International context
By this time, global society had entered a period characterized by desire for freedom of action and expression. To date, the sixties are iconic of North American culture, who at that time found themselves at an ideological crossroads based on the Cold War and its derived conflicts, such as Korean war, the Cuban Revolution and the Vietnam War. This led to a political insurrection and even to an artistic and spiritual awakening.
Although these movements were considered anti-systemic, they managed to bring visibility to marginalized sectors of society, as well as to taboo issues of the time. It originated a new way of conceiving social movements, as were the hippie, the LGBT, the student, the feminist, the alter-globalist, the environmentalist and the antinuclear, among others.
See: Global 68: Revolution and Counterculture
The world began to become aware and the children of the post-war, or also known as the generation of the baby boom, The political decisions of the government were questioned. El generational awakening What youth experienced internationally in the sixties can only be compared with the present globalized reality, in which protests and demonstrations go viral with the use of social networks.
Ultimately, 1968 was a historic year for Mexico and the world. The resurgence of the revolutionary left at a global level, the bipolar context and the fight for civil rights were some of the characteristics that permeated the scenario in which emblematic events for the social change. However, in a time of growing social activism, insurrections against the political elite were repressed militarily, amplifying the call for democracy.
The massacre of Tlatelolco
July 22, 1968 is considered the beginning of a series of clashes between young students and the Mexico City police force. On this date, a student fight took place between Vocacionales 2 and 5, both preparatory schools of the National Polytechnic Institute (IPN), and the Isaac Ochoterena high school, incorporated into the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM).
The conflict was intervened by a body of grenadiers (capital police agents) who broke into the facilities of these high schools, fired tear gas and beat students and teachers. Subsequently, other student demonstrations in protest against the violent police intervention during the fight between high schools. However, these demonstrations were also repressed, to which the students responded by taking over the campuses of the National Preparatory School (ENP) 1, 2 and 3. Even, on August 1, Javier Barros Sierra, the then rector of UNAM led a march from Ciudad Universitaria as a sign of dissatisfaction with what happened in the preceding days.
In the same way, the UNAM, together with the IPN, the College of Mexico (COLMEX), the Ibero-American University, the La Salle University, the normal schools, and other study centers in the country, created the National Strike Council ( CNH) and established a request list with six key points. These demands consisted of the dismissal of police chiefs, the disappearance of the grenadier corps, compensation to those harmed in the conflict and, in general, the democratization of the country.
At first, the government of Gustavo Díaz Ordaz (president of Mexico, 1964-1970) declared that he had the best will to dialogue with the Council, but never formally agreed to a public dialogue. The absence of a response led students to demonstrate again on August 27 in the Plaza de la Constitución, also known as Zócalo, in Mexico City.
This protest was one of the largest student mobilizations; It was made up of approximately 400,000 students, who were evicted, persecuted and beaten in the early morning of October 28. Despite the systematic repression, the National Strike Council (CNH) called for a new peaceful demonstration, in which around 300,000 students marched with their mouths covered and in absolute silence as a symbol of protest.
View: September 13: the “silent march” that silenced the government
However, once again, violence was exercised against those who demanded justice. Another sign of protest was made by the rector of the UNAM, who spoke out against these coercive acts, as well as the intervention of the army on the campuses of Ciudad Universitaria and the IPN, for which he presented his resignation, which was denied by the Governing Board, so he had to remain in office.
Finally, on October 2, one day after the military eviction of the university facilities, an afternoon meeting was held in the Plaza de las Tres Culturas in Tlatelolco, attended by thousands of students, professors, workers and families. to demonstrate against repressive events. What they did not know was that a paramilitary group made up of members of the Presidential General Staff (EMP), the Olimpia Battalion, was infiltrated in this protest, who dressed as civilians and wore a white glove on their left hand.
View: This was Operation Galeana, the army's strategy on October 2, 1968
This battalion, led by the soldier Luis Gutiérrez Oropeza, waited for the signal of the flare lights to begin opening fire against the protesters and soldiers who were in the square. The above has been classified as a strategy to make believe that the aggressors were among the students, who were repelled by the military guards who were monitoring the demonstration.
In a few minutes, the Plaza de las Tres Culturas was filled with blood and the protesters rushed to hide in the buildings of the Tlatelolco Unit and its surroundings. Unconstitutionally, the army stormed the entire perimeter to capture them without having a court order. This persecution, which began at 18 p.m. on October 2, lasted until dawn the next day; There were seven continuous hours in which the rights of the Mexican people were violated.
View: Olympia – Trailer
Some protesters were detained and tortured, while others, alleged leaders of the mobilization, were arrested and taken to the Lecumberri Palace prison. The next day, the scene of the incident was cleaned and the newspaper headlines could only read: Strange hands are determined to discredit Mexico. Likewise, despite the tragedy that occurred days before, the first celebration of the Olympic Games in Mexico took place, according to plan, on October 12.
The report presented by the Mexican government indicated 26 dead, 100 injured and 1,034 arrested. However, although unofficially, the National National Police (CNH) counted 150 civilian deaths and 40 military deaths, leading to the announcement of an end to the demonstrations. Similarly, over the years, various journalists who have conducted research on the matter have indicated that a more accurate figure is probably between 200 and more than 300 deaths.
The above has come to be considered as the first case of genocide in the legal history of Mexico. Responsibility for these events has been attributed to former president Díaz Ordaz, who is credited with an alleged connection with the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) of the United States in a hypothesis that relates student mobilizations with a communist insurgency.
This last statement is also related to other figures attributed responsibility for what happened in Tlatelolco, mainly to the then Secretary of the Interior and later President of Mexico (1970-1976), Luis Echeverría. The hypothesis of Mexican journalist and researcher Jacinto Rodriguez Munguia points to former President Echeverría, former General Jesús Castañeda Gutiérrez and philosopher Emilio Uranga as the architects behind the massacre of October 2.
See: The conspiracy of '68
However, the latter's participation has not been solidly substantiated by journalist Rodríguez Munguia. Although, on the other hand, Luis Echeverría faced an accusation in 2005 by the Special Prosecutor's Office for Social and Political Movements of the Past that He was put on trial for crimes against humanity. for his participation in the Tlatelolco massacre and the Corpus Thursday massacre (another repression of students that took place during his government), but he ended up being exonerated in 2007 due to lack of evidence.
The role of women
In the middle of the 20th century, women began to actively participate in political life; This period was characterized by the insurrection of the third wave of feminism internationally and the second in Mexico. The postwar period represented a drastic change in social and production relations, so the dynamics of the different organizational spheres were dramatically altered.
The Mexican mobilizations of 1968 were the first large demonstrations in which young female students participated to demand justice and freedom of expression. However, its presence in this fight has not been analyzed in depth; There are few works that make an account that highlights the fundamental role of female support.
“The night of Tlatelolco”, published in 1971 by the Mexican journalist Elena Poniatowska, is one of these works that recorded the testimony of more than one hundred women students, teachers, mothers and civil servants. However, the participation of women in '68 was more than a mass sum.
On the one hand, it was a representative sample of female empowerment, although, on the other hand, the imposition of traditional gender roles remained. Some participated as leaders in the mobilizations, while others were in charge of providing food to speed up the fight. Their female status made them seem less suspicious, which made it easier for them to act as messengers.
Although it often goes unnoticed, the emotional labor that is attributed to a greater extent to women has throughout history represented a constitutive element in social movements. No struggle is possible without this emotional support, at least not the social ones, given that these are oriented towards the liberation of the people and the search for the true essence of democracy.
“The truth is that I did what I wanted. I followed the police at three in the morning, I drove a truck, I directed 60 boys armed with sticks to protect one of the leaders of the movement [...] I did not consider my participation in '68 limited to a traditionally feminine role or role. .” (Cohen and Frazier, 1993, p. 75).
El rejection of authoritarianism, rebellion and politicization of women These were key factors that would ultimately define feminist social organization in Mexico. For this reason, beginning in the 1970s, the first militant groups were formed: Women in Solidarity Action (MAS), the National Women's Movement (MNM), the Women's Liberation Movement (MLM), and the Mexican Feminist Movement, among others.
“I had classmates who really had to oppose their family, the environment […] a young woman who, as a citizen, has to face the totalitarian system that we lived in at that time and add to that the fact that they have to face a patriarchal society. The political and emotional burden of the young women of '68 was double, that is why their participation is admirable.” (Barrera and Beltrán, 2018)
See: The Women of '68 and the Emerging Feminist Revolution
To carry out a more rigorous analysis of the facts, it is necessary to take into account the gender perspective; a vision that allows us to clarify the multidimensional panorama of reality. All social actors play an important role in the mechanism that constitutes an insurrection movement.
Closing remarks
The student conflict of 1968 is truly complex and, to date, relevant data is unknown to achieve a more complete understanding of the different aspects that make up this social fact. We are faced with an example of the internal contradictions that can take place despite the State experiencing great economic growth.
Continuous social repression, sooner or later, ends up triggering a subversive counterattack by civil society. For the Díaz Ordaz government it was essential to appear orderly before the foreign press that was in the country; The Mexican miracle had to be noticed abroad, while inside the social and political structure was breaking down.
The repression and authoritarianism that took place during the mandate of Gustavo Díaz Ordaz and Luis Echeverría were a critical breaking point for the hegemony of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), which had dominated the political scene since its creation. This internal structural crisis It would be the one that would take place in the decades after the institutionalization of an opposition in the country.
To learn more:
Lamas, M. (2018). “From 68 to today: the political mobilization of women.” Mexican Journal of Political and Social Sciences, 21.
Poniatowska, E. (1971). The night of Tlatelolco; oral history testimonies. Mexico: Era Editions.
Rodriguez, J. (2018). The conspiracy of '68, intellectuals and power: this is how the massacre was forged. Mexico: Debate.
Internationalist from the National Autonomous University of Mexico. I love languages, research and international politics. I want to make known the problems of the countries and turn social causes into an everyday issue. Being aware of our reality is the first step to transforming it.
