There is no ethnic census of enlistees: on military records, most were listed as "white." Estimates range from about 340,000 to 500,000 Hispanics who were drafted or volunteered between 1941 and 1945. The lower figure comes from later veteran surveys; the higher figure is used by museums and in congressional resolutions.

Society

Hispanic Heritage Month Kicks Off: Celebrating a fundamental contribution to the United States of America

Williams Perdomo

According to the Voces Oral History Center at the University of Texas at Austin, which collects testimonies from Latino men and women who served in World War II, for many, the experience was accompanied by an unprecedented sense of belonging.

Private Armando Flores, from Corpus Christi, Texas, for example, fondly recalled being reprimanded for putting his hands in his pockets on a cold day during basic training. "American soldiers stand at attention," a lieutenant told him. "They never keep their hands in their pockets." Years later, Flores was still amazed by what that moment meant to him: "Nobody had ever called me an American before!"

An unprecedented mobilization of the Hispanic community

The United States' entry into the war, following the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941, sparked an unprecedented mobilization. Of the approximately 16 million Americans who served, estimates place the number of Hispanics at between 340,000 and 500,000. Of these, more than 53,000 were Puerto Ricans, and the remaining bulk—ranging from 300,000 to just over 400,000—were Mexican Americans.

Often, the sacrifice involved the entire family. One story that has been passed down in Hispanic historiography of the war is that of the Sánchez family, comprising 10 siblings, who came from Bernalillo, N.M., to Southen California. Three of the sisters became "Rosita the Riveter" working in factories, and five brothers served. Two were Army soldiers, one a military doctor, another Seabee in the Navy Construction Battalion and the eldest, aged 50, a civil defense patrolman. One was killed in the Philippines; they didn't know if another had survived the Battle of the Bulge.

Society

Five Central American countries celebrate their independence on September 15: Here's the story behind the date

Williams Perdomo

Unlike black soldiers, Hispanics were not segregated into specific units, with exceptions such as the 65th Infantry Regiment from Puerto Rico. That unit, later known as the "Boriqueneers"—a nickname that became particularly popular during the Korean War—already existed and served in World War II.

The available statistics, though imperfect, paint a picture of disproportionate contribution. While Hispanics accounted for approximately between 2% and 3% of the U.S. population in the 1940s, their presence in the ranks exceeded 3% of the total force. Estimates of Hispanic casualties in the conflict range from 9,000 to higher figures, although the lack of precise ethnic records prevents a definitive count.

Decorated Hispanic heroes: 17 Medals of Honor

The bravery of Hispanic soldiers was reflected in the number of decorations they received. Seventeen Hispanic soldiers received the Medal of Honor, the United States' highest military distinction, for acts of extreme heroism in combat.

• Joe P. Martínez. Private. Attu, Alaska, 1943. He relaunched the assault on the snow-covered pass with a BAR and grenades; he died while capturing the position. First Hispanic to receive the Medal of Honor in World War II.
• Marcario García. Sergeant. Grosshau, Germany, 1944. Despite being wounded, he refused to be evacuated and single-handedly destroyed two machine-gun nests; he killed six and captured four.
• José M. López. Sergeant. Krinkelt, Belgium, 1944 (Ardennes). Using a machine gun, he repelled a German attack; the citation credits him with killing at least 100 enemy soldiers.
• José F. Valdez. Private First Class. Rosenkrantz, France, 1945. He covered his patrol's retreat under attack from an enemy company; he died from his wounds.
• Manuel Pérez Jr. Paratrooper. Luzon, Philippines, 1945. He neutralized a bunker that was holding up his company and killed 18 Japanese soldiers. He later died from a sniper's bullet.
• Silvestre S. Herrera. Private First Class. Mertzwiller, France, 1945. He stormed a nest and captured eight Germans; he continued fighting after losing both feet in a minefield.
• Ysmael R. Villegas. Sergeant. Villa Verde, Luzon, 1945. He cleared sniper nests one by one; he was killed while storming the last one.
• Rudolph B. Dávila. Sergeant. Artena, Italy, 1944. He silenced three German machine guns. He was awarded the medal in 2000.
• Pedro Cano. Private. Schevenhütte, Germany, 1944. In two days, he eliminated several machine-gun nests that were holding up his unit. Medal awarded in 2014.
• Joe Gándara. Paratrooper. Amfreville, France, 1944 (Normandy). He destroyed three machine guns and was mortally wounded. Medal awarded in 2014.
• Salvador J. Lara. Private First Class. Aprilia, Italy, 1944. He led the assault on several strongpoints for two days. Medal awarded in 2014.
• Manuel Mendoza. Sergeant. Monte Battaglia, Italy, 1944. While wounded, he repelled a German counterattack. He survived, served in Korea, and died in 2001; the medal was awarded to him in 2014.
• Lucian Adams. Staff Sergeant, 30th Infantry, 3rd Division. Saint-Dié, France, 1944. He advanced practically alone under heavy fire, destroyed several machine-gun nests, and captured several enemy soldiers; his action broke German resistance in that sector and allowed his company to advance. Medal awarded in 1945.
• David M. Gonzales. Private First Class, 127th Infantry, 32nd Division. Villa Verde, Luzon, April 25, 1945. A shell buried several of his comrades; under fire, he dug them out and was killed while attempting to rescue another. Medal awarded posthumously.
• Alejandro R. Rentería Ruiz. Private First Class, 165th Infantry, 27th Division. Okinawa, April 28, 1945. His company was pinned down by a pillbox; he approached it, his rifle jammed, he repaired it under fire, entered the pillbox, and killed all 12 occupants. He survived.
• Cleto L. Rodríguez. Private, 148th Infantry, 37th Division. Paco Station, Manila, February 9, 1945. Together with John N. Reese Jr., he stormed the Japanese defenses at the station; between them, they are credited with killing more than 80 enemy soldiers. Rodríguez survived; Reese was killed in action. Medal awarded in 1945.
• Harold Gonsalves. Private First Class, Marine Corps, 15th Marines, 6th Division. Okinawa, April 15, 1945. During an artillery advance, he threw himself on a Japanese grenade to save his squad. Medal awarded posthumously.

Many of these awards came decades after the war, as a result of a review ordered by Congress that identified cases of overlooked heroism. This belated recognition does not change the fact that Hispanics received the highest per-capita rate of Medals of Honor among all minorities in the country during the war.

Society

Hispanic Heritage Month: Despite challenges, the community's influence continues to grow

Israel Duro

Hispanic women and the IISGM

Many Hispanic women joined the war effort even though it was unusual in their communities for a daughter or wife to leave home alone and travel across the country. Their proficiency in Spanish and English made them especially valuable: they encrypted messages, operated communications and served as interpreters.

Others cared for the wounded as nurses in the Army Nursing Corps, a separate unit from the auxiliary unit, or as volunteers with the Red Cross. They also enlisted in the women's corps created during the war: the Women's Army Auxiliary Corps (WAAC), which became the Women's Army Corps (WAC) in 1943; the Navy's WAVES; and the Women's Marine Corps Reserve.

According to Voces, at age 19, María Sally Salazar, from Laredo, Texas, used her sister's birth certificate to meet the minimum age requirement of 21 and enlist in the Women's Army Corps. Assigned to New Guinea and later to the Philippines, she spent a year and a half in the jungle, working in the Surgeon General's office and, when needed, tending to the wounded.

Society

Orlando Salazar and Karina Yapor to participate in the Foro Latino Tour

Williams Perdomo

The home front: The Bracero Program and the war economy

While hundreds of thousands of Hispanics were fighting in Europe and the Pacific, the U.S. economy faced a critical labor shortage. In August 1942, Washington and Mexico signed the Mexican Agricultural Labor Agreement, which gave rise to the Bracero Program. Between 1942 and 1945, some 170,000 to 220,000 Mexican farmworkers entered the country legally; tens of thousands more were hired by the railroads—around 80,000 during the war years.

The Braceros sustained the harvests and rail lines of the so-called "Arsenal of Democracy." Their experience, however, was marked by substandard housing, discrimination, low wages and, along the border, DDT spraying. In the fields, workers frequently used "el cortito," a short-handled hoe that forced them to work in a hunched position and caused spinal injuries in many day laborers—a problem that persisted throughout the entire program, which remained in effect until 1964.

Society

How Hispanics travel in the US: Discover which destination they prefer over Miami and New York

Carlos Dominguez

Discrimination and early civil rights struggles

Despite their service, Hispanic veterans returned to a country that often denied them equal treatment. Many faced segregation in schools, restaurants and movie theaters, especially in the Southwest. In Texas, for example, Hispanics were officially classified as "white" but suffered de facto discrimination in all areas of public life.

This contradiction between sacrifice on the front lines and marginalization at home fueled a burgeoning civil rights movement. Organizations such as the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) and the American G.I. Forum stepped up their activism in the postwar period, denouncing police violence, school segregation, and political exclusion. Iconic cases, such as that of Private Félix Longoria, whose funeral was refused by a Texas funeral home in 1949, highlighted the problems of a system that demanded loyalty in war but denied dignity in peace.

Society

Why is Spanish the language New Yorkers most want to learn?

Diane Hernández

• Charles III (Madrid, 1716–1788) was king of Spain during the Revolutionary War. During his reign, Spain provided financial and logistical aid to the rebels in the 13 colonies and, beginning in 1779, openly intervened in the war against Great Britain.
• Pedro Pablo Abarca de Bolea y Ximénez de Urrea, count of Aranda (Siétamo, Huesca, 1719– Épila, Zaragoza, 1798) was a military officer, diplomat, politician and businessman. He signed—as Spanish ambassador in Paris—a promissory note in 1776 for 2 million pounds sterling allocated by Spain and France to aid the British colonies in America. That same year, he participated in a meeting with Benjamin Franklin to assess Spanish aid in the war.
• Luis de Córdova y Córdova (Seville, 1706–San Fernando, Cádiz, 1796) was a naval officer and captain general of the Spanish Navy who commanded the Spanish-French fleet that attempted to invade southern England in 1779. In 1780, he captured a British convoy of 55 ships carrying weapons, troops, 80,000 muskets and more than 1 million pounds sterling intended to reinforce the British army in the colonies.
• Bernardo de Gálvez, count of Gálvez (Macharaviaya, Málaga, 1746–Tacubaya, Mexico, 1786) was a lieutenant general and viceroy of New Spain who conquered the British outposts on the Mississippi in 1779 and, in 1780, captured Mobile—operations that consolidated Spanish control over the Mississippi Valley and the Gulf of Mexico.
• José de Gálvez y Gallardo, Marquis of Sonora (Macharaviaya, Málaga, 1720–Aranjuez, Madrid, 1787) was a lawyer, councilor for the Indies, secretary of state and of the Office of the Indies, and governor of the Council of the Indies. The Royal Academy of History counts him among the key figures in Spain’s involvement in the American Revolution.
• Diego María de Gardoqui y Arriquíbar (Bilbao, 1735–Turin, 1798) was a businessman, enlightened landowner and diplomat who sent the first muskets, pistols and supplies to the rebels in 1775 and, on behalf of Charles III, subsequently organized the transport of funds, blankets, rifles, boots and fabric to the 13 colonies.

Sports

Hispanic Power: Hispanic Roots Shape Team USA for the 2026 World Cup

Williams Perdomo

• Juan de Miralles Trayllon (Petrel, Alicante, 1713–Morristown, New Jersey, 1780) was a merchant and businessman and is among the figures selected by the Royal Academy of History for his role in Spain’s support of American independence.
• José Moñino y Redondo, Count of Floridablanca (Murcia, 1728–Seville, 1808) was a statesman, politician and jurist, and is one of the key figures highlighted by the Royal Academy of History in this historical process.
• Juan Francisco de Saavedra y Sangronis (Seville, 1746–1819) was a military officer, diplomat and politician who delivered 2.5 million pesos in Cuba to the French allies to aid the American rebels in 1781.
• Luis de Unzaga y Amézaga, known as Le Conciliateur (Málaga, 1717–1793) was captain general of Havana, first captain general of Venezuela, lieutenant general and governor of Louisiana. He is also among the key figures in Spain’s involvement listed by the Royal Academy of History.

Throughout its history, the U.S. has faced challenges that at the time seemed existential. However, on each occasion it has found a way to rebuild itself.

From the Civil War, which in the 19th century threatened to permanently divide the country, to the Great Depression of the 1930s, through the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the 2008 financial crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, the nation has demonstrated a remarkable ability to overcome its worst crises and, in many cases, emerge stronger.

The Civil War: The “rebirth” of the United States

The American Civil War, which lasted from 1861 to 1865, was the bloodiest conflict in the country’s history. Estimates of casualties range from about 620,000 to nearly 750,000 deaths, according to the demographic review by historian J. David Hacker.

The conflict threatened the very survival of the United States, devastated much of the South, and ended with the Union’s victory, which preserved national integrity, abolished slavery and paved the way for the country’s industrial consolidation.

The United States emerged from the war profoundly transformed. The Union prevailed militarily and prevented the permanent partition of the country, while the Emancipation Proclamation and, later, the 13th Amendment legally abolished slavery. The war also paved the way for far-reaching political and economic reorganization.

Historian James McPherson, winner of the Pulitzer Prize for his book "Battle Cry of Freedom," has been one of the authors who has best explained the profound significance of the American Civil War. In his interpretation, the conflict not only preserved the Union but also brought about a “rebirth of freedom” by transforming a decentralized republic into a more centralized nation-state by abolishing slavery and laying the institutional and political foundations of the United States.

From the worst crisis to the greatest economic boom in history

The economic collapse of 1929 marked the beginning of the Great Depression, the darkest period in the history of the U.S. economy in the 20th century. According to official data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), unemployment reached a devastating peak of 24.9% in 1933. In real terms, this meant that nearly one in four American workers was unemployed.

The decline in industrial production, the collapse of agricultural prices and the spread of poverty gave rise to iconic images of the crisis, such as the homeless encampments known as “Hoovervilles” and the long lines for bread.

In his acceptance speech as the Democratic nominee in 1932, Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR) promised to implement a “New Deal” for the American people. After taking office in March 1933, he launched an ambitious economic recovery program.

During his first 100 days, Roosevelt persuaded Congress to pass a comprehensive package of emergency legislation. He declared a bank holiday to stop bank runs and created numerous federal agencies known as the “alphabet agencies.”

Among the most important New Deal agencies were the Agricultural Adjustment Administration (AAA), which sought to stabilize agricultural prices and support farms; the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), which employed young people in conservation projects; the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), which created jobs and electrified large rural areas of the South; the Federal Emergency Relief Administration (FERA) and the Works Progress Administration (WPA), which provided aid and massive employment through public works and cultural projects; and the National Recovery Administration (NRA), which sought to regulate industrial competition through codes affecting prices, wages and production.

Although it failed to completely eliminate unemployment—which still hovered around 14% in 1940—the New Deal created jobs, stabilized the economy and established a new, more active role for the government in the lives of citizens.

The arsenal that pulled the U.S. out of the depression

The true end of the Depression came with the war effort during World War II. Industrial mobilization turned the United States into what FDR called “the arsenal of democracy.”

Between 1939 and 1945, the U.S. economy experienced an exceptional war-driven expansion: nominal GDP rose from $93.4 billion in 1939 to $228 billion in 1945, while unemployment fell from 14.6% in 1940 to 1.9% in 1943 and reached 1.2% in 1944. These figures show the extent to which the war effort transformed production and absorbed the labor force in the United States.

By 1945, the United States accounted for nearly 50% of global GDP, establishing itself as by far the world’s leading economic power.

After 9/11: Reconstruction and fortification of the U.S.

Following the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, which left nearly 3,000 dead and deeply scarred the national consciousness, the United States responded with determination under the leadership of George W. Bush. The country rebuilt the World Trade Center (WTC)—now known as One World Trade Center, the tallest building in the Western Hemisphere—as a symbol of resilience.

In addition, the United States significantly strengthened its national security apparatus. In 2002, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was created through the Homeland Security Act, the largest reorganization of the federal government since World War II. Previously, the USA Patriot Act (Patriot Act) was passed by Congress and signed by President George W. Bush on Oct. 26, 2001, significantly expanding surveillance powers and counterterrorism efforts.

Subsequently, in 2004, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) was created as part of a sweeping reform aimed at improving coordination among agencies such as the CIA, the FBI and the NSA.

The Great Recession of 2008: Response to the financial collapse

The 2008 financial crisis, triggered by the bursting of the housing bubble and irresponsible practices in the subprime mortgage sector, led to the worst recession in the United States since the Great Depression. Between 2008 and 2010, more than 8.7 million jobs were lost, the unemployment rate reached 10%, and millions of families lost their homes to foreclosure.

Faced with the collapse, the government responded with unprecedented measures: the bank bailout program, the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), worth $700 billion, designed to prevent the collapse of major banks and stabilize the financial system. It was later reduced to $475 billion. In 2009, President Barack Obama spearheaded the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), a massive fiscal stimulus package of $831 billion that included tax cuts, infrastructure investment, and direct aid to states and citizens.

At the same time, the Federal Reserve (Fed) implemented an extraordinary monetary policy: it lowered interest rates to virtually zero and launched several rounds of Quantitative Easing (Q.E.), purchasing trillions of dollars in bonds to inject liquidity into the market.

Although these measures were highly controversial, they succeeded in preventing a total collapse of the financial system and laid the groundwork for a gradual recovery of the U.S. economy.

TARP was harshly criticized by both Republicans and progressive groups, who viewed it as an unfair bailout of the banks responsible for the crisis using taxpayer money, thereby encouraging “moral hazard.” The ARRA stimulus package was strongly questioned by Republicans and liberal economists, who considered it excessively expensive and riddled with inefficient political spending. Q.E. was met with opposition, particularly among conservative and libertarian economists, as well as those of the Austrian School, who argued that creating trillions of dollars distorted the markets, punished savers and increased inequality by primarily benefiting owners of financial assets.

The COVID-19 pandemic: The sharpest collapse and its rapid recovery

The COVID-19 pandemic triggered the fastest economic collapse in the modern history of the United States in 2020. In just two months, more than 22.4 million nonfarm jobs were lost, according to the BLS, representing a 15% drop in total employment. This collapse was driven primarily by mandatory lockdowns and government restrictions that brought key sectors such as leisure, hospitality and retail to a standstill.

Despite the magnitude of the crisis, the U.S. economy demonstrated extraordinary resilience. Thanks to an emergency response that included stimulus packages totaling more than $5 trillion, support from the Federal Reserve, and, especially, innovation and adaptation by the private sector, a V-shaped recovery was achieved—that is, a sharp decline followed by a rapid and vigorous rebound—one of the fastest among the developed nations of the G7 and G10.

The first Trump administration played a key role with initiatives such as Operation Warp Speed, which accelerated vaccine development through efficient partnerships with the private sector, avoiding excessive bureaucracy. American companies pivoted quickly, driving e-commerce, remote work and industrial restructuring, which highlighted the strength of free-market capitalism in the face of the limitations of state planning.

In the wake of the pandemic, the U.S. economy recovered thanks to the innovative spirit of its people and the free-enterprise system, free from government overreach.

The inalienable right to undertake and compete allowed private corporations to take on colossal challenges, transforming a vast, scattered landscape into the most advanced logistical and technological infrastructure in human history.

These are five key corporations that irreversibly shaped the country’s development and prosperity:

1. Union Pacific Railroad (1862)

Expansion into the untamed American West required more than just wagons and daring; it needed a steel artery to unite a geographically fragmented nation. Founded in 1862 under federal legislation promoting the development of critical infrastructure, Union Pacific Railroad undertook the monumental task of building the eastern section of the nation’s first transcontinental railroad.

The project represented the triumph of civil engineering and private investment over the barriers of nature.

The culminating moment in its history came in 1869 at Promontory Summit, Utah, where the Union Pacific tracks met those of the Central Pacific Railroad in the famous Golden Spike ceremony.

This achievement connected the Atlantic and Pacific coasts for the first time in a continuous line . The feat drastically reduced travel time from months to days, lowering the cost of transporting essential goods and spurring a massive wave of migration that accelerated the Union’s territorial integration.

Today, the company operates one of the most extensive freight networks in North America, transporting agricultural products, automobiles, chemicals, and industrial materials across the central and western parts of the country.

Although it incorporates cutting-edge technologies for fleet management and energy-efficient locomotives, the company preserves its historical heritage by restoring steam locomotives, a constant reminder of its central role in the national supply chain.

Union Pacific Railroad.Public domain.

2. US Steel (1901)

In the early 20th century, the rapid growth of American cities demanded a material capable of supporting the architecture of the future. In 1901, a consortium of financial titans led by J.P. Morgan and magnate Andrew Carnegie consolidated the country’s major steel mills to found the United States Steel Corporation.

This megacorporation immediately became a global financial landmark as the world’s first company valued at over 1,000 million dollars.

The company’s strategic value proved indispensable to the consolidation of urban centers and the military power of the United States.

Its steel mills produced the steel used to build the skyscrapers of New York and Chicago, the suspension bridges that connected previously impassable coastlines, the naval fleets that fought in the world wars, and the infrastructure of the national rail networks. US Steel thus became the undisputed symbol of the American industrial boom.

Despite facing fierce international competition and the need to modernize its plants in recent decades, the company remains a pillar of the country’s industrial security.

Recently, the company has invested in electric arc furnace facilities to complement its traditional coal-fired operations, drawing intense political and regulatory scrutinyamid foreign takeover bids that have once again highlighted the strategic value of domestic steel production for U.S. economic sovereignty.

US Steel.Public domain.

3. Ford Motor Company (1903)

At the beginning of the last century, personal transportation remained a prohibitive luxury reserved for the economic elite. This reality changed dramatically in 1903 when Henry Ford founded the Ford Motor Company in Dearborn, Michigan.

The company’s great genius lay in its vehicle design and in a complete overhaul of the industrial production model that would transform the global economy forever.

Ford introduced and popularized the large-scale moving assembly line, a manufacturing method that optimized production times and reduced costs to unprecedented levels. Thanks to this mass production system, the famous Ford Model T became an affordable consumer good for the average middle-class citizen.

This phenomenon democratized individual mobility, spurred the creation of the nation’s highway system, and forever altered the urban design of American cities.

Over the years, the brand maintained its market leadership through iconic products such as the F-Series trucks (the best-selling vehicle in the United States for decades) and the Ford Mustang.

Today, the company is combining the strengthening of its traditional internal combustion engines with an aggressive transition to electric mobility, developing models such as the F-150 Lightning pickup truck to compete in the new automotive landscape without losing its manufacturing essence.

Ford Motor Company.Public domain.

4. IBM (1911)

Long before the Internet connected homes around the globe, the modern economy already required complex systems to process large volumes of business information.

International Business Machines (IBM), a corporation founded in 1911, assumed leadership of the nascent computer industry by developing tabulating machines, punch cards, and, later, the first large-scale computing systems that automated corporate workflows.

During the second half of the 20th century, IBM’s central computers or mainframes served as the technological engine behind the global banking system, telecommunications networks, government records, and the logistics operations of the country’s largest companies.

The Blue Giant also provided the critical computing infrastructure that enabled NASA to handle the mathematical calculations for the Apollo space program, ensuring the success of the first human landing on the Moon.

Faced with the advent of personal computing in the 1980s and 1990s, IBM successfully reconfigured its business model, gradually phasing out the manufacture of personal computers to focus on enterprise software, high-end consulting, and hybrid cloud platforms.

In today’s environment, the corporation is directing its research laboratories toward artificial intelligence and the development of quantum computing, serving as a historic bridge between old heavy industry and the knowledge economy.

IBM.Public domain.

5. Apple (1976)

The dawn of the digital age and the consolidation of Silicon Valley as the global epicenter of private innovation cannot be understood without Apple’s emergence.

Founded in 1976 in a California garage, the company challenged the conventions of the technology sector by approaching computer development from a perspective centered on intuitive design, user privacy, and vertical integration between physical and logical components.

The company revolutionized the global consumer market by launching products that defined their respective industries, such as the Macintosh computer, the iPod, and, most significantly, the iPhone in 2007.

This last device ushered in the era of modern smartphones and gave rise to the digital app economy, radically transforming the way billions of people work, communicate, conduct business, and consume entertainment in their daily lives.

Headquartered at Apple Park in Cupertino, the corporation has expanded its influence by designing its own microprocessors (Apple Silicon), significantly reducing its dependence on foreign suppliers and strengthening the nation’s technological sovereignty.

By expanding its business model into digital services and artificial intelligence, Apple represents the culmination of American innovation-driven capitalism, maintaining one of the highest market capitalizations on the planet.

Apple, Inc.Public domain.

Thus, the United States has proudly flown as many as 27 flags throughout its history. Actually, 29, if we include the flag with which the 13 colonies began the American Revolution and the Confederate flag, which might have become the national flag had that side prevailed in the Civil War.

The meaning of the American flag: Stars, stripes and colors

On June 4, 1777, the Second Continental Congress passed the first Flag Resolution. In it, the “Stars and Stripes” were officially adopted as the national flag:

“Resolved, That the flag of the United States be made of thirteen stripes, alternate red and white; that the union be thirteen stars, white in a blue field, representing a new Constellation.”

Although Congress did not explain the reasoning behind the choice of colors or the flag’s distinctive elements, the institution’s then-secretary, Charles Thompson, left a detailed summary that includes the meanings behind the colors that have represented the United States ever since:

“The colors of the pales are those used in the flag of the United States of America; White signifies purity and innocence, Red, hardiness and valour, and Blue, the color of the Chief signifies vigilance, perseverance and justice.”

The first official American flag, 1775: "The Grand Union Flag"

Grand Union FlagVOZ

The first official flag—since the United States did not yet exist as such, but rather as the army of the 13 rebellious colonies—consisted of 13 red and white stripes and the flag of the United Kingdom in the upper left corner. This is the same basic design as the flag of the British East India Company, which flew from 1701 to 1801. The difference lies in the number of stripes, as the Company’s flag had between nine and 13 red and white stripes. The Continental Army flew the flag until 1777.

1777: Betsy Ross

The 1777 Flag, or Betsy Ross FlagVOZ

The flag approved by Congress included 13 stars, arranged in a circle. Popular legend has it that Elizabeth Griscom, known as Betsy Ross, a flagmaker from Philadelphia, sewed the first official flag in June 1776.

According to legend, George Washington, Robert Morris and George Ross arrived at Ross’ home to discuss the design of a national flag. The original design featured six-pointed stars, but she suggested five-pointed stars and demonstrated how quickly she could cut them out. Impressed, they awarded her the honor of being the first person to sew the flag.

1794: 15 stars and 15 stripes; Vermont and Kentucky join the Union

1794 FlagVOZ

In 1794, the second Flag Act was enacted, adding two stripes and two stars to accommodate the admission of Vermont and Kentucky. The flag remained in use until 1818 despite the admission of five other states (Tennessee, Ohio, Louisiana, Indiana and Mississippi) prior to that date.

1818: 20 stars and the return of the 13 stripes

1818: 20 stars and the return of the 13 stripesVOZ

In 1818, the rule was established to add one star for each new territory, and the number of stripes on the flag was set at 13. It flew for barely a year, as it was replaced in 1819.

1819: Illinois added

1919 FlagVOZ

1820: Alabama and Maine join

1820 Flag with Alabama and MaineVOZ

1822: Missouri

Flag of 1822 following Missouri’s admissionVOZ

1836: Arkansas

1936 flag, featuring ArkansasVOZ

1837: Michigan

1837 flag featuring MichiganVOZ

1845: Florida

1845 flag featuring FloridaVOZ

1846: Texas

1846 flag featuring TexasVOZ

1847: Iowa

Flag featuring IowaVOZ

1848: Wisconsin

American flag, 1848VOZ

1851: California

1851 flag with CaliforniaVOZ

1858: Minnesota

1858 flag featuring MinnesotaVOZ

1859: Oregon

1859 flag featuring OregonVOZ

1861: Kansas

1861 flag featuring KansasVOZ

1863: West Virginia

Flag featuring West Virginia (1863)VOZ

1865: Nevada

1865 flag featuring NevadaVOZ

1867: Nebraska

1867 flag featuring NebraskaVOZ

1877: Colorado

1877 flag following Colorado's admissionVOZ

1890: Idaho, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota and Washington

1890 flag following the admission of Idaho, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota and WashingtonVOZ

1891: Wyoming

1891 flagVOZ

1896: Utah

1896 flag with UtahVOZ

1908: Oklahoma, the first star of the 20th century

First flag of the 20th century featuring OklahomaVOZ

1912: Arizona and New Mexico

Arizona and New Mexico on the 1912 flagVOZ

1959: Alaska

1959 flag featuring AlaskaVOZ

1960: Hawaii rounds out the list... for now

American flag since 1960 following Hawaii’s admissionVOZ

Confederate flagVOZ

Why Not July 2?

The Continental Congress voted to officially sever ties with Great Britain on July 2, 1776, not the 4th. The motion had been introduced weeks earlier by Virginia delegate Richard Henry Lee, and it was that vote—not the date celebrated today—that legally sealed the independence of the United States of America. On July 4, only the already drafted text of the Declaration was adopted—the document intended to announce to the world what had already been decided two days earlier. The date became fixed in the collective memory because it was the one printed in the document’s header; its printing was ordered that very night, and the first copies distributed throughout the colonies bore July 4 at the top, not July 2. The internal vote, however, left no document for people to read or celebrate, remaining merely a procedural step without much substance. President John Adams was so convinced that July 2 would go down in history that for years he refused to congratulate anyone on the wrong date.

Politics

July 4: What do Adams, Jefferson, Monroe and Coolidge have in common?

Joaquín Núñez

A draft that addressed slavery

The original draft by Thomas Jefferson included a paragraph condemning slavery and directly accusing King George III of imposing it on the colonies—a claim that, at the time, was still controversial. Delegates from Georgia and South Carolina, whose economies depended on slave labor, demanded that the passage be removed before the text was put to a vote. Congress agreed, and the Declaration of Independence ultimately proclaimed that all men are created equal without mentioning the institution that contradicted that idea in half of the signatory colonies.

The mass signing came later

On July 4, 1776, there was no mass signing by the 56 delegates, as popular imagination suggests. On that day, only John Hancock, president of the Congress, signed the document—his enormous signature appears at the top of the page. The rest of the delegates signed in the following weeks, and the formal ceremony with most of the signatures did not take place until August 2, 1776—almost a month after the date that appears in textbooks today.

This is how one of the most iconic symbols of the U.S. was born

Uncle Sam, perhaps the symbol most closely associated with the United States around the world, was born out of a misunderstanding involving sacks of meat. Samuel Wilson, a packer from Troy, New York, was responsible for supplying the U.S. Army during the War of 1812 and marked the barrels with the initials “U.S.” Soldiers began joking that those initials stood for “Uncle Sam,” in reference to Wilson himself, and the joke eventually became the official personification of the country more than a century later.

Society

The biggest patriotic celebration of the decade kicks off at the National Mall, led by Donald Trump

Diane Hernández

The Mockery That Became Patriotic Pride

Yankee Doodle, the tune that is heard today at parades and patriotic events, began as a British mockery of Americans. British officers sang it before the war to ridicule the colonial soldiers, whom they described as rustic, unkempt, and unsophisticated with the word doodly, at the time meant fool or simpleton. The Americans themselves adopted the tune during the War of Independence and turned it into a hymn of pride, reversing the original insult.

The Borrowed Melody

Nor is the music of The Star-Spangled Banner entirely American. The melody originally belonged to To Anacreon in Heaven, the song of a London gentlemen’s drinking club dedicated to the Greek poet Anacreon. Francis Scott Key wrote the lyrics in 1814 after witnessing the flag flying over Fort McHenry, but he set his poem to an English tune that had already been circulating for decades in taverns on both sides of the Atlantic.

The 4th of July is also celebrated in other parts of the world

Although the 4th of July is almost entirely associated with the U.S., in reality, the date does not belong exclusively to that country and, in fact, is celebrated in other parts of the world. The Philippines commemorates Republic Day on that day, in reference to Washington’s formal recognition of its independence in 1946, and Rwanda observes Liberation Day, which marks the end of the 1994 genocide. In other words, three countries and three completely different histories coexist on the same day of the calendar.

Society

Living Independence Day away from home

José Carlos Rodríguez, Grant Torres Franco

A Symbol of Freedom

The Liberty Bell, which is now on display in Philadelphia as one of the most recognizable symbols of American independence, does not ring on July 4, as is often portrayed in movies. The original bell hung for decades in the tower of Independence Hall, the building where the Declaration was debated and signed, and over time it became an emblem of the struggle for freedom, in part because of a biblical inscription cast into its rim proclaiming the liberation of all the inhabitants of the earth. But since 1846, it has been unable to function as a normal bell, as a crack that worsened over the years rendered it inoperable; today, it is preserved, cracked and silent, inside a glass pavilion, having become a museum piece rather than an instrument. Every July 4, instead of ringing it, a group of descendants of the Declaration’s signers gently strikes it thirteen times with a wooden mallet—once for each of the thirteen original colonies—in a gesture that is more symbolic than functional. Nor did the first public reading of the Declaration take place on the day it was adopted: it was on July 8, 1776—four days later—in the courtyard of that same building.

Unlike the French Revolution, the American Revolution bequeathed a structure that endures and makes the United States a beacon of hope for an increasingly decadent West—where, precisely, nations like France, which are extremely secularized, play a decisive role in that decadence.

To a large extent, the difference between the American Revolution and the French Revolution has to do with the preservation of tradition. This is the backbone of any conservative stance. And it is precisely the key to the success of the Founding Fathers’ project: freedom is born of inherited institutions.

But that is not the only difference between the American Revolution and the French Revolution. To a large extent, the spirit of rupture and progressivism also shaped the Latin American revolutions. As Carlos Rangel aptly explains in his essential work From the Noble Savage to the Noble Revolutionary, Latin America’s struggle for independence was fueled by a fierce anti-Spanish spirit.

As for the American Revolution, the colonists did not seek to create a “new man.” Instead, they insisted that the driving force behind their aspirations was the need to defend the traditional rights of the English themselves.

Edmund Burke, while praising the American Revolution—even as he remained critical—stated that U.S. independence defended an inherited order. As can be inferred from Burke, the American Revolution was, in many ways, a conservative revolution: it upheld common law; it respected private property; it protected the churches and local life; and it avoided destroying the social structure bequeathed by the British. There was no equivalent in the United States to the French Reign of Terror or to the “war to the death” declared by Bolívar against the Spaniards.

In From the Noble Savage to the Noble Revolutionary, Rangel argues that hostility toward Spanish tradition was decisive in sparking a spiral of chaos in the nascent Latin American nations that still plagues them today. Before independence, the countries of South America were Spain. They enjoyed their legacy, their history, their traditions, and their institutions. But the eagerness to build something new, breaking with the past, led to decades of instability for many of these young nations.

In that sense, if there is one thing we can learn from the American Revolution—beyond an appreciation for our countries of origin—it is the value of tradition and the importance of preserving what came before us so that we may pass it on to future generations.

From a conservative perspective, it is clear that Latin America does not need—as some progressive politicians still propose—to reinvent itself. Instead, it must reconcile itself with what has given it historical continuity: its legal tradition, the family, the church, civil associations, private property, and a rich political culture that teaches us to limit power rather than personalize it.

The great lesson of the American Revolution is not to make a revolution, but to understand that the most enduring transformations usually involve preserving and refining an inherited order, rather than betting on its complete replacement.

However, between the lines of that founding text lies a detail that often goes unnoticed. The Declaration of Independence mentions God four times, whereas the Constitution, drafted just eleven years later by many of the same key figures, does not.

Far from being an anecdotal detail, the references to God were at the heart of the revolutionary argument. To understand why they appear in the Declaration and why they are absent from the Constitution, it is necessary to explore the nature of each document.

​A text to justify a revolution

In June 1776, the Second Continental Congress tasked a committee of five delegates with drafting a declaration explaining why the thirteen colonies were breaking away from Great Britain for good. The group consisted of Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Roger Sherman, and Robert Livingston, although it was Jefferson who wrote the first draft in a rented room in downtown Philadelphia.

Before it reached the full Congress, the text was reviewed by Adams and Franklin. Later, the delegates made further changes before adopting it on July 4, 1776.

By its very nature, the Declaration of Independence was a defense of the revolution, an explanation of the grounds that led the thirteen colonies to separate from the British Crown. It was not designed as a government program. It was crafted as an argument to convince both the colonists and foreign powers that the revolution against King George III was legitimate.

The four references to God in the Declaration of Independence

In this context, the references to God played a central role in strengthening the moral argument. There are four references, each with a specific purpose.

The first appears in the opening paragraph, when the text invokes “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God” to assert that people may dissolve the political bonds that bind them to another state.

The second is probably the best-known, the most widely cited passage in the document. The text asserts that all men are created equal and are “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.”

The Continental Congress itself incorporated the other two references. Before concluding the document, the delegates appeal to the “Supreme Judge of the world” as a witness to the righteousness of their intentions and, finally, express their “firm confidence in the protection of Divine Providence.”

What do the references to God mean?

The references combine deistic elements, such as the first two, with some more Christian references, which presuppose an active God who intervenes in the course of History. This is particularly evident in the reference to divine providence, which implies the belief that God guides, protects, and directs the destiny of individuals and nations.

Brenda Hafera, deputy director and research associate at the Simon Center for American Studies at the Heritage Foundation, spoke with VOZ about the nature of the Declaration of Independence.

As she explained, the Founding Fathers were primarily influenced by the tradition of natural law, the Scottish Enlightenment, ancient philosophy, and Christianity.

"The Great Awakening swept through America in the 1730s and 1740s, the most referenced work of the Founding generation was the Bible, and about 70-80% of American colonists attended service on a regular basis," she added, citing the book We Still Hold These Truths: Rediscovering Our Principles, Reclaiming Our Future, by Matthew Spalding.

Regarding the Great Awakening, it was a movement of religious renewal that transformed the spiritual life of the colonies decades before independence.

Hafera noted that the document appeals to both "reason and Revelation, to Nature and Nature's God, to eternal laws and immutable truths." For the founding generation, he argued, these traditions were not incompatible but complementary.

“Endowed by their Creator”

Regarding the famous passage from the Declaration, Hafera emphasized that, for its time, the concept was revolutionary.

Until then, many European monarchies held that rights ultimately depended on the authority of the sovereign. The authors of the Declaration reversed that logic: rights existed prior to any government because they belonged to human nature itself. Therefore, if those rights had been granted by God, no king or Parliament could override them.

“The government recognizes, rather than grants, inalienable rights and has limited, enumerated powers. That understanding is a reflection on what it means to be human and calls for a system of government that is respectful of human dignity and conducive to human flourishing,” Hafera noted.

“In stating that people’s rights were given to them by their creator, the Continental Congress endowed those rights with a legitimacy that knows no parallel in mortal sources. What God has given to man is not enjoyed at the sufferance of any monarch or government. Liberty is the inviolable birthright of all,” lawyer and historian Anthony J. Minna wrote in an article published on the Journal of the American Revolution website.

Why doesn’t the Constitution mention God?

The absence of similar references in the Constitution often comes as a surprise, but it stems from a simple reason: the two documents pursued entirely different objectives.

One of the most famous metaphors in this regard was popularized by Abraham Lincoln. In December 1860, he compared the Declaration of Independence to an “apple of gold” and the Constitution to a silver frame. For Lincoln, the principle that all men are created equal was the true heart of the American project; the Constitution, on the other hand, was the instrument designed to protect and preserve that ideal. In his own words, the frame was made for the apple, not the apple for the frame.

Along these same lines, Hafera emphasized that "the Declaration lays out America's principles, and the Constitution protects those principles through practical mechanisms."

“All men are men and not beasts”

More than 250 years later, those four references to God continue to spark interpretations and debates. For Hafera, their importance lies in the fact that they express the conviction that there are fundamental and immutable truths about human nature: “They are an indication that there are fundamental and unchangeable truths and that there is order to the universe.” That idea, she argued, was the starting point upon which the Founding Fathers built their conception of liberty, rights, and self-government.

That vision was summarized years later by President John Adams, who wrote the following reflection on the concept of equality in the Declaration:

“Really means little more than that We are all of the same Species: made by the same God: possessed of Minds and Bodies alike in Essence: having all the same Reason, Passions, Affections and appetites. All Men are Men and not Beasts…. All these are Men and not Angels.”

But I want to focus here on another matter: the unique character of the United States of America. There are nations whose roots run deep in history, others that are clearly shaped by factors such as geography, ethnicity, language and religion. These are, so to speak, organic nations. This is not the case with the United States, a nation whose distinctiveness was observed with his usual insight by Chesterton, who, in his book What I Saw in America, published in 1922, wrote that "the United States is the only nation in the world founded on a creed. That creed is set forth with dogmatic and even theological lucidity in the Declaration of Independence." If this is not understood, one cannot comprehend the United States, which, for better or worse, is not a nation like so many others, but rather was born of an idea and conceives of no constraints or limits to the expansion of that idea.

This explains that famous anecdote involving Benjamin Franklin: when, upon leaving the Constitutional Convention in 1787, Elizabeth Willing Powel asked him, "Well, Dr. Franklin, what do we have, a republic or a monarchy?" Franklin replied with a phrase that has gone down in history: "A republic, if you can keep it." This response highlights that the United States is not like other nations but is in fact an ongoing political experiment. A nation, then, that requires a certain permanent tension, an endless effort, as its own founding fathers were already aware that relaxing and taking it for granted carries great risk.

This is also why the United States has, from its very beginnings, viewed its expansion as something natural and legitimate. Ultimately, the United States has conceived of itself as an open project to which territories and peoples could join. It is the manifest destiny of a republic that, on the other hand, will also experience the tension and contradictions between its expansionist dynamic and its rejection of imperialism, which it will regard as one of the vices of that old Europe that the Mayflower pilgrims abandoned, considering it definitively lost.

Just the News

America 250: Founding fathers, presidents point to the Bible as the anchor of liberty

Just The News

This tension between what has been characterized as expansionism and isolationism would run through the history of the United States. With some nuances, however, for example, isolationism has never been a significant factor when it came to the United States' position on the American continent: the Monroe Doctrine, now updated as the Donroe Doctrine within the framework of the Western Hemisphere, has always enjoyed broad majority support. Another matter is interventions overseas, something that proved much more difficult and did not become the norm until the United States' participation in the two world wars of the 20th century (although as early as 1805, U.S. Marines were deployed to Libya in the war against Barbary pirates), a step that on both occasions was taken when the conflict had already been underway for some time and amid strong resistance. Shedding American blood in distant conflicts, whose direct impact on life in the United States, protected by two oceans, is not so evident, always met with opposition, which on many occasions was far from marginal.

However, the die was cast. One might debate whether this was already the case as early as 1776, but it was undoubtedly so by 1865. The path the new nation would take during its first decades of existence left room for some uncertainty. In fact, even the term "nation," in its modern sense, would have been rejected by many Americans of those early days, with a weak federal government and loyalty to each individual state taking precedence for many. Confederation or Federal Republic? The Civil War decided the future of slavery in North America, of course, but in reality what was at stake was the institutional structure of the United States. Only in this light can one understand, for example, why Southerners opposed to slavery fought in the Confederate ranks. The outcome of the war gave rise to, this time for good, what would become a nation conceived as a unified whole, though without eliminating the enormous influence of the states or avoiding deep divisions, as evidenced, for example, by the punitive Reconstruction of the South or the persistence of Jim Crow laws until the 1960s. In any case, Lincoln earned his place alongside Washington as a founding father and shaped a united nation ready to increasingly spread its founding ideals.

This expansion was facilitated, of course, by the enormous industrial and economic power with which a continental United States, capable of uniting its two coasts and exploiting its vast resources, emerged during the so-called Gilded Age of the last third of the 19th century. Then came the decisive U.S. intervention in the two world wars, Wilson's largely failed attempt to reshape Europe, and the Cold War with the communist bloc, which culminated in the collapse of the USSR and its satellite states. It was a time of optimism and high expectations, which were tragically shattered by the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Since then, U.S. global leadership, far from being unchallenged, has had to face growing challenges: from jihadism to the rise of China, including Putin's Russia and the Iran of the ayatollahs. But perhaps the greatest challenge, as is always the case, lies at home. This is probably the moment, in its 250-year history, when more Americans no longer believe in that creed Chesterton spoke of. "A republic, if they can keep it," said Franklin; the great challenge facing the United States today, as with any political project that can rely neither on inertia nor on organic momentum, is to have a sufficient number of Americans willing to fight and sacrifice for those ideas that makes the United States a unique experiment.

On the 100-year anniversary of American independence in 1876, President Ulysses S. Grant admonished American youth to “hold fast to the Bible as the sheet-anchor of your liberties; write its precepts in your heats and practice them in your lives. To the influence of this Book we are indebted for all the progress made in true civilization, and to this we must look for our guide in the future.”

On the 150th anniversary of independence in 1926, President Calvin Coolidge pointed to “the miracle of the birth of a new nation,” which he said came from “convictions of a great mass of independent, liberty loving, God-fearing people.”

Because of this, he said, “It is but natural that the first paragraph of the Declaration of Independence should open with a reference to Nature's God and should close in the final paragraphs with an appeal to the Supreme Judge of the world and an assertion of a firm reliance on Divine Providence. Coming from these sources, having as it did this background, it is no wonder that Samuel Adams could say, ‘The people seem to recognize this resolution as though it were a decree promulgated from heaven.’"

On the 200th anniversary of independence in 1976, President Gerald Ford said early settlers brought “the Bible and Blackstone's Commentary across the Atlantic among their few cherished possessions and established their own governments on a strange and hostile coast. American families … took with them on the overland trails the principles of equality and the God-given rights of the Declaration of Independence.”

In 1935, President Franklin D. Roosevelt pointed to the influence of the Bible on America’s founding 400 years after the first mass produced Bible was printed in English.

“In the formative days of the Republic the directing influence the Bible exercised upon the fathers of the Nation is conspicuously evident. For President George Washington, the Bible ‘contained the sure and certain moral precepts that constituted the basis of his action,’” Roosevelt said. President Thomas Jefferson “turned to the Bible as the source of his higher thinking and reasoning. … He held that the Bible contained the noblest ethical system the world has known. His own compilation of the selected portions of this Book in what is known as ‘Jefferson's Bible,’ bears evidence of the profound reverence in which he held it.”

Nearly 50 years later, President Ronald Reagan also said, “Of the many influences that have shaped the United States of America into a distinctive Nation and people, none may be said to be more fundamental and enduring than the Bible. Deep religious beliefs stemming from the Old and New Testaments of the Bible inspired many of the early settlers of our country, providing them with the strength, character, convictions, and faith necessary to withstand great hardship and danger in this new and rugged land. These shared beliefs helped forge a sense of common purpose among the widely dispersed colonies – a sense of community which laid the foundation for the spirit of nationhood that was to develop in later decades.

“The Bible and its teachings helped form the basis for the Founding Fathers' abiding belief in the inalienable rights of the individual, rights which they found implicit in the Bible's teachings of the inherent worth and dignity of each individual.”

Politics

Trump kicks off America’s 250th anniversary celebrations and predicts a new golden age

Joaquín Núñez

In times of war, presidents echoed similar sentiments.

After winning the Mexican American War, President Zachary Taylor said the Bible “is the best of books and I wish it were in the hands of everyone. It is indispensable to the safety and permanence of our institutions; a free government cannot exist without religion and morals, and there cannot be morals without religion, nor religion without the Bible.”

During the Civil War and in response to receiving a Bible from the “loyal colored people of Baltimore,” President Abraham Lincoln wrote, “In regard to this Great book, I have but to say, it is the best gift God has given to man. All the good the Savior gave to the world was communicated through this book. But for it we could not know right from wrong. All things most desirable for man’s welfare, here and hereafter, are to be found portrayed in it.”

Founding fathers also argued the Bible should be taught in public schools and following its teachings is necessary to maintain a free society.

Taylor wished the Bible would “be placed in the hands of the young” and that all Americans were “brought up under the influence of that Holy Book,” emphasizing that the Bible “is the best schoolbook in the world.”

© Just The News

A cowboy commemorating the cattle trails in Texas.AFP

North American cowboys are the natural extension after the discovery of the New World of the classic Spanish vaqueros who tended cattle on the vast plains of Extremadura or in the marshes of Andalusia, two of the regions that fostered the conquistadors. The colonization of America moved this icon to the prairies that span from Mexico to the American Southwest.

In fact, when we talk about the classic cowboy hat, this refers to the ten-gallon hat, whose name actually does not come from the unit of measurement, but rather from across the Atlantic.

There are two versions for the etymological origin of this term. Some historians point an alteration to the Spanish expression "tan galán" ("so handsome"), which praises the elegance the face beneath the hat ("You look tan galán with that hat!"). On the other hand, somewhat less poetic, some linguists point out that the term galón has another potential key meaning, from the Royal Spanish Academy dictionary: "Narrow ribbon of strong fabric that is used as an ornament on a garment." This could refer to the braids that sometimes adorned these hats. Be that as it may, it is evident that either meaning has the same origin: the Spanish language.

Hispanic culture: The heart and soul of the United States of America

Cowboys are but a small footprint within the very broad Spanish legacy in the United States since its origin and birth. In fact, beyond cowboys, the figure of the "gunslingers" that fought against the Native Americans in the Wild West is iconic. It is also Spanish. These fearless symbols have their origins in the Dragones de Cuera, elite soldiers who patrolled the borders of New Spain, "were military men who wore seven-layered vests to defend themselves from the arrows of, above all, Apaches and Comanches, since with the rest of the tribes, despite their pluses and minuses, the Spanish signed peace and trade agreements," explains Marcelino Lominchar, professor of history and author of the book "Historias de la Historia de España" ("Stories of the History of Spain").

Lominchar recalls how five centuries ago, a large group of Spaniards crossed California, Florida, New Mexico, Alabama, Louisiana, Nebraska, Montana, Utah, Arkansas, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Missouri and even Alaska in a journey that left an indelible mark on the nation's history. From this journey came the names of Los Angeles, Santa Elena, San Diego, San Francisco, Santa Fe, Santa Monica and a long list of emblematic places founded by the Spanish empire.

Avilés Street in St. Augustine, Fla., the first street in the United States.Cordon Press.

This image belongs to the first street in the United States of America. Avilés Street is located in St. Augustine, Fla. This is the oldest city in the country, founded by Pedro Menéndez de Avilés, a Spanish soldier and sailor who in 1565 conquered Florida and founded this emblematic city. Along with him, other iconic figures include Junípero Sierra, Juan Ortíz, Cabeza de Vaca and Bernardo de Gálvez, an American national hero for his help against the English whose portrait hangs today in the Capitol.

Ceremony honoring Bernardo de Gálvez in Washington.TIM SLOAN / AFP.

To get an idea of the magnitude of nation's Spanish heritage, Professor Marcelino Lominchar recalls that "Florida was sold to the U.S. in 1820, so it still has a century and a half to go before it is under U.S. sovereignty as long as it was under Spanish rule."

"Of the nearly 4 million square miles in the U.S., roughly 400,000 were under British rule and over 2 million under Spain, the rest being unsettled land," Lominchar continues.

Florida was sold to the U.S. in 1820, so it still has a century and a half to go before it is under U.S. sovereignty as long as it was under Spanish rule. From the crossbreeding of Spanish horse breeds comes the word "mustang," referring to the wild horses that roamed the plains of North America and were later domesticated by the Sioux, Arapahoe and Cheyenne.Marcelino Lominchar, historian

Similarly, the professor adds, "the Spaniards were the first to navigate the Mississippi, the first white people to see the Grand Canyon and Monument Valley and the first to cross the Rockies and the Mojave Desert. Even in Alaska there is a place called Quitatayarock, which comes from the Spanish "quítate de allá" ("get out of the way"), which was shouted by the crew of a Spanish galleon so it would not crash into the rocks and was eventually adopted as a local name.

To certify this footprint, what better than the words of President Thomas Jefferson, who said that "the history of the United States is written in Spanish." In Spain, meanwhile, the poet Federico García Lorca is credited with the phrase "the Spaniard who has not been to America does not know what Spain is." The two nations that have moved hand in hand through time for more than 500 years. Happy Hispanic Heritage Month, a month to also celebrate the country's Spanish roots.

On September 15, 1821, in Guatemala City, the Act of Independence of Central America was signed, drafted by José Cecilio del Valle and approved by representatives of various political, ecclesiastical and academic sectors.

Unlike other movements in America, independence was peaceful, the result of negotiations and political consensus rather than armed confrontation.

After independence, the provinces faced debates over their political future. Some briefly joined the Mexican Empire, while later they created the United Provinces of Central America, ancestors of the current sovereign states.

"In 1822, several open town councils met to vote on the annexation. Thus, Guatemala, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Honduras and Costa Rica were incorporated into the Mexican empire. But in 1823 the empire fell, the republican project was imposed, and a confederation of state-provinces was formed in Central America, independent of both Spain and Mexico," explains the National Historical Museum of Argentina.

These national celebrations, like the one in Mexico, also take place in the United States thanks to the participation of the immigrant community, which fills the streets of cities like Los Angeles and Chicago with parades, live music, and various events to pay tribute to their culture and traditions.

The beginning of Hispanic Heritage Month

From September 15 to October 15, the country celebrates Hispanic Heritage Month. A holiday to celebrate the achievements and contributions of the Hispanic community to the United States. In addition, it is a commemoration that remembers the indelible legacy of Spain in America.

It is a tradition that has been celebrated for at least 56 years. Its origin dates back to 1968, when George W. Brown, a member of the House of Representatives, first proposed that the country formally recognize Hispanic contributions through a law that would authorize the president to proclaim each year National Hispanic Heritage Week, around September 15 and 16.

Brown's initiative was backed by Hispanic-American congressmen Edward R. Roybal and Henry B. Gonzales and seventeen other legislators, totaling 13 Democrats and 6 Republicans. In that regard, as National Geographic recalls, President Lyndon Johnson, who was a teacher at a small Hispanic school, signed the resolution and that same day issued the first National Hispanic Heritage Week proclamation.

"Two decades later, in 1988, President Ronald Reagan proposed extending the celebration to a 30-day period, from September 15 to October 15 each year. This consolidated the Hispanic Heritage Month that is celebrated today," the specialized magazine reported.

Society

Hispanic Heritage Month kicks off: Spain's unforgettable legacy

Williams Perdomo

The amulet of protection advances the presence of the followers of Jesus north of the Alps about 50 years with respect to the oldest finds found to date. The researchers also point out that the text contained in the silver scroll is peculiar because it is written entirely in Latin - at that time it was usually Greek or Hebrew - and does not include references to other religions, neither to Judaism nor to pagan gods, something frequent at that time.

State-of-the-art technology to decipher the contents

The amulet was discovered in 2018 during excavations at a site with hundreds of Roman-era tombs in the city. It is located in an area that formed part of Nida, a Roman frontier town that was eventually abandoned. According to the museum's statement, the tomb where the silver scroll was found also contained other objects, such as an incense burner and a clay jar.

It took several weeks to decipher due to its deteriorated state. Archaeologists had to "digitally unroll" the silver sheet, which had been rolled up for about 1,800 years.

Thanks to computed tomography and art technological equipment, the text could finally be deciphered in May. Subsequently, a long period was also required for the translation process.

(Holy, holy, holy! In the name of Jesus Christ, Son of God! The Lord of the world withstands to the best of his ability all attacks(?). The God(?) grants entrance to well-being. This means of salvation(?) protects the person who submits to the will of the Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, for all knees bow before Jesus Christ: the heavenly, the earthly and the subterranean, and every tongue confesses (Jesus Christ).

Connection with St. Paul

The reference to St. Titus, an early missionary and disciple of St. Paul the Apostle, is also unusual. The connection to St. Paul is reinforced by the last lines of the text, which are "an almost literal quotation of Paul's so-called hymn to Christ in his letter to the Philippians," according to the researchers.

According to the researchers, "The bearer of the silver amulet was clearly a devout Christian," something "absolutely extraordinary" for the time and place. However, the object's presence in Germany "does not necessarily mean that there was a large Christian community there, since such amulets are easily transportable," Gideon Bohak, of Tel Aviv University's Department of Jewish Philosophy and Talmud, told the Times Of Israel.

And the fact is that before the arrival of the Spaniards, there was no paradise as the radical left tries to sell. What existed was a mosaic of local societies in different degrees of technological development, almost always with relations of confrontation and subordination. In addition, of a culture that could reach barbarism with human sacrifices for pagan gods.

What there was at that time, Velez stressed, was some empires that were succeeding each other in time when the Spaniards arrived. The two main ones would be the Mexica Empire, what is now Mexico, and the Tahuantinsuyo or Inca Empire, which were based on the exploitation of other ethnic groups or other ethnic nations.

"America lacked a total idea. Here it is necessary to begin by affirming that in effect it was a discovery; that is to say, that those lands are inserted in a theory of the sphere, that is what verifies the fact of a discovery, because contacts between humans have always existed. But they must be inscribed in a global theory, never better said by the idea of globe", explained Velez.

This situation, Velez points out, generated a clash between the two cultures. This because the Spaniards found a world with zoomorphic god religions, with human sacrifices, with anthropophagy in some cases, with polygamy and with infanticide in other places.

"I say this because of what the chronicles of Peru say, the jars full of stuffed children that they found in some cases, in short, a reality incompatible in many aspects with the vision that the Spaniards of the 15th and 16th century had."

In that sense, Vélez explained that the black legend arose in the context of political and economic rivalries between Spain and other European powers, especially during the 16th and 17th centuries. Many of the negative stories were propagated by enemies ofSpain, such as England and the Netherlands, who sought to discredit the Spanish monarchy.

Contrary to what is promoted, the Spanish Empire promoted the advancement and prosperity of its viceroyalties -Spain never treated them as a colony compared to other empires in the world-. A demonstration of this impulse is that during certain periods of the Spanish Empire, some regions of Spanish America experienced remarkable development, often in economic and cultural aspects that, in some cases, surpassed those of Madrid and other Spanish cities. Likewise came order.

"What is clear is that what is built is a kind of legal monument, which are the laws of the Indies, where they try to address all the peculiar and particular problems of such a large territory, but with a kind of common substratum on both sides," he said.

He recalled that the Spanish Constitution recognized Spaniards from both hemispheres:

"When it is said about both hemispheres, it is referring to the Constitution of Cadiz, which is where the act of the Spanish nation, the political nation, is raised. It is not that Spain did not exist before, nor that it was not a nation, it was a nation of a different nature, a nation, if we want to call it somehow pre-revolutionary".

Likewise, he asserted that what was attempted, in some way, was to export the peninsular model to those lands. He detailed that if you look at the cities that have more or less preserved their classic typology, you find many similarities.

It is not about creating a pink legend. Velez acknowledged that there were mistakes on the part of the Spanish Empire during the time of the conquest. He insisted that it was neither a dark and gloomy world nor was it an Eden, thoughts he labeled "childish."

"I believe that going to the sources and cross-checking the sources and going to original documents. There you can find solvent reasons to defend the totality or the generality of the Hispanic action. Because it was not only Spanish, immediately those born in America were the ones who developed those that were not colonies at all. They were cities, with similar institutions and appearance," Vélez pointed out.

"It is estimated that 40,000 ritual sacrifices a year were practiced in the Mexica empire."

Ignacio Bracht, historian and journalist.

Similar was the position of historian and journalist Ignacio Bracht, who stressed that the common denominator between those who promoted the Black Legend in the past and those who do so in the present is the hatred they have for Spain.

"The Black Legend was a propaganda machine that undoubtedly had an effect and that Spain until not many years ago had assumed with guilt. What happens is that also in Spain, we see it up to the present, there are forces that are endophobic; that is to say, they hate Spain. I make clear reference, for example, to the separatists, who hate the concept of hispanidad. Hispanidad is that unique process in the history of mankind that was the cultural and blood miscegenation that gave a common worldview on one side and the other side of the Atlantic," Bracht explained.

The journalist also highlighted Spain's imprint in America and emphasized that the arrival of the Spanish brought to the other side of the Atlantic a culture, a religion and a language that unites millions of people around the world.

"They bequeathed, among other things, Christianity and a language, which did not cancel out the aboriginal languages. Today, Aymara, Quechua or Guarani are still spoken in many countries. But the common language that unified us and that makes us part of the same worldview, because language is the soul of a nation, was Spanish. It is a language that was spoken from Alaska to Patagonia and that today continues to be a unifying element, spoken by more than 600 million people in the world. In fact, in the United States itself, it is spoken as a second language," Bracht mentioned.

In this sense, Bracht indicated that these elements made this empire, for 300 years, with practically no large military garrisons and no large armies, to live together in peace, almost without any problems. And that in all this juridical-political and cultural structure the races were mixed.

"This assimilation on both sides of the Atlantic, between the conquering power and the countless peoples who were conquered and evangelized in the Christian faith, lead us to the conclusion that it was not an empire that subjugated. It was an empire that expanded a faith: the Christian faith. It also consummated that magnificent fact that was the cultural and blood miscegenation that gives us an identity, a worldview and a common language that we call Hispanic".

Bracht said that the Black Legend is currently being promoted by the left and "they are beginning to claim ancestral lands as native peoples. In reality there is clearly a political objective behind it because they do not recognize the Nation-State. We are talking about radicalized sectors that do not recognize the national symbols either. And one can clearly see that this is a political orchestration".

He referred directly to the president-elect of Mexico, Claudia Sheinbaum, who assured that the Spanish Empire must apologize to the indigenous peoples for the conquest:

"She would actually have to ask forgiveness, if she is self-perceived Mexica, to all the peoples that at the time the Spaniards arrived, at the time Cortés arrived in what is now Mexico, the Mexica territory was a very limited territory in Mesoamerica, but a very hardened, very expansive people that had subjugated a number of peoples. In those cultures they had anthropomorphic gods, practiced ritual sacrifice and cannibalism. This is what dismantles the whole black legend. How can one suppose that Hernán Cortés with 400 Spaniards would take Tenochtitlan, an empire or a territory inhabited by 2 million Mexica? When Hernán Cortés takes Tenochtitlan he goes in alliance with the different Mesoamerican peoples who see Cortés as the possibility of putting an end to that judgment they were suffering at the expense of the Mexica empire."

"So, the conquest of Mexico was not really carried out by the Spaniards. It was done by the Mexican people themselves, led by a group of Spaniards, who, in addition to bringing the faith of Christianity, put an end to the ritual sacrifices. It is estimated that 40,000 ritual sacrifices a year were practicedin the Mexica empire", he added.

Finally, Ignacio Bracht asserted that the way to confront the pretensions of the left to do away with the legacy of Spain in Americaand break with the historical ties that unite both hemispheres is precisely by highlighting the culture, values and traditions that unite Spain with Hispanic America.

"That is the great value that Hispanidad has and that we must reaffirm ourselves in it. Defend it. Because it is what identifies usas what we are."

"After examining hundreds of bones and documents, it can be affirmed that Christopher Columbus was Jewish," explained RTVE which shows the research findings in a documentary entitled Columbus DNA, his true origin. Along with this, it is speculated that he was a convert or that he kept his hidden Hebrew religion hidden in public.

According to the information, the discoverer of America was neither Genoese nor Italian, which is the main hypothesis of his birth supported by most historians and the Royal Academy of History of Spain. José Antonio Lorente argues that Columbus was a Jew from the Spanish Mediterranean, which stretched from the coast of the Levant to the island of Sicily:.

"DNA indicates that Christopher Columbus had a Mediterranean origin in the western Mediterranean. Of course, what happens? That if there were no Jews in Genoa in the 15th century, the chances of him being from there are minimal. Nor was there a large Jewish presence in the rest of the Italian peninsula, which would leave it very tenuous. There are no solid theories or clear indications that Christopher Columbus could be French. What would we be left with, the Spanish Mediterranean arc. The Balearic Islands and Sicily. But Sicily would also be strange, because if not Christopher Columbus would have written with some Italian or Sicilian language features, so it is most likely that its origin is in the Spanish Mediterranean arc or in the Balearic Islands, which at that time belonged to the Crown of Aragon.

This is the same research that confirmed that the remains buried in the Cathedral of Seville are those of Christopher Columbus. The research brings a definitive conclusion to another of history's greatest enigmas and sheds light on the past of this historical figure. The past and actual location of Columbus' eternal resting place has been the subject of much debate among the scientific community until now.

The team of researchers assures that there is absolute reliability regarding the conclusions drawn from the analysis of the remains buried in the Cathedral of Seville, Spain. In that place, although well after his death, the presumed remains of the explorer were buried.

The researchers recalled however, that under the crypt of the Cathedral of Seville there is not a complete human skeleton, which could indicate that the rest of the parts are in the Dominican Republic, as this country has been claiming for years.

The analysis of the bones that rested in the Sevillian temple could not be analyzed previously, due to the little genetic material it contained. The use of new technologies made it possible to carry out the studies only recently.

Society

Spanish study confirms that Christopher Columbus is buried in the Cathedral of Seville

Juan Peña

It is a tradition that has been celebrated for at least 56 years. Its origin dates back to 1968, when George W. Brown, a member of the House of Representatives, first proposed that the country formally recognize Hispanic contributions through a law that would authorize the president to proclaim National Hispanic Heritage Week each year, around September 15-16.

Brown's initiative was backed by Hispanic-American congressmen Edward R. Roybal and Henry B. Gonzales and seventeen other legislators, totaling 13 Democrats and 6 Republicans. In that sense, as recalled by National Geographic, President Lyndon Johnson, who was a teacher at a small Hispanic school, signed the resolution and that same day issued the first National Hispanic Heritage Week proclamation.

"Two decades later, in 1988, President Ronald Reagan proposed extending the celebration to a 30-day period, from September 15 to October 15 each year. This consolidated the Hispanic Heritage Month that is celebrated today," the specialized magazine reported.

The holiday is celebrated on September 15 to coincide with the commemoration of the national independence anniversaries of several Hispanic countries: Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua, which recognize this date as their independence day, while Mexico's is celebrated on September 16 and Chile's on September 18.

Culture

Oct. 12, the day that kick-started the creation of the modern world

Williams Perdomo

In the United States, Latinos leave their mark with their Hispanic heritage. They are a human force that is a pillar of the nation and a fundamental piece in its prosperity and cultural diversity. From Felipe de Neve, founder of the city of Los Angeles, to designer Carolina Herrera, the Hispanic community is a driving force in the growth of American society.

And most importantly, it maintains pride in its Hispanic roots. That is reflected in the fact that most speak Spanish today and consider it important for the next generation to maintain their language, according to a Pew Research study:

A majority of Latinos (65%) say it is very important that future generations of Latinos in the United States speak Spanish, including one-third who say it is extremely important. That is, 85% say it is somewhat important. Only 5% say it is not at all important.

Society

One in four US children is of Hispanic origin

Santiago Ospital

Hispanics account for more than 19% of the U.S. population, according to the Census Bureau. By 2060, they are projected to equal 27.5% of the population. From 2021 to 2022, the Hispanic community residing in the country grew by one million.

So this September 15, more than 60 million of us will celebrate our Hispanic heritage. Happy Hispanic Heritage Month!

According to El Nuevo Herald, the Spanish Army that supported the Americans was composed of "Cubans, Mexicans, Puerto Ricans and Venezuelans, probably the first time that Hispanics fought on American soil, in defense of the United States, along with free blacks and slaves."

Every 4th of July is celebrated as the country's Independence Day. A national holiday that commemorates the Declaration of Independence by the Continental Congress on that same day in 1776 and honors those who fought to achieve an independent country.

"This declaration occurred during the course of the American War of Independence (1775-1783). This war event featured the participation of Spanish troops, favorable to the thirteen North American colonies, who played a decisive role in the victory over the English," Hispanic Council explained.

The war involved Spanish troops, favorable to the thirteen American colonies, who played a decisive role in the victory over the British. Something that is recognized by the country's current leaders. President Joe Biden argued in 2022 that had it not been for Hispanic support, the United States would not be an independent country.

In Voz Media, together with Hispanic Council, we wanted to remember several of the Hispanics who risked their lives for the United States.

Juan de Miralles: Born in Alicante in 1713. He moved to Cuba in 1740 and from Havana organized trade with the American colonies. Over time, he became acquainted with the English settled on what is now the east coast of the United States. At the beginning of the War of Independence, he formed a secret service that obtained intelligence for the Americans through spies. Among those who collaborated with Miralles was Friar Antonio de Sedella, whose identity was not discovered for 50 years.

"Miralles had an excellent relationship with George Washington, who would later become the first president of the United States. An extensive correspondence between the two, found by historian Salvador Larrúa Guedes, attested to the friendship. Miralles' support was decisive when, General Washington, having run out of resources, mobilized gold worth 300 million dollars today," detailed the Hispanic Council.

Diego María de Gardoqui y Arriquibar: He is known as the first Spanish ambassador to the United States. The Spanish crown sent, at the beginning of the war, money and other resources through private merchants like Gardoqui.

In addition, Gardoqui focused on fostering a network of support and supplies for George Washington's troops. According to available data, it is known that Gardoqui managed the collection of at least 18,000 blankets, 11,000 pairs of shoes, 30,000 uniforms, 4,000 tents, 215 cannons, 30,000 muskets, 30,000 bayonets and 300,000 pounds of saltpeter to make gunpowder. All for a total value of 946,906 reales.

"With the end of the war and the independence of the United States, Gardoqui settled in New York, the capital of the country until 1790. He was Spain's first ambassador and chargé d'affaires to the United States. His relationship with George Washington was also close. At his side, on April 30, 1789, he remained during his inauguration as president. He also attended the inauguration of St. Peter's Church, whose construction was led by the Bilbao native," said the Hispanic Council.

Similar is the story of José Moñino y Redondo, the 1st Count of Floridablanca. Moñino was in charge of guiding the foreign policy of Carlos III to strengthen the position against England and was one of the main drivers of U.S. independence.

In that sense, Hispanic Council explained that The Count created a secret plan to support the rebels to avoid the direct involvement of Spain. "He bet on allowing the docking of American ships in the ports of the Mississippi controlled by Spain. In addition, he sent arms, money and uniforms to the combatants," the organization indicated.

Finally, the most repeated Hispanic name in the history of U.S. Independence is that of Bernardo de Gálvez. He is one of the eight honorary citizens of the United States. Considered as the most important Hispanic in the historical feat. Gálvez was governor of Louisiana from 1776. Gálvez prevented the English from conquering the southern United States.

"With the official entry of the Spanish crown into the contest, Gálvez became involved in the defense of the North American territory from the British offensive. He quickly and simply defeated at Manchac, succeeded at Baton Rouge and soon set his sights on Florida to open fronts for the British and disperse their efforts," the Hispanic Council detailed.

Gálvez's influence has been recognized in the history of the United States. In fact, the Founding Fathers approved a resolution in Congress to honor him by hanging one of his portraits in the Capitol in Washington, D.C. However, this promise was not fulfilled until 231 years later, in 2014.

Although the Tea Mutiny of 1873 is usually considered historically as the starting point of the conflict with Great Britain, the first fighting did not take place until April 1875. After just over a year of war, the Colonies convened a Continental Congress in Philadelphia, at which Richard Henry Lee, of Virginia, introduced what is known as the Lee Resolution, in which he noted that "these united colonies are and by right ought to be free and independent states," acting under the instructions of the Virginia Convention. The document was divided into three parts: a declaration of independence, a call to form foreign alliances, and "a plan of confederation." The Congress created three separate committees to develop each of these aspects.

History

July 4: Declaration of Independence

José María Marco

The drafting of a declaration of independence was left to five men: Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Robert R. Livingston and Roger Sherman, who immediately set to work. Jefferson was charged with drafting the text with the group's ideas, and after several drafts -in which Franklin and Adams introduced modifications- they presented the final document to Congress.

July 2 or July 4?

The latter approved the Formal Declaration of Independence from Great Britain on July 2 unanimously, after a first vote a day earlier in which the representatives failed to agree -some even still trusted in a reconciliation with the British- however, the Resolution of the five was not voted until two days later: July 4. This caused some of those involved, like John Adams, to consider July 2 as the true Independence Day and thought it would be the date that would pass into posterity. Thus he wrote in a letter to his wife:

"The second day of July, 1776, will be the most memorable epoch in the history of America. I am convinced that it will be celebrated by future generations as the great anniversary festival..... It should be solemnized with pomp and pageantry, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires and illuminations from one end of this continent to the other from this time and forever."

John Adams

However, the Fourth of July is the day that finally passed into history and subsequent calendars. Congress felt that given the importance of what was decided the citizenry should be solemnly informed that they would be part of an independent country. And, given the technology of the time, the printing of the 200 copies stipulated took two days. The originals - 26 of which remain - came off the press of publisher John Dunlap two days later, which is why the Declaration has the words "In Congress, July 4, 1776" at the top. To further complicate the choice of the day to celebrate, the document was not signed by all until August of that same year.

In addition to the day, two different models of celebration were discussed: on the one hand, the Federalists proposed following Adams' idea of a great national holiday, while another faction, led by Jefferson, preferred a more intimate commemoration: "For ourselves, we leave the annual return of this day to refresh forever our memories of these rights, and an undiminished devotion to them."

On the date in 1981, the man who had taken office more than two months earlier left a speech conference at the Hilton Hotel in Washington, D.C., greeted his followers and headed to his car to resume his itinerary. However, his path was interrupted by several shots fired by John Hinckley Jr. Although the Secret Service tried to protect him, one of the .22 caliber bullets ricocheted off the car and entered under Reagan's left armpit.

Years later, we learned that Hinckley had been camouflaged among a group of admirers that the Secret Service mistakenly let within 15 feet of the "leader of the free world" without prior examination. As a result, agent Timothy McCarthy, policeman Thomas Delahanty and press secretary James Brady suffered gunshot wounds. The former stood between the bullets and his boss, receiving six of them, and the latter suffered permanent damage.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1774067660709318769

On the brink of death, but with a sense of humor

Once inside the vehicle, Reagan began to cough up bright and somewhat frothy blood, so he was immediately taken to George Washington University Hospital. According to what he later confessed, the assailant thought this action would impress actress Jodie Foster, which was far from the case.

Once at the hospital, the diagnosis was not very promising. The president had a broken rib, a punctured left lung and severe internal bleeding. Upon examination, the doctor cut off his custom-made suit, worth an estimated $1,000, earning him an ironic rebuke from the head of state.

Although his condition required surgery, it did not detract from the president's characteristic sense of humor. Before the operation, he told the doctors: "Please tell me you're Republicans." Laughing, one replied, "Today, Mr. President, we're all Republicans."

Politics

The "hero in history": 20 years after the death of Ronald Reagan

Joaquín Núñez

Politics

Reagan, Obama, Trump, Biden, and more: the best moments from the State of the Union addresses over the years

Joaquín Núñez

A little-known infection that could have been more lethal than the gunshot wound

Although his blood pressure was so high that he had to be treated with intravenous fluids, oxygen, tetanus toxoid and chest tubes, the doctors's quick action managed to save the president's life. Another factor that helped keep him alive was Reagan's excellent physical condition, as an average man his age might not have been able to withstand the procedure.

Hours later, First Lady Nancy Reagan was allowed to visit the man she married in 1952. When she arrived at his room, a good-humored Ronald said, "Honey, I forgot to duck." This subtle joke triggered first a punch from his wife and then a comforting hug.

While few things can sound more devastating than being shot, Reagan came closest to death from a gunshot-related infection. As revealed by James Baker in 'Work hard, study, and keep out of politics!', "something that didn't get much press was the president's post-operative infection." "It was serious, frankly, and we might have come closer to losing him to the infection than to the shooting itself," he wrote.

The other face of two fierce political rivals

The commander-in-chief was hospitalized for 12 days before he could return to work. During that time, no one besides Nancy, his children, or a cabinet official was allowed to see him. Max Friedersdorf, head of congressional relations, stood guard at his bedside to scare people away.

To his surprise, a well-known gray-haired man came to the hospital one night and demanded to see the president. It was Thomas Tip O'Neill, speaker of the House of Representatives, who led the opposition to Reagan before he took office and then during his term. It took Baker's intervention to get O'Neill in to see the president.

Far from what one might expect from two bitter political adversaries, they experienced a very intimate moment that put politics aside. "It was quite touching. Tip knelt by the bed and said a prayer for the president, held his hand, kissed him and they said a prayer together, the psalm of 'walking beside still waters,'" Friedersdorf recalled in an interview.

"They never talked much, but I heard him say, 'God bless you, Mr. President. We're all praying for you.' The president, who was sedated, said, 'I appreciate you coming, Tip.' The speaker sat by his bedside and held his hand for a long time," he added.

A clean slate

Indeed, once the hospitalization period was over, Ronald Reagan returned to work. His health improved rapidly, and two weeks later, he spoke in front of Congress, where he expressed his gratitude for the messages of affection he received. He even took the courage to read a letter Peter Sweeney, a 7-year-old boy, sent him. "Mr. President, you'd better get well quick, or you'll have to make your speech to Congress in your pajamas."

According to Paul Kengor, author of "The Pope and the President," Reagan believed that one of the reasons he survived was that God had a greater purpose in store for him. According to the author, this was to defeat communism, or, in Reagan's words, "the evil empire."

Ultimately, the head of state finished his term, won a second term, and even indulged in jokes about the situation. In May 1987, while giving a speech in West Berlin, a balloon burst, resembling the sound of a bullet. Reagan paused for a moment and celebrated, "Missed me."

For decades, March 30, 1981, stood as the last time a sitting president nearly died in office. It took 43 years until July 13, 2024, when Donald Trump narrowly survived a gunshot wound in Butler, Pennsylvania.

That tragedy was one of the worst of humanity. Nearly 200,000 were killed, 350,000 were injured and more than 1.5 million were displaced and homeless.

This time, however, Haiti made headlines around the world not because of a historic natural disaster or an assassinated president but because of an armed rebellion led by the bloodthirsty local gangs that control 80 to 90 percent of Port-au-Prince. This new crisis of violence led Prime Minister Ariel Henry to resign from office. He is now in exile.

The leader of this criminal revolution is none other than Jimmy Cherizier, known as "Barbecue." The former police officer turned gang leader has been accused by the United Nations and the United States of orchestrating deadly attacks against civilians. Now “Barbecue,” who heads the armed group “G9 Family,” has made himself out to be the liberator of Haitians. He even managed to overthrow Henry after Moïse was killed in 2021.

At that time, the gang leader, who was very close to Moïse, stated: “We have chosen to take our destiny into our own hands. The battle we are fighting will not only overthrow Ariel's government. It is a battle that will change the entire system.”

But how did Haiti become a leaderless failed state dominated by gangs?

There was a long road to get to this point.

An independence weighed down by harmful foreign factors

The Clinton family and international NGOs were not the only “allies” that weighed down Haiti from 2010 onwards through multimillion-dollar failed international aid that did not help the country rebuild after the earthquake.

The history of this Caribbean nation, discovered by Christopher Columbus, has proven that Haiti's "friends" were detrimental to the development of this small country, which was not always in bad shape.

The Spanish described Haiti as a paradise for its pleasant climate, its agricultural wealth, its extensive forests and its productivity. However, Europeans brought diseases with them with they came over which would end up killing the native people over time. They were replaced with slave labor brought from Africa. In those years, Haiti, the jewel of the Caribbean, was recognized for its vast resources, although they were exploited by foreign powers.

In 1804, after decades of colonization, Haiti became independent and was founded as the first black republic in the world. A brutal process of warlike independence was successfully carried out at the same time as the French Revolution.

The Haitian revolution, which began in 1791, preceded the rest of the wars for independence in Latin America. The intense hatred that Black slaves had toward their white masters manifested after decades of oppression. The war, which lasted 13 years and had many complex phases involving different powers and social classes of the time, culminated with the triumph of revolutionary leader Jean-Jacques Dessalines, who proclaimed Haiti's independence on January 1, 1804, becoming its first ruler.

Dessalines, who rose to the rank of general in the service of Governor General Toussaint Louverture, the most important political and military leader of the Haitian revolution, ordered the ethnic cleansing of white Creoles in Haiti. It was one of his first measures and it is estimated that between 3,000 and 5,000 people were killed, leaving the country practically without whites.

But in Port-au-Prince, it is often said that this great independence victory for Haiti was, in reality, the beginning of centuries of debt, underdevelopment and ultimately, misery.

France, taking advantage of the fact that the world order feared that Haiti's independence process could become an anti-slavery beacon for the colonies of other powers, orchestrated a geopolitical movement that would condemn Haiti to underdevelopment.

According to a BBC report, to achieve some recognition in the international community, the then Haitian president Jean-Pierre Boyer signed an agreement with the French country in 1825 that would burden his nation for more than a century: The Royal Ordinance of Charles X.

The pact, promoted by the French empire that was still threatening to recover its former colony, promised Haiti diplomatic recognition at a very high price. The country committed to a 50% tariff reduction on French imports and agreed to pay 150,000,000 francs to compensate the former colonists for the properties they had lost.

According to an article in The Times, the first installment of this compensation was six times the country's total GDP, so Haiti had to ask for loans from French banks to pay the debt. This situation plunged the country into endless debt, which was prolonged with loans to German and American financial entities.

“The country was saddled with the enormous debt burden until 1947. Last year an investigation by The New York Times calculated that the true cost of the reparations paid was $21 billion, more than the nation’s 2023 economy. Research by the University of North Carolina School of Law has estimated that without the debt Haiti’s economy could now be reasonably expected to be six times bigger, placing it on a par with its far more successful neighbor, the Dominican Republic," reads The Times.

The consequences of this debt were profound. Carolyn Fick, an expert on Haiti at Concordia University in Canada, told the BBC that the compensation payments “literally paralyzed the ability of Haitians to invest in infrastructure, public education and the general functioning of government services.”

That is to say, independence was extremely expensive for Haiti. Throughout the 19th century, the country's political and social unrest never allowed it to generate stability. More than 20 dictators came and went from power without achieving an established order for future generations.

In fact, Haiti earned the reputation of being a tremendously uncivilized nation, where cannibalism, human sacrifices and dangerous mystical rites were, according to reports, daily occurrences.

Going into the 20th century, France was no longer Haiti's main “ally." The United States stepped in to safeguard the interests of American corporations that had assets in the country, which Democratic President Woodrow Wilson argued was necessary at the time.

Seeing that Haiti struggled to pay back its debts to American financial entities, the United States occupied the Caribbean nation from 1915 to 1934, in one of the longest military occupations in the country's history.

The invasion was sold by the State Department as a necessary step to “civilizing” the country. It was also a way to avoid a potential German invasion. The truth is it occurred under strong pressure from Wall Street in general and National City Bank in particular, the entity that later became Citigroup.

“Under heavy pressure from National City Bank, Citigroup's predecessor, the American elbowed French aside and became the dominant power in Haiti for decades to come,” reads the pages of The New York Times. which cited reports from U.S. officials. “The United States dissolved Haiti's parliament at gunpoint, killed thousands of people, controlled its finances for more than 30 years, shipped a big portion of it to bankers in New York and left behind a country so poor that the farmers who helped generate the profits often lived on a diet 'close to starvation level,' United Nations officials determined in 1949, soon after the Americans let go of the reins.”

Historians still debate the legacy of the American invasion and how it shaped Haiti's sociopolitical situation for decades to come. Despite the reported abuses, the occupation wasn't all bad. During this time, Haiti made some tangible infrastructure improvements. Hospitals were built, along with 800 miles of roads. The country's public administration also became more effective.

However, what good were these improvements in historical terms? The answer is clear: very little.

The rise of 'Papa Doc,' Haiti's most brutal tyrant

Since colonial times, Haiti has been closely culturally linked to voodoo. But it was not until the second half of the 20th century, under the regime of François Duvalier, that voodoo became an effective method to implement social terror from the government.

Duvalier, also known as Papa Doc, stands out as the figure who wielded the greatest influence over the decades of misery that have plagued Haiti until the present day.

Duvalier was a fascist tyrant, in every sense of the word. He repressed those who opposed him. He employed fearsome torture methods and public executions against conspirators. The first execution took place 66 years ago, on July 28, 1958, when five American mercenaries supported by Haitian Army officers tried to overthrow the then-elected president who had only been in power for about 12 months.

The coup d'état failed, and thereafter, Duvalier tightened his grip with an iron fist leveraging a mystical aura rooted in voodoo to instill fear and cultivate followers.

The story goes that Duvalier, who came from a family of farmers, was intelligent and gifted in manipulation skills. This was evident from a young age. He studied medicine at the University of Haiti. He worked to fight against typhus, malaria and other diseases. He became famous and earned the nickname Papa Doc.

His years as a doctor led him to serve as Director General of Health and in 1949 for the Ministry of Health and Labor. Finally, in 1957, amid much political upheaval, he became president in the only election that he would legitimately win. His campaign appealed to the rift between Afro-Haitians (lower social class) and mulattoes (the elite).

Although in his first months, he demonstrated serenity by sticking to his campaign promises to improve the quality of life of those who were less fortunate, the first attack against him marked the beginning of his political shift. Duvalier, who already had a reputation for using unconventional medical practices rooted in voodoo, began to generate a mystical personality cult.

He latched onto voodoo to generate more popularity among Afro-Haitians and went so far as to say that he was an 'oungan,' the equivalent of a voodoo priest. One image that is forever etched into the minds of Haitians was when he imitated the spirit of 'Baron Samedi' (deity of death and cemeteries in the voodoo pantheon). He wore sunglasses and imitated the spirit using a nasally voice.

Of course, Duvalier achieved his goal of making Haitians fear him.

His mystical delirium was so great that Papa Doc even took credit for the death of John F. Kennedy. He claimed he cast a voodoo spell after the Democratic leader decided during the Cold War not to support the dictator and finance the Haitian dissidence.

Voodoo was not his only method used to achieve social control. Duvalier was the target of several attacks and his children were the victims of attempted kidnappings. This led Duvalier to create a repressive force, an alternative to the Army and the police that was known as the “tontons macoutes.” The group was made up of ruthless, untrained criminals who tried to intimidate, persecute, torture and kill anyone who acted out against Duvalier.

An article in La Vanguardia states that “Imbued with voodoo beliefs, these militias acted convinced of their superior mission." Duvalier remained in power, establishing a kind of family monarchy.

Duvalier's battle with diabetes finally cost him his power in 1971.

His legacy was bloody. It is estimated that, under his regime, 30,000 people were murdered. Civilians, soldiers and political opponents died. No one was safe from Papa Doc. He designed the Haitian Constitution and declared that his son, Baby Doc, would succeed him in office. Baby Doc became president for life at the age of 19.

Duvalier's son, who was said to have been a poor student with little interest in politics, not only inherited the position left to him by his father but also his father's way of ruling. Haiti remained a tyranny for 15 more years until Baby Doc was overthrown by General Henri Namphy's military coup.

Baby Doc was exiled to France. He took with him a fortune estimated at $1.2 billion, a figure that, at the time, exceeded Haiti's foreign debt.

That year, after his son was overthrown, François Duvalier's body was dug up by an angry crowd. The tyrant's crypt was destroyed and his remains were beaten in what appeared to be a voodoo ritual.

The Duvalier dictatorship was completely immoral. It will be remembered for being a regime of terror. It impoverished the country and was full of corruption. When Papa Doc died, Haiti was still the poorest country in the region, the lowest ranked in literacy rates, and had one of the worst health systems on the continent. All his promises were forgotten and his legacy meant decades of delay for a country that was already a century behind in paying its foreign debts.

A turbulent “democratic” era

With the Duvaliers out of office, many thought that, perhaps, it was time for Haiti to rise from its ashes. However, the democratic era after 1986 was far from working.

Although Haiti achieved political stability, the country was still plagued with economic failure, coups d'état, political repression and corruption. The country seemed to be condemned to eternal underdevelopment.

In these almost four decades, Haiti has fallen back on old vices of the past. Now, bloodthirsty gangs have taken over the country amid natural disasters, humanitarian crises and an absolutely devastated country that has no respect for life.

According to the United Nations, in 2023 homicides increased by 119.4% compared to 2022. That year 4,789 people were killed, including 465 women, 93 boys and 48 girls. In 2023 alone, 8,081 people were victims of gang violence, according to UN data.

Perhaps Papa Doc, one of the men who contributed most to Haiti's misery, was right when he said, “Haitians are destined to suffer.”

Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov was born in Simbirsk, now known as Ulyanovsk (one will find no Hitler am Inn in Austria), on April 22, 1870 to a wealthy family that ended up unsettled. In 1886, the father, a member of the civil servant nobility, died, and in 1887, the son Alexander, who wanted to kill Tsar Alexander for the sake of the People's Will (this was the name of his terrorist organization), was killed. In that same year, Volodya (Vladimir's nickname), a brilliant student at the University of Kazan, was expelled from the university for taking part in minor protests and for being his brother's brother. He was deported to Kokushino; read Marx, joined the People's Will, and fueled hatred and resentment. By 1888, he was back home.

He graduated with honors in law and practiced as a lawyer for a short time. It was not not his thing. His thing was politics, the Revolution.

In 1900, he went into exile and remained there until 1905. In those five years, he came to adopt the pseudonym "Lenin" (apparently inspired by the Siberian Lena River) and wrote his famous novel "What Is to Be Done?" where this heretic-burning fanatic laid the foundations for the heretic form of Marxism known as Marxism-Leninism. He attended the momentous Second Congress of the Russian Social Democratic Party, held in London in 1903, where his ideas on how to make the revolution generated the division, which later turned bloody, between the Mensheviks and the Bolsheviks, the latter a (very slim) majority, which was actually the meaning of the term "Bolshevik" in Russian.

The 1905 Russian Revolution caught this sinister know-it-all so off guard that he did not have the chance to latch on. He was also caught off guard by the revolution of 1917 and the fall of the Tsar. According to British historian Paul Johnson (be sure to read his "Modern Times"):

He was so quick to move in times of turbulence because he had no hesitation, no mercy, no humanity. In 1891, he was a nobody in the city of Samara. He refused to participate in a campaign to help the hungry there – who must have been part of the legion, considering that it was one of the worst famines in Russian history. (between 400,000 and 500,000 deaths) – because hunger had "numerous positive consequences," as he told a friend and was recorded in the shocking "Black Book of Communism":

God, had not just died, despite what Nietzsche had said. Lenin, the son of the devout Ilyá Nikolayevich Ulyanov, wanted to finish Him off and exterminate His servants (2,961 priests, 1,962 monks and 3,447 nuns murdered in 1922 alone).

Hunger would come again, this time with Lenin in power. However, this time it was much worse, simply unspeakable, and caused by his criminal policies. The famine of 1921-22 affected about 27 million people, killing between 3 and 5 million. The following is an excerpt from a letter he addressed to the Politburo on March 19, 1922 and cited in "The Black Book of Communism":

***

"In February 1917 the path to freedom opened before Russia. Russia chose Lenin," wrote Vasili Grossman in the memorable "Everything Flows." The phrase is catchy, but it is not true. Russia did not choose Lenin. Lenin did not come to power through a popular uprising but through a coup d'état, which murdered Liberty in the cradle ("Currently there is no country in the world as free as Russia," Lenin himself said in April of the decisive year 1917, as Christian Jelen recalls in his essential "L'aveuglement" ("The Self-Delusion"):

Lenin, a putschist (Johnson: "The real tragedy of the Leninist Revolution ... is that it revived a savage national method of government which was actually dying out quite fast"), knew that his rule could only be imposed through terror, which is why he immediately (December 1917) created the abominable All-Russian Extraordinary Commission, known as the Cheka or VCheka, to combat counter-revolutionaries and and sabotage. Johnson again:

There are those who estimate the number of state enemies murdered by the Cheka at 200,000. The commission later became known as the State Political Directorate (GPU) in 1922. Lenin did not protect the Cheka, it was that he protected it from the criticism of the intelligentsia so that terror was shown to be a "necessity," as he wrote in 1922 to Dimitri Kursky, who was serving as the commissioner of justice. "We must openly ... espouse a politically just principle that is the essence and motivation for terror, showing its necessity and its limits. The courts must not end the terror or suppress it in any way. ... They must give it a solid basis, and clearly legalize all its principles without any form of deception or deceit," also from "The Black Book of Communism."

The tsarist regime shot 3,932 people in the 92 years between 1825 and 1917. Leninism had already surpassed that figure in March 1918, just four months after taking power.

***

Lenin and Terror and Lenin and War. World War I made him who he was, the first totalitarian dictator in the century of mass death. He was against Russia's participation WW1, but not out of pacifism, rather out of tactics. He wanted war not between nations, but within nations. That ensured that Russia – which had between 1.7 and 3 million soldiers and between 1.5 and 3 million civilians killed – continued to bleed. The civil war (1918-20) unleashed by the Bolsheviks resulted in 2 million soldiers (from the White and Red armies) and 2 million civilians dead, and perhaps another two million exiled.

***

Fortunately, Lenin died an ugly death: three heart attacks in two years, his body paralyzed, mute, perhaps syphilitic. He ended up bitter, angry from not being able to continue his reign; like Hitler, accusing his people of not having lived up to the task. His reign of terror came to an end in Gorky on Jan. 21, 1924. Contrary to his wishes, he was embalmed and left him exposed forever and ever in the mausoleum in Red Square that bears his name.

“Lenin died. But Leninism did not die,” wrote the great Vasily Grossman:

What was initially called Pueblo de Nuestra Señora la Reina de los Ángeles, on the Porciúncula River, began with just 14 families gathered around a small settlement that the Spanish monarchy ordered to be built to strengthen its position on the west coast.

(Wikimedia Commons)

Spain threatened

Spain was under siege. It has just ceded Florida to England in order to keep Havana. Furthermore, the Spanish ambassador in Saint Petersburg, Viscount de la Herrería, notified the monarchy that Emperor Peter III of Russia intended to carry out another military stunt against the ports of the west coast of Spanish California.

To slow him down, the Spanish monarch Charles III ordered the creation of new coastal settlements in the general command of the west, from Baja California to what is now the Shasta-Trinity National Forest.

An Andalusian soldier

They needed people to build these settlements. That's when Felipe de Neve appears. His family had roots in Seville and he was born in the city of Bailén (Jaén). His father was an artilleryman. He joined the Spanish infantry at the age of 20 and later became a cavalry officer. He served in the Seven Years' War against Portugal and achieved an exceptional service record.

When the military corps of New Spain, founded by Juan de Villalba, called for more officers to join in the defense of the viceroyalty, Felipe de Neve decided to embark on what he thought would be a four or five-year mission. He was wrong. He would never return to Europe or see his wife and children again.

On the first day of November 1764, the then-sergeant major arrived at the port of Veracruz, in present-day Mexico. His first task was to organize the cavalry corps and with them suppress a revolt of Jesuits, who continually disagreed with the Spanish monarchy on the affairs of the viceroyalty. The Jesuits were replaced by the Franciscans and it was at this time that Brother Junípero Serra, founder of 15 religious missions who evangelized a significant part of California, made a name for himself.

Governor of California

Over the next ten years, Felipe de Neve took part in different campaigns. In 1974 Viceroy Bucareli de Arzúa named him colonel and fourth governor of the Californias. When he arrived in Loreto, the then-capital of Baja California, de Neve found himself in a tough predicament. Supply routes were in poor condition. There was a small population and a very small military presence that was generally poorly equipped. There was also a growing threat from the Apache and Comanche tribes. According to the files consulted by the Hispanic Council, Felipe de Neve only had 146 men-at-arms to control more than 0.7 square miles and 620 miles of coastline. That is practically four times the size of Spain.

Felipe de Neve was a fantastic manager and politician. He managed to substantially improve the situation of the inhabitants of the Californias and reinforced Spain's position. Faithful to one of the most important missions, he founded a good number of settlements, but one in particular that he is remembered for is Los Angeles.

How Los Angeles was founded

In 1781 de Neve arrived at what is now Los Angeles and deemed it suitable for building a settlement. "Lots of easy-to-drink water and beautiful lands," according to the files cited by the Hispanic Council. He asked the viceroy for at least 60 fieldmen without vices or defects. Afterward, he offered each new settler a monthly salary of 116 pesos a year for two years, reduced to 70 for three more. He subsidized farm and work animals and families gradually arrived.

Los Angeles then began with 14 totally heterogeneous families. There were Iberian Peninsulars, such as mestizos, mulattoes and indigenous converts. Little by little the colony grew. It took in a good number of indigenous people who converted to catholicism. Diversity almost became the norm and mixed marriages were common in the settlement.

The Spanish under the command of Felipe de Neve designed Los Angeles in a way that is still noticeable today. They were guided by the Laws of the Indies and the new manuals and the streets were designed in a grid formation. In less than nine years, the city increased in size and in 1790 the 141 inhabitants of the colony were counted for the first time.

Few details are known about how and where exactly Felipe de Neve died. It is believed that his remains were in the Mexican city of Chihuahua until the 1980s when the mayor of Los Angeles asked that they be returned to the city. Unfortunately, they were lost and there is no record of their current whereabouts.