La Révolution mexicaine : révolution minière ou révolution serrano ?

Résumé En

The Mexican Revolution : a Miner's Revolution or a Serrano Revolution ? This critique of the article of F.-X Guerra begins with a brief outline of Guerra's argument, which displays certain ambiguities : in particular, it is not clear if popular revolt is thought to correlate with the modern mining sector, or with some ill-defined transitional zone between modern and traditional sectors. Two major criticisms are then advanced : that the evidence put forward is selective : and that varieties of violence are indiscriminately "lumped" when they should be analytically "split"; and (2) that there is a basic ecological fallacy, whereby regions and revolts are appropriated for the "mining" hypothesis when, in fact, mining was either absent or of very limited importance. Finally, the critique offers two alternative hypotheses. First, it is argued that the revolts under consideration were essentially serrano movements, in which miners and mining communities were far from being pre-eminent participants. Second, it is suggested that miners should be disaggregated into "traditional" and "modern" groups, the first of which displayed a penchant for sporadic, urban violence, after the manner of the Bajio artisans, the second of which followed the practice of the industrial proletariat, that is, peaceful unionization and pragmatic political participation.