one of the more extreme effects. It's generally aimed at overthrowing a significant status quo regime or power structure and generally, it occurs when there's a buildup of repression and opposition and it reaches an overwhelming breaking point. Once that tipping point is reached, man, the uprising is quick, it's dirty, but a key reason they're successful is because it's collective and organized toward a common goal.
Speaker 2:All that's playing in my head right now is the Beatles song Revolution.
Speaker 1:Yeah, I was literally listening to that when I did these notes. I love that song. It's a goodie, and actually that song comes to us from basically the last successful revolution that this country has seen. So fun fact. So revolutions as we know them today actually weren't really a thing until the 17th century or the age of enlightenment, when masses of folks began to question institutional powers and realize there are other ways a society could be successful. We don't need a monarchy, we don't need the church ruling over our day-to-day being. Also, I mean, he kind of coincides with an uptick of philosophical thought, which I think is kind of interesting the more discourse you have, the more revolutionary moments that you have, in history too.
Speaker 2:That's such an interesting correlation. I like it.
Speaker 1:It's neat. So the 17th 18th century is really what's considered the age of revolution, and the population at that time had also increased significantly. Revolution and the population at that time had also increased significantly. So mobilization efforts were much more impactful than, say, the slave uprisings in ancient egypt, in which rebel populations reached 30 000 at its peak. For context, black live matter protests reached participation of 26 million.
Speaker 2:Oh, my goodness just for comparison purposes, like there is definitely power in numbers, that okay, obviously we just lived through that recently, right like the context that you just painted that in is wild, like I knew that there was participation and all that stuff, but those numbers are huge huge and yet not a lot came from.
Speaker 1:So it's kind of interesting to see like you have these mass mobilizations happening but nothing's really coming of it. We've had so many you can't even call them revolutions at this point because they haven't really led to a significant social change. And sometimes, when we're talking about LGBTQ plus movement and things like that, it does lead to legislative changes and things like that. It does lead to legislative changes, but how much of those legislative changes are now being backpedaled upon? So it's not change that's being sustained, even though we have numbers and we have even more significant numbers now, and the ability to spread awareness and amplify messages to the masses has grown much more achievable with the advancement of technology. And yet, like we were just talking about, we haven't really had successful revolutionary shift in this country since the 1980s for the civil rights movement. That's when, well, the peak of it was 60s and 70s, but technically it ended in the 80s with Lyndon B Johnson, which is kind of funny because he's a white Texan. So you wouldn't, you wouldn't really see that happening these days. But here we are.
Speaker 1:How times have changed, I know turns to table yeah, with so much unrest these days, you kind of just have to sit back and ask yourself why haven't we had a revolution?
Speaker 1:There's so much opposition and so much discontentment in our society and yet we're not really making much traction on that. So, as scholar Mike Bessinger puts it, revolutions are essentially non-existent after a certain degree of democracy is attained. I see it as a perception of choice and freedom, and when individuals disagree with the state of a union, they are taking their grievances. Individuals disagree with the state of a union. They are taking their grievances to the ballot box in those democratic countries, trusting that the majority will prescribe to the same resolution that they did. And yet, when nothing changes, there's a belief that it's because your thinking is not synonymous with the population at large. There's a buildup of learned helplessness, a hesitancy to speak about views on larger platforms, so folks don't vote and instead turn toward like minded individuals they can feel comfortable sharing their opinions with, who aren't going to oppose what they're saying, who isn't going to make them feel uncomfortable about speaking about their opinions.
Speaker 2:Nothing's ever going to change if you don't talk about it, and you do get uncomfortable like that.
Speaker 1:You should be uncomfortable. Uncomfortability is how you get to finding common ground. You have to work through the icky to get to the good. You know, people just aren't as inclined to feel that way and I feel like this unwillingness to have discourse. It's a strategic obstacle placed here to dissuade folks from voting. It's a quiet backsliding of democracy that is to the advantage of those in power. You could say that they have found the right dosage of repression to instill, to keep talk of revolution muted and instead to turn on each other, whereas sympathizers never quite evolve into activists. Bouts of discontentment lead to riots without organization, and riots without organization are effectively silenced by shows of government force and the elected officials draw bold and distinct party lines where Democrats represent Democrats and Republicans represent Republicans and no one is left to consolidate public opinions for the interest of all. And it gives me chills saying that out loud because it just feels just disgusting. The environment, like the air in the country, is just so different than anything I've ever felt these days. Do you feel that too?
Speaker 2:Absolutely Like there's a palpable divide and like I don't know how to describe it. It just doesn't feel good and it's not the kind of uncomfortable that can lead to a positive discourse like we've talked about. It's the kind of uncomfortable where it's like something's gonna happen is what I feel.
Speaker 1:Uh-huh, I feel it looming in the air and I'm kind of finding myself becoming I don't want to say a doomsday prepper. I've been talking to Alex a lot lately and saying if our society as we know it crumbles right now, I have no tradable skills. I, what am I going to do? I can't even like so. So I need to learn how to farm. I think I need to grow herbs. I need to treat periods. I need to become like a medicine woman. I don't know I same.
Speaker 2:I'm in the same boat. I can't even grow plants, though, like I kill them.
Speaker 1:So my catnip thriving. Is that going to be helpful? It'll be, for the crazy cat people that are around I could probably barter with them, because people want to keep their cats alive in the apocalypse right.
Speaker 2:Absolutely. Cats will eat you if anything happens to you. So you got to keep them fed and happy.
Speaker 1:It's true, I remind me of you frequently. It's okay. If you want to chomp at me when I die, I would be grateful if you ate me. I guess I'm one of those crazy cat ladies. That's okay. There's nothing wrong with that. I'm gonna have to ride the coattails of people, though, like I'm gonna have to find useful people and just surround myself with them okay, well, when you find some, let me know, because I also have no tradable skills.
Speaker 1:I can cook for people, if that counts, like I feel like that counts, even though I told alex it doesn't count for me, it counts for you. Perfect, we'll figure something out, don't?
Speaker 2:you worry, I'll learn how to make moonshine. That'll be valuable.
Speaker 1:Oh yeah, that will be very valuable you gotta make it in a boot though perfect, I've got just the right pair. Don't take our ideas. Everyone. We're gonna be the main suppliers of bootleg liquor and I guess catnip, catnip, get off our turf.
Speaker 1:Well, back to the serious topic at hand. Other scholars agree with this, but not all of them. It's obviously a debatable, because I am a conflict sociologist at heart, but I do truly feel like those in power kind of know what's going on and how things are happening and how we're feeling and manipulating that to their advantage and outside of the entities in power. We all agree that things must change, but can't agree on what that change should look like. And if we can't lay down our arms of political affiliations and discuss this, then it's going to come to a head in the shape of a civil war, like there's no way to avoid it at this point. Well, there is still a way to avoid it.
Speaker 1:We can correct chorus. Don't worry guys, the end times are near. I believe that 60%. So what can we do to correct chorus, to enact social change without crumbling the walls of society as we know it? There are common themes in all social movements that have been successful, and I'm going to share these pro tips with you so we can all benefit. I'm ready. Do tell. We're going to mobilize our listeners. Germany, you're gonna have to help us out. We're gonna be mobilize our listeners, germany, you're going to have to help us out.
Speaker 1:We're going to be on the watch list for sure after this, and I'm only saying Germany, help us out because we have German listeners. I'm not just not for any other reason. Make that clear. Okay, so this might go without saying, but the first step is to engage with all and use this engagement to refine goals and clarify purpose. Second, organize thoughts, educational curriculum and funds. Before organizing people, discipline and training is important if you are to collectively share a defined message.
Speaker 1:I want to use the Occupy movement as an example for a moment, because we all know this did not end in social change for many reasons, but the most damning is that protesters rallied around a generalized cause of economic inequality, but the details of the what, why and how were not established with the group at large. So you have all these folks saying, yeah, I think the economy should be different too, I think that we should be more equal in our stratification system or not have a stratification system. But when you ask them like what does that look like? How many of those protesters because you didn't inform them in ways that made sense or clarify those goals at the ground up how many of them can speak to those talking points, or how many people can they persuade? You can't do that if you're just angry and you're just mad as hell and you're not going to take it anymore. You just go out to the streets with no goal in mind, right While a purpose existed, the clarity of how to achieve it did not and, as a result, the movement fizzled out within months.
Speaker 1:You have to remember that revolutions back in the 17th and 18th century revolutions looked very different, because they were armed revolutions. They didn't have the numbers that we have today. They didn't have the educational materials or the way to like spread your message the way that they do today. They were doing little secret pamphlets on the streets, you know, like putting aliases on pieces of paper and then shooting people. I think that some people would like to go back to those ways, but I just don't think it's feasible nowadays.
Speaker 2:Let's not do that. That is not the call to arms that we are rallying behind here, correct?
Speaker 1:We are not advocating for an arms race, but it is important. So like you need to understand why you feel the way you feel, what is the information to back up those things, because you can't just make a movement off of feelings or being angry. You have to have something to share with people, to educate people, to bring people to this understanding. Not everyone's going to understand that, but you can do your best to have those conversations, those intimate conversations with individuals. When you think about modern American movements, they have a tendency to be very reactive, which is a recipe for failure. And how quickly word can spread a reaction can turn out some pretty serious crowds, planning, organizing, training. This can lead to mass disorder which, as we know, are swiftly quelled and criticized on a large scale, saying we're all rioters and we're just mad and we want things to change. Can't give people not literal ammunition either, but also figurative ammunition to quell your cause. Instead, scholars find the best way to grow a movement is to do just that grow it. Grassroots campaigns are, far and above, more efficient and effective, because research shows that people are more inclined to conform to majority opinion when in small groups. And that's not to say that you should just influence people, not let them make their own opinion, but you can have those interactions in smaller groups that you could never have in larger crowds.
Speaker 1:Of course, movements lead to change when the resistance grows in numbers, but large numbers aren't the cause of social change. It is an effect of the groundwork done in smaller strategic settings. If you start with large demonstrations, how will you address questions opposing opinions? Provide education. There's no platform for it because you're literally screaming. You're screaming into an echo chamber while those not effectively brought into the fold write the cause off to the trouble. And I also. I feel like I need to say that I believe in protest very, very strongly and I believe in organizing, but I believe in organizing in a way that makes sense and being strategic from the ground up, and I think that's where a lot of movements fail these days.
Speaker 2:Absolutely, because there's no way to sustain it and keep it moving forward. Exactly.
Speaker 1:And then I feel like a lot of the times, you know, you have these movements, they grow huge because of social media and we're all marching down the streets, we're taking over the cities and then, once we're at that point, then you think about funding and then you think about garnering support, and then you think about political reform and then you think about the legislation that you'd enact, and that's very, very backwards in my mind, 100%. And then this other point I think this is a hard pill to swallow for a lot of people these days. Understand that not everyone holds the same views, and attacking those that don't share your view is quote creating enemies that undermine the cause. As Greg Zadel puts it, instead of making allies, you just villainize. Essentially, if you don't believe me, then you're wrong. You can get out of here. Rather than understanding that you want people to kind of partner with you, you want to build relationships and instead you're just cutting them at the legs legs. The goal of a movement should be to educate and discuss, to inspire folks to think more deeply and act upon this enlightenment, not to carry the movement through to change. It's a ripple effect, a long game and it cannot be treated as a siloed effort. And lastly, rhetoric helps no one. You can argue and shitpost all you want, but it rarely persuades anyone who doesn't already share the same mindset as you. So those are my pro tips and with that I'm ending my portion.
Speaker 1:With the resounding, things suck right now. They sure do. Yeah, it's daunting, especially when everything we have so many things that we need to address and so many things we need to focus on, and it feels really overwhelming. And this division in our country, and like many other countries I'm sure we're experiencing like a looming dark cloud, but it's not lost yet. It's true. There will always be a power to oppose. We will never reach a utopian society where grievances don't exist. Sorry, karl Marx, I just don't think it's in the cards. This world, maybe the next planet, but we can make the world better day by day. I'm being optimistic for once. Isn't that surprising? I love it. I think we can do it. We can do it. We can learn to re-engage and be part of communities again, to empower each other towards shared views, to educate, to vote, at the very least. Please, can you, please just vote, and then if everyone votes and it turns out voting doesn't echo common sentiment, then we revolt. I'm ready.
Speaker 2:But follow the proper processes first.
Speaker 1:Exactly. Put a strategy in place. Be organized. Don't let your emotions Exactly. Put a strategy in place. Be organized. Don't let your emotions guide you. I believe in us.
Speaker 2:Listen as someone who really leads with emotion. A lot of the time I hear you.
Speaker 1:I hear you Taking your feedback. Got it? Constructive criticism.
Speaker 2:We got to go step by step. I want to be like out in the streets and do this but it's not going to do anything.
Speaker 1:And I have been out in the streets angry and I did do the Black Lives Matter protest and I did do the Occupy Movement protest. So I'm not criticizing the causes at all, but we need to be thoughtful, otherwise we're never going to get the change that we want to see in the world going to get the change that we want to see in the world, absolutely.
Speaker 2:I feel like yours is very uplifting, like, yeah, things suck right now, but there's hope right, there is hope.
Speaker 1:I actually had a really fun time doing it because I grabbed, like my sociology books and was cracking open my my conflict sociology and social change. I was like this is fun, get into the mold roots. Conflict sociology and social change. I was like this is fun, get into the mold roots.
Speaker 2:I know I also opened up my college textbooks because I was like, yeah, I love this, but you went negative. It is just a little bit negative. But here's the thing it's a little negative and the stuff that I'm going to talk about sucked, but I think there's a light at the end of the tunnel, because it wasn't a successful movement, right, and I think it was successful in a way because, as you'll learn, it's still talked about and it's still at the forefront of people's minds so that it doesn't happen again.
Speaker 1:So I think that's successful in a sense then.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I take it as a win, but you want to dive into this Heck, yeah, okay. So, as you know, kayla, the 1960s, they were a time of change, learning, growth and hope, among many other things, sex, drugs and rock and roll. There we go. That's the title of this episode. Just kidding, that's been very misleading.
Speaker 1:We don't talk about sex, drugs or rock and roll. There we go. That's the title of this episode. Just kidding, that's been very misleading. We don't talk about sex, drugs or rock and roll. Actually, we did talk about rock and roll very briefly. Yes, we did the beatles counts, we got rock and roll and that's it and we talked about bootlegging. Well, that's not drugs, it's alcohol so it could be drugs when things go into prohibition again, which they, they might. Who knows, that'd be fun Speakeasies. One reason for society to go.
Speaker 2:And then we will make money off of bootlegging.
Speaker 1:Oh yeah, and we might even get arrested and be really tough. We'll show up on like wanted posters.
Speaker 2:It'll be really cool, We'll autograph them for our faithful listeners. So all of this changed. It was not just so in the US, but in other countries as well. Specifically, I'd like to take you to a year in Mexican history that sticks with me to this day. Many years ago, back in high school, I first learned about it, and in college I had the opportunity to really dive into this movement and the reason behind it, as well as the aftermath that followed. So let's journey to Mexico City in 1968.
Speaker 2:This year saw the forging of alliances between students, workers and the marginalized urban poor and their battle to challenge the political regime. Back in this day, like the powers that be in Mexico, like all of the political officials, it was very dictatorial and it wasn't hidden, where I think one could argue that now it's still very dictatorial and there really isn't a democracy, but it's a little bit more masked, so it was more overt. Back then you would see students on buses out in the streets where brigades would be formed. To quote unquote, rally the troops on their way to fight the good fight. To quote Dissent Magazine, there was no central leader. Families were drawn in whole apartment buildings and neighborhoods. A revolution was happening, Not Che's revolution, but a revolution from within the system, Nonviolent, driven by euphoria, conviction and the excitement of experimentation on the ground. And there's something in that that evokes hope and provokes goosebumps in me. People coming together for a common goal, a greater purpose, to improve oneself and one's country, and I really think that's beautiful, Wouldn't that be?
Speaker 1:nice it would. We can still hope. All right, we can still hope. You're right. I'm supposed to be the positive one, this episode at least. Yes.
Speaker 2:What isn't so beautiful is some of the context behind the need for the revolution. So the Mexican president, Gustavo Díaz-Ordaz. He struggled to maintain public order during a time of rising social tensions, but suppressed movements by labor unions and farmers fighting to improve their lot. His administration suppressed independent labor unions and farmers and heavy-handedly tried to direct the economy. In 1958, under the previous administration of Adolfo López Mateos, the labor leader Dimitrio Vallejo was arrested and peasant activist Rubén Jaramillo was murdered. This was a time where the government wanted to have their hand in everything from labor unions to educational systems, and they'd stop at nothing to coil the loud voices.
Speaker 1:Was he murdered by the government?
Speaker 2:Yeah, a lot of this happened in the nineties too, where where journalists, when they were publishing stories to like, try and inform the masses, like the government, through use of either cartel or other means, they would murder the journalists and then they would put their heads on wooden sticks and they would leave that like out in the public square, if you will, to like, if you speak out against us. This is what's going to happen to you, that was in the 1960s, uh-huh.
Speaker 1:Wow and even to the 90s. It's kind of like jarring to me that you can live so close. You think I would be more informed about Mexican history, especially knowing how much we have impacted the country negatively ourselves, and I feel like completely ignorant.
Speaker 2:So thank you for educating me, you're welcome, I will tell you, I will speak ad nauseum about this. So again, arising from reaction to the government's violent repression of a July 1968 fight between rival gangs quote unquote the student movement in Mexico City quickly grew to include large segments of the university students who were dissatisfied with the regime of the PRI, which is a political group much akin to the US Democrats and Republicans, most especially at the Autonomous National University of Mexico UNAM is the acronym for it and the National Polytechnic Institute, but also at other universities. So after a fight by rival student groups in central Mexico City was broken up violently by a large contingent of police, university students formed a National Strike Council to organize protests and to get together and present their demands to the government. So there was some organization there right.
Speaker 2:Large-scale protests grew in size over the summer as the opening of the Olympic Games in mid-October grew nearer and Minister of the Interior Luis Echeverria needed to keep public order. The Minister of the Interior, along with the heavy handed president, were anxious to ensure that the Olympic Games went off without a hitch. The often looked down upon country of Mexico was set to host the Games a coveted spot as it brings with it not only a great source of revenue, but also a large spotlight on the country. And this reminds me of parents. When they're set to have guests, you remind the kids to mind their P's and Q's while the guests are here, and if they don't, there will be dire consequences when the guests leave. That's kind of what the feeling was in Mexico.
Speaker 1:Yeah, that's the vibe I was getting. Like why would you want to welcome so many other country representatives to yours when you're literally killing your people in the streets?
Speaker 2:Speaking of that, on October 2nd 1968, around 10,000 university and high school students gathered in the Plaza de las Tres Culturas to protest the government's actions and listen peacefully to speeches. Many men and women not associated with the CNH, which is the National Strike Council that's the abbreviation for it they gathered in the plaza to watch and listen. They included neighbors from the residential complex, bystanders and children. So this is a very interesting plaza and so I think it is very important to like speak on it a little bit. It is in Mexico City and there are a lot of, like apartment buildings, but it was created to to really showcase the three cultures that made up the mexican entities, like like the mexican culture, being mexican, so like your european roots, your native roots and then what you are now as mexican, does that kind of make sense? Yeah, and so it's like poetic, because that's where you're meeting and you're here to talk about like history and change and enact change I love it.
Speaker 1:College students are the best.
Speaker 2:I love how like feisty they are yes, but all right, let's go back to this. They, they gathered. There were a lot of people from the residential complexes, bystanders and children. The students had congregated outside the Chihuahua building, a three module, 13 story apartment complex, in the Plaza de las Tres Culturas. Among their chants were no queremos olimpiadas, queremos revolucion, which means we don't want olympics, we want revolution, which I thought was pretty cool.
Speaker 1:I mean it's a good point.
Speaker 2:Why would you spend all this?
Speaker 1:money on this bullshit when you're not getting your basic needs met Exactly.
Speaker 2:So that was a big point of contention for the college students. They're out here getting their education and they really see what things are like and they really feel that the government should be investing money not only in schools but in their own neighborhoods and their own labor force. But, instead there's. I mean, there was so much money that was invested in the Olympic Stadium that was built to host these games, so money not being used adequately, according to the people, and I don't disagree.
Speaker 1:They literally built a stadium for it.
Speaker 2:Yeah, wow, and I don't disagree, they literally built a stadium for it. Yeah, wow. So the rally organizers did not try to call off the protest when they noticed an increased military presence in the area. There were two helicopters, one from the police and another from the army. They flew over the plaza. At 5.55 pm, red flares were shot up from the nearby Mexican Ministry of Foreign Relations. There's a tower there. Around 6.15 pm, another two flares were shot, this time from a helicopter. One was green and another one was red, as 5,000 soldiers, 200 tankettes and trucks surrounded the plaza. So like there's just all of this military presence.
Speaker 2:Much of what proceeded after the first shots were fired in the plaza remained ill-defined for decades after 1968. Records and information released by American and Mexican government sources since 2000 have enabled researchers to study the events and draw new conclusions. The question of who fired first remained unresolved years after the massacre. The Mexican government said gunfire from the surrounding apartments prompted the army's attack, but the students said that the helicopters appeared to signal the army to fire into the crowd, and that's what they think those flares were signaling. Journalist Elena Poniatowska, who is actually of Russian descent but she's Mexican, she wrote the textbook that we studied extensively in college and I absolutely love it. It's called the History of Mexico. It's a giant book, if anyone wants to read it. She culled interviews from those present and described events in her book.
Speaker 2:Flares suddenly appeared in the sky overhead and everyone automatically looked up. The first shots were heard. Then the crowd panicked and started running in all directions. Despite CNH efforts to restore order, the crowd on the plaza quickly fell into chaos. Shortly thereafter, the Olympia Battalion, a secret government branch made for the security of the Olympic Games, composed of soldiers, police officers and federal security agents, were ordered to arrest the leaders of the CNH and advanced into the plaza. The Olympic battalion members wore white gloves or white handkerchiefs tied to their left hands to distinguish themselves from the civilians and prevent soldiers from shooting them. Captain Ernesto Morales Soto stated that immediately upon sighting a flare in the sky, the prearranged signal we were to seal off the aforementioned two entrances and prevent anyone from entering or leaving.
Speaker 2:The ensuing assault into the plaza left dozens dead and many more wounded. In its aftermath, the soldiers responded by firing into the nearby buildings and into the crowd, hitting not only the protesters but also watchers and bystanders. Demonstrators and passers-by alike, including students, journalists and children, were hit by bullets, and mounds of bodies soon lay on the ground. Meanwhile, on the Chihuahua building, where the speaker stood, olympia battalion members pushed people and ordered them to lie on the ground near the elevator walls. People claim these men were the people who shot first at the soldiers and the crowd. There was also video evidence that points to at least two companies of the Olympia battalion. They had hid themselves in the nearby apartment buildings and set up machine guns. The specific apartment building is called Molino del Rey. In addition, many snipers were positioned on the roof of the church of Santiago de Tlatelolco and many people involved, including the ones who fired the first two flares, were present. At the nearby convent and the foreign relations tower there was a machine gun on the 19th floor and a video camera on the 17th floor. Video evidence shows 10 white-gloved men leaving the church and bumping into soldiers who point their weapons at them. One of the men shows what appears to be an ID and they are let go.
Speaker 2:The killing continued throughout the night, with soldiers and policemen operating on a house-to-house basis in the apartment buildings adjacent to the square. The Chihuahua building, as well as the rest of the neighborhood, had its electricity and phones cut off. Witnesses to the event claimed that the bodies were first removed in ambulances and later military officials came and piled up bodies not knowing if they were dead or alive into the military trucks, while some say that the bodies were piled up on garbage trucks and sent to unknown destinations. The soldiers rounded up the students onto the Chihuahua building's elevator walls, stripped them and beat them. 3,000 attendees were taken to the convent next to the church and were left there until early in the morning, most of these being people that had little to nothing in common with the students, and they were only neighbors, bystanders or passersby and others who were in the plaza just to listen to the speech. Other witnesses claim that in later days, olympia battalion members would disguise themselves as utility employees and inspect the houses in search of students.
Speaker 2:The official government explanation of the incident was that armed protesters were among the ones that provoked the incident. Of course they did. They stated that they were stationed in buildings overlooking the crowd and they had begun the firefight. The firefight Suddenly finding themselves sniper targets. The security forces had simply returned the shooting in self-defense. Which what a likely story. By the next morning, newspapers reported that 20 to 28 people had been killed, hundreds wounded and hundreds more arrested. Most of the Mexican media reported that the students provoked the army's murderous response with sniper fire from the apartment buildings and the plaza.
Speaker 1:But those were the battalion right, right El Día which is a newspaper.
Speaker 2:Their morning headline on October 3rd read criminal provocation at the Tlatelolco meeting causes terrible bloodshed. The government-controlled media reported the Mexican government's side of the events that night, but the truth eventually emerged. A 2001 investigation revealed documents showing that the snipers were side of the events that night. But the truth eventually emerged. A 2001 investigation revealed documents showing that the snipers were members of the presidential guard who were instructed to fire on the military forces in order to provoke them.
Speaker 1:So the military shot at military to incite violence.
Speaker 2:The military shot into the crowd and there were just different sectors of military that were snipers or on the perimeter. Does that make sense? Yeah, there were like the presidential battalion, but then there was also the Olympic battalion. They're just different sectors. That were government agents.
Speaker 1:So they barricaded everybody in and just shot them like fish in a barrel them like fish in a barrel.
Speaker 2:There's a movie called Red Dawn and I remember watching it because how they talk about how this goes into the into the early morning hours of the next day. And it's this little kid and I just remember he's in one of the apartment buildings that's right outside the plaza so he could see everything, he could hear everything that was going on and he can just see that there's like blood out on the streets and what do you do as a little kid Like you hear all this going on all night, like you're just waiting for the sun to come up so it can stop. It's traumatizing. I can only imagine and that's like the only part of the movie that I really remember is just that little kid and how traumatized he looked.
Speaker 1:I'm thinking that poor little boy.
Speaker 2:I know, and granted, that was just a movie, but how many kids were there that that actually happened to? Exactly the number of deaths resulting from the event is disputed. According to US National Security Archives, american analyst Kate Doyle documented the deaths of 44 people. However, estimates of the actual death toll range from 300 to 400, with eyewitnesses reporting hundreds dead. Additionally, the head of the Federal Directorate of Security reported that 1,345 people were arrested.
Speaker 2:In the days and years to come, the Mexican government worked tirelessly to sweep the events of the massacre under the rug, not just to save face for the Olympic Games, but as a way to maintain control over the population that so fervently wanted a revolution. If you tried to find out about what occurred that fateful October 2nd, your endeavor would be fruitless. It wasn't printed in textbooks, it wasn't taught in schools. What you did find was graffiti on the walls that read 2 de Octubre no se olvida, which means the 2nd of October will not be forgotten. Year after year. This was the way that history was kept alive, to remember the efforts that, hopefully, revolutionaries had.
Speaker 2:It wasn't until the late 1990s and early 2000s that more information would come to light. What is striking to me is that the official number of deaths the Mexican government gave was 44. And I will share with you pictures from that day. There were bodies laying in the street, there were countless others injured, and I'm not good at math, but there were definitely more than 44. You could see them, the bodies that they would pile up, and I don't necessarily know that we need to share that, but some of them were covered in white cloth and even in that one snippet it's more than 44.
Speaker 1:And if they're taking what do you say? Dump trucks full of people to unknown destinations, how could you possibly trust them to have an accurate body count Right? Just throwing them in like they're trash?
Speaker 2:Pretty much and that's what the government thought of them. And I do want to say so, like my family. Like it's something that we notice when we do go to Mexico they use the walls on the sidewalks as billboards. So it's not graffiti in the sense that we would think, like you know, it's a gang sign or whatever. Like they use it to advertise the rodeo that's coming to town or this concert that's going to take place. So when somebody writes that on the wall, like it's just a way for people to continue to see that message because they know that they read what's on the walls.
Speaker 2:Yeah, this story sticks with me because we all know the victors write history, but this was a mere 55, almost 56 years ago, and it shows the extent to which countries will go to ensure the correct history makes it to the annals of time. Only their version of events is the only thing that that's remembered, unless we forget that this doesn't only happen in uncivilized third world countries, and I use that in quotations, but we've talked a little bit about it earlier. Let me remind you of the BLM movement. That happened after the murder of George Floyd.
Speaker 2:What were said to be peaceful protests were deemed riots. Our very own police officers meant to keep the peace inside of the crowds or shot at them with rubber pellets or employed the use of tear gas. News outlets reported those rioters caused the reaction of the lawmen, while the outcomes were very different. There were no murders in the BLM protests. To my knowledge, the parallels are there with the story I told earlier. Before we get on our holier-than-thou pedestal, we should reflect on our own actions, realign our priorities and hope for and work towards a better future where peaceful opposition is met with fruitful dialogue and measurable change, instead of violence and a retelling of history by those who choose to suppress the masses. It's a pretty little bow. It ties it all together.
Speaker 1:Well, well, well, look at that.
Speaker 2:The message is hope baby.
Speaker 1:Yes, it is very alarming to me to know how easily and swiftly people in power can alter history, and not even just history, current events because, like to your point about the BLM protests to your point about the BLM protests, I mean, when you think about the coverage on the news, it was never about the good that the protesters were doing, it was always about the rioters smashing up buildings and Portland should be condemned and like cause. I don't know why Portland got a lot of flack about it, but they did. But you know, there was not people who are rioting, they were people who were upset Like nobody's providing positive coverage and nobody's supporting the cause on a public scale. You had newspapers and media reporting current events on behalf of the police force that were tear gassing crowds that were standing up for their rights and, in the case of Mexico, you had media platforms speaking on behalf of the government who are murdering people for speaking up for their rights. I can't believe that they would just like barricade people and nobody can leave and shooting people dead.
Speaker 2:It just leaves me speechless it's so crazy because, like I fully believe, obviously this was 56 years ago right, we weren't there, but I firmly believe that it was meant to be a peaceful protest. They had some organization, they were going to be there to speak their peace and to really educate the people that were there, like, hey, this is what's going on in our country. We need to enact change, and I think it's important also to reference like, or how they were able to differentiate people. So like the, the military officials were wearing the white gloves on their left hand to signify that they were military officials. The people that were protesting were wearing black gloves and they would hold it out, like in solidarity and so like that's how it really started. Like they were just out there, like, yeah, we're just out here to support each other, and then you see the flares going off and I can only imagine what that feels. Like you were just there to talk. And they also have well, they should have the ability to speak their minds, but that is still something that is very controlled by the government. So we are fortunate in the sense that we can speak our minds and not experience something like that.
Speaker 2:But ultimately, I didn't want it to be such a downer, but it is something that has happened. How do we keep it from happening again, like we all want to enact change and make our country, our world, a better place. How do we do that? Kayla laid out the facts there and the steps, but I also think it's important to keep bringing it up and not letting it go by the wayside. Every october 2nd, I post that on social media. Why? Because people look at social media accounts, right like that is what captivates the masses now.
Speaker 1:But it is a way for me to keep that history alive so that we don't repeat it and if you guys, if people aren't talking about it, where would would it, how would it survive history? Like, how would people know what happened, like the real, true events of what happened, you know?
Speaker 2:Mm-hmm.
Speaker 1:And honestly, I mean, even if they started peaceful or giving speeches and stuff and they started getting violent, I can't really blame them. When you're like shipping people in, like the government and the military and and like to 200 military vehicles, that seems a bit excessive. Yeah, I would like fight or flight would absolutely kick in. You know like how and that's not to say that they even did fight back but like, could you blame them when you have folks staged all around the square with snipers ready to shoot at you?
Speaker 2:And there there were. Like it's interesting that they pointed out that there were cameras there, because the government controlled news outlets wanted to depict certain things, so they wanted that to be shown. To kind of again reiterate if you speak out, this is what's going to happen. Or look at those unruly kids, this is what they caused yeah, so was it that?
Speaker 1:because you had mentioned earlier that a lot of reporters are being murdered and their heads put on pikes in that time frame? So my assumption is at that point is like you either are on the side of the government or you're going to also be the one getting shot, you know? Know, exactly. It puts things into perspective a little bit in the sense that America, we are not doing well, I don't think we're doing well, but we should be so grateful that we do have I mean, we do have a democracy for the most part. Is it undermined quite a lot by our government? Yes, do we have the ability to criticize our government openly without getting shot? Yes, and that's something that we shouldn't take for granted, absolutely. How many countries are there out there you know when you can't do any of that.
Speaker 2:Exactly Well, dear listeners, we hope that this has inspired you to make sure that history does not repeat itself, and that we do go out there and enact change, but meaningful and sustained change. And I really don't think that there's a problem with like protesting, because it draws attention to causes, right, but what are we going to do after that? There's got to be a plan in place. That's all I've got.
Speaker 1:Fight the good fight. Don't let the government write your history. Get out there and blog. I'm just kidding.
Speaker 2:Until next time, which will hopefully be soon. Bye.