Someone wrote: "April 21, 1836
On this day in 1836, Texas forces won the battle of San Jacinto, the concluding military event of the Texas Revolution. Facing General Santa Anna's Mexican army of some 1,200 men encamped in what is now southeastern Harris County, General Sam Houston disposed his forces in battle order about 3:30 p.m., during siesta time. The Texans' movements were screened by trees and the rising ground, and evidently Santa Anna had no lookouts posted. The Texan line sprang forward on the run with the cries "Remember the Alamo!" and "Remember Goliad!" The battle lasted but eighteen minutes. According to Houston's official report, the casualties were 630 Mexicans killed and 730 taken prisoner. Against this, only nine of the 910 Texans were killed or mortally wounded and thirty were wounded less seriously."
Just as the American Revolution was, at its heart, a struggle against taxation and mercantilistic economic policy, the "Texas Revolution" was a struggle over property and culture - not freedom and liberty. No one can make a solid case that a weak and corrupt Mexico City, nearly a thousand miles away, was somehow realistically oppressing and tyrannizing the "guest workers" of Tejas who had been invited in by Mexico. Closer to the truth is that these Americans had no desire to be ruled by what they considered a degenerate race, had no desire to live in a culture speaking Spanish, and had no desire to support and favor the Roman Catholic Church. More importantly, much more importantly, they had brought their slaves with them and would not give them up under any circumstances. The tyranny of Mexico City was to outlaw slavery in its 1824 constitution and to free all slaves in Mexico by 1829 - except for those owned by the Gringos of Tejas. The Gringos of Tejas were not going to give them up and would fight for their very valuable property against the "liberal" government in Mexico City that dared to enact such a law. This is the history that is not taught even in these nauseatingly politically correct times with its absurd obsession with diversity trumping everything else - including reality. It was cold hard economics - where the money was coming from and where it was going - that underscored this conflict, like so many others.
A people, any people, can decide they no longer wish to be ruled by others and will fight to make it so. That is the natural order of things and I take no issue with that. I take issue with a people who fight for very real economic, or even cultural reasons, and then attempt to cover less altruistic-seeming motives with a myth of opposing evil tyranny, championing liberty, or fighting for "rights" that were never being violated. The Texas War of Independence was never about weaker Texans standing up to a much stronger and autocratic Mexico. For anyone who has really studied the history it was the opposite. The Texans were the stronger party, in so many ways, and in the fullness of time, sensing that strength, they decided to act and throw off their much weaker erstwhile master. Mexico attempted to enforce its "rights" on the battlefield and failed miserably. The Texans were not Spartans and Santa Anna was no Xerxes. The Texans won by locally concentrated force against a regime too weak and outnumbered to enforce its writ locally and too incompetent and distant to project power effectively from its core. On that day, April 21st, 1836, the Texans were most likely fighting for Sam Houston and to avenge the Alamo, but at the end of the day, metaphorically, they had won a victory for slavery, the English language, the Protestant religions, and the much desired and soon to be realized union with the United States. The loyalty to that union, likewise, would quicly evaporate when Texans again perceived the possesion of their slaves under threat. The second time, however, the distant political core would project power to enforce its writ rather more effectively.