Annex Mexico?

OK, I heard on some talking head show that at some time back in ancient history the USA had considered just Annexing Mexico. (Some war or other, or some such. We won, and the question was “what now?”).

So I thought I’d like to pick up a bit of history and decided to find out about this backwater of history.

One web search on “Annex Mexico” and I’m finding out it’s not just an artifact of long ago:

“1-10 of 6,700,000 results”</a.

The United States Should Annex Mexico: An Illegal Immigrant Solution

T. Rawat, Yahoo! Contributor Network
Sep 17, 2006
It’s amazing to read of the billions of dollars poured into so-called Border Security with Mexico. Here we are, dumping copious amounts of cash into programs and technologies meant to keep out people who are truly following the American dream.
With the increasing amount of money being spent on border security with Mexico for a almost worthless cause, it makes perfect sense to try and annex Mexico. The last time the U.S. annexed a new land was in 1898 (Hawaii, Guam etc) so it’s about time we added to the U.S. holdings.

Besides, Mexican food and drink is tasty.

Oddly, I find myself giving the idea serious consideration…

End of the “Border war”. End of the “illegal alien” problem. Solves a chunk of the Social Security funding “issue” as we get a load of fresh blood into the Ponzi Scheme. Even can get a bunch of young Senoritas trained as nurses to take care of all us old geezers and solves the nursing shortage.

As we will get a load of folks “in the drug trade” inside our border and a load of folks who make a living in “related industries” voting: The “War On Drugs” would end suddenly and we’d save all that money too. The “balance of trade” would be improved markedly, and the USA could legalize the whole thing (thus ending the need for drug cartels and violence and bringing some peace to Mexico; at the same time turning many of our citizens from “criminals” into free citizens again).

Heck, we could likely become the major drug growing capital of the world. Talk about a Growth Industry!

California already wants to expand its production and “go legit”. It would be even easier with experience Mexican labor.

Looks to me like a big “win win”!

Might be a bit of trouble with the present government of Mexico. But if we leave all the present states of Mexico intact, their employees and Governors ought to be OK with it. Declare a “Mexican Administrative Zone” of the US Federal Government and put all the present Mexican Federal employees in that (keeping their President in charge) and we ought to be “good to go”.

Heck, a large part of the old folks in the USA would love to retire to Mexico anyway, and most of the kids want to go there to party on spring break anyhow.

We’ve got a giant flood of factories “just over the border”, so why not bring them “inside the border”? We’d need to have an exemption from US Labor Laws for some number of transition years. Maybe 10? 20? As the local economies adjusted.

The more I think about it, the more it “makes sense”… of a sort…

Heck, it would even make Puerto Rico feel more comfortable about being a Spanish Speaking part of the USA (kind of like Texas, Arizona, and California… don’t know about New Mexico… a lot of White Yuppies moved in there in the last few decades…)</a.

Time to Annex Mexico!
South Orange, NJ
Friday, June 08, 2007
By Alan Caruba

Since we obviously cannot safeguard our border with Mexico, it seems to me the next best choice is to annex Mexico. Let’s declare Mexico a protectorate of the United States and set about governing it in a benevolent, but self-interested way. In time, we could incorporate it as several new States.

The current illegal flow of Mexicans and Central Americans to the United States constitutes the largest diaspora in modern history. An estimated 10% of Mexico’s population of more than 107 million people is now living in the United States. About 15% of Mexico’s labor force is working in the United States and one in every seven Mexican workers migrates to the United States.

The immediate benefits of annexation are obvious. Mexico’s oil industry is its largest provider of revenue, but is very poorly managed. Its vast revenues are not benefiting the Mexican people who clearly feel compelled to emigrate to the United States. The Mexican government relies on oil income because its national tax evasion rate is more than 40%.

So there would be a bit of an “oil uplift” too…

Looks like there is even an active “petition” in favor of the idea:</a.

Annex Mexico 28 Signatures

Published by Michael Pascuzzi on Aug 17, 2008

Target: United States Government
Region: MexicoShare now:

Background (Preamble):
The United States is suffering from various economic problems and illegal immigration, problems which can easily be solved by the annexation of Mexico.

Mexico is a poor nation full of corruption and untapped resources. The result of our annexation would prove beneficial to both countries for the following reasons:

1. The US can tap oil and minerals to lower petroleum costs and fix our economy.

2. Mexicans would become US citizens and no longer have to sneak across the border for a better chance of life.

3. The US would have a much smaller border to defend.

4. Businesses would have their labor force.

5. A corrupt government would be erased and life would improve for the people of Mexico.

We, the undersigned, call on the United States Government to annex Mexico either by diplomatic or militaristic means.

Only 28 signatures so far, but you know, tiny acorns and all that… (Do they have oak trees in Mexico?… Maybe “tiny coconuts”… )

Even World Net Daily:</a.

The case for annexing Mexico
Posted: August 23, 2005
By Erik Rush

I received some interesting responses to my last column, “The case for imperialism,” in which I suggested that the War on Terror could have been prevented by the continuation of colonialist policies as practiced by the U.S. and European powers in earlier centuries, as doing so would have made the West more culturally relevant to Third World peoples by acclimatizing them to Western concepts and values.

One of the surprising aspects regarding the feedback received was that most of it reflected agreement. Granted, the idea was a bit of a stretch – there were lots of qualifiers involved, something of a “What if Hitler had never been born?” kind of postulation.

Well, looks like he was angling for an even bigger reach… Maybe we ought to annex Panama too? Oh, wait, we already did that once… Well, you know what they say “Everything old is new again!”

Due to a variety of factors (including national security), issues surrounding the U.S.-Mexico border have been in the forefront of discussion for many months. The precise number of Mexicans entering the U.S. illegally each year is impossible to accurately determine, but estimates average out to about 1 million. The motivation for the majority of illegal immigrants from Mexico is, as we are all aware by now, primarily economic.

So, I say: Annex Mexico. Handsome bribes to Vicente Fox and his underlings would no doubt bring them around to thinking it an excellent idea. As a contingency, we could probably enlist the cooperation of key players in the Mexican military fairly cheaply. A poll released on Aug. 16, 2005, by the Pew Hispanic Center indicated that more than 40 percent of Mexican adults would move to the United States if they could, so I seriously doubt there would be widespread rioting in the streets of Mexico City when the mutually agreed-upon annexation was announced.

Hmmm… 40% would MOVE. That implies even more would be fine with being part of the USA and not needing to move to get the goodies. Even 10% in the “nice to have if I don’t have to move or learn English” group and you have a positive majority in favor of “joining up”. AND THAT was in 2005, before the Drug Wars and border mayhem got even worse…

Even being discussed on Political Forum. Who knew?</a.

Some Pondering

I’m still trying to figure out what search keys to use for finding the history of when we last thought about this. Probably need some old musty politicians names… I’ll start with the Presidents during various Mexican USA wars and see if anything interesting shows up.

But for now, I find my self trying to think of why NOT to Annex Mexico and not coming up with much.

Yes, the Latin desire for Socialism would flood into the “Lower 48″… but most of the Mexicans I’ve known are more Libertarian than actual Progressives. They like being in the military. Like to party. Are interested in family and home. Usually are Catholic (at least on paper). Generally have that Calvinist “work ethic”. Only “negative”, really, is that they like government goodies. But everybody falls for that one. Even the Greeks, Russians and Italians. Heck, even the Chinese have dabbled in it (though presently running away from the worst aspects of it…)

Then, about a decade after that was “a done deal”, I’m pretty sure the various “Central American States” would join up too. Put the border back on the lower edge of Panama and have a nice integrated North American Continent…

Oh Dear…

Have to do something about Canada…

But that can wait for a while. No need to rush things. Have to see how they like the idea of passport free travel to Cancun and The Mexican Riviera… owning a “winter condo” in Costa Rica. That kind of thing…

Besides, French is almost like Spanish and I’m sure the Quebecquois would love to have more Latin Language Speakers in the mix. It would also pretty well cement the notion of individual states with their own languages. They already have to deal with 2 national languages. Making it 3 ought not to be that big a deal. Heck, just require folks to learn ‘any 2 out of 3’ in school. Then it’s a “choice” not a “mandate”. ( I’m already basically functional in all three and it’s not THAT hard. Heck, in SoCal you will hear as much Spanglish as either Spanish or English in many places. And in the Upscale New England areas, folks are always putting on fake status with using Faux French in conversations. N’est Pas?

And just think how much easier it would be to “control the border” when the only border left is Panama?

All in all, I think this idea is growing on me. It could even lead to International Peace.

As the block developes, and as the Castro Brothers finally die of old age, probably about 2034, we could even let Cuba join. Then all the Cubans living in Miami could return to visit The Old Country and all the Cubans in Cuba would be able to get a job and have a future. “win win” again…

In short order, I’d expect many of the “Island Nations” to sign up. Some would likely stay with their existing patronage agreements (like The British Virgin Islands) and some would stay out as they exist on a Tax Haven Take; but I could really see a case for Jamaica… As the ‘passport free no drug laws’ tourism dollars would be flooding to Mexico, they would ‘want to compete’, and the easiest way to do that would be “from the inside”. It would even help the poor of the “Lower 48”, as folks from Jamaica could set up shops around the country with Jamaican restaurants, floor shows, ganga counters. Bringing some of that Jamaica experience to those too poor to afford The Real Deal and a flight down.

Yes, I’m sure of it now… Clearly at the end of the day the integration of Mexico would inevitably lead to a free and independent “United States of North America – All Of It”. And that would be a good thing… I think… maybe… Do they grow coffee in Mexico? I could use more coffee right now… I know they grow it in Jamaica, but I can’t wait that long…

( Do I need to add the ;-) ?)

Subscribe to feed


About E.M.Smith

A technical managerial sort interested in things from Stonehenge to computer science. My present "hot buttons' are the mythology of Climate Change and ancient metrology; but things change...
This entry was posted in Political Current Events and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

30 Responses to Annex Mexico?

  1. George says:

    I actually proposed exactly the opposite but to create the same result. You allow Mexico to annex the US. Then we adopt the US constitution and move the capital to Washington DC. We have so many voters that it would swamp their voters in number. But allowing the initial annexation to go in the opposite direction has a certain “face saving” aspect.

    The problem with Mexico is that they have a very poor legal system.

  2. R. de Haan says:

    Hell, annex Middle and the Northern part of South America too.
    Almost the same arguments apply to make the case.

  3. Mexico is relatively inexpensive because current US laws do not apply to it. The US was, too, at one time — for the same reason.

    Just think — we’d add a continent-sized inner city to the United States, with all of the political implications of that. 110 million new Democrat-dependants, 20 million in Mexico City alone.

    We’d be replacing the difficult-to-defend land border with Mexico with a new, many times longer and more difficult to defend sea border.

    And the illegal immigration from South and Central America would be on in earnest. It is, already; they come through Mexico.

    Mexico has a tremendous number of good, hard-working, honest people. But our bread-and-circuses progressives are corrupting and emasculating our own people, and I don’t think the comparatively poor Mexicans will fare any better.

    After all, who in 1865, after the Republicans defeated the Democrats and freed their slaves, would have thought that a century later the Democrats would have enslave them again through a liberal combination of lies, anger, and subsidized victimhood? Relatively few blacks can shake this off, and deserve applause when they do.

    The big-government system is set up to produce poor results for the country, because it suits the purposes of those this places in power. Our Mexican friends would need extraordinary resolve to overcome this. Some will, of course, which is why my numbers above are not 100% of the population.

    ===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle

  4. UninterestingConnections says:

    What a wonderful idea. A whole new people for the political class to use in extracting taxes from the rest of us. 100M of them … who might even vote to tax us more and more …

    shades of the Roman Empire being overrun by rent seekers and low productivity outsiders.

  5. Pascvaks says:

    “Tierra del Fuego or Bust!”

    There’s just no other way Sénior!

    (If we had one language, maybe. It doesn’t make sense otherwise;-(

  6. dearieme says:

    “I could really see a case for Jamaica”: my God, that’s very brave of you. I had a friend whose wife was familiar with the “Caribbean communities” here in the UK the 60s: by her account their tragedy was that their youngsters, particularly the males, were attracted into the violent, nasty Jamaican culture, even when the parents were from islands with a much better way of life.

  7. R. de Haan says:

    Who ever said imperialism is dead! LOL

  8. co2fan says:

    OSHA would destroy Mexico. have you ever seen a Mexican construction project?

    Also, even if you had 80% approval of the Mexican people for an annexation, the 10% who presently run the country and live well, won’t participate and stop the move.
    (Españoles criollos or Españoles americanos)
    People who in theory were of full direct Spanish ancestry but were born in the Americas. In reality Criollos could also have some native ancestry, but this would be disregarded for families who had maintained a certain status (Wiki))

    would even be against the reverse annexation.

  9. pouncer says:

    Just start with Baja. And don’t take it, buy it. Like we did Alaska, from Russia. Or Louisiana from France.

    Small bites.

  10. George says:

    “buy it”

    With what?

  11. E.M.Smith says:

    Just a reminder, since some folks are being a bit serioso:

    “( Do I need to add the ;-) ?)”

    It would seem I do …


  12. j ferguson says:

    George:” “buy it”

    With what?”

    If I’d had a mouth full of coffee it would be on my lap. So few words, so much significance. bravo.

  13. E.M.Smith says:

    @J Ferguson & George:

    Chart of FXM, the Mexican Peso, rising lower left to upper right…

    Now THAT says a lot to me. The Mexican Peso is stronger than the US dollar and has been for at least a year…

    Maybe we could borrow some Greek Bonds to buy it with ;-)

  14. bjordan says:

    brazil too :) I want to be part of it

  15. kuhnkat says:


    there is probably more useful metal in the Mexican Peso. 8>)

    “Buy it.

    With what??”

    With the same thing our politicians have been buying us for generations, PROMISES!!

  16. George says:

    Of course the peso is rising, they aren’t just printing them (anymore) to purchase their government’s debt. The dollar should be falling against just about every currency on the planet right now except for countries who are printing currency faster than we are.

  17. H.R. says:

    Really… I’d like to include Canada, but I don’t speak Canadian ;o)


    “buy it”

    With what?
    Maybe we could swap East St. Louis for it. If that doesn’t fly we could sweeten the pot with Newark, NJ. eh?

  18. George says:

    Apparently the Zetas are massing along the Texas border and are claiming that they intend to target US citizens in Mexico over the weekend:

  19. E.M.Smith says:


    What is a “Zetas”? I’d look it up myself but I’m in mid financial analysis mode… and packing…

    Oh, and heard on Bloomberg:

    “Kenyan Shilling rising against the US dollar”…

    Next stop, …. well, I’m not sure who the next stop would be… is there someone other than African Banana Republics below Kenya? Maybe some Socialist Dictator somewhere? …

    Looks like Reuters has it too:

    “UPDATE 1-Kenyan shilling gains for third day vs dollar”

    But that was a few days ago, while the Bloomberg “crawler” was tonight…

    I think you can consider your thesis confirmed…

    UPDATE: Never Mind… I see the link tells me what a Zeta is…

  20. George says:

    From the wiki:

    Los Zetas Cartel is a criminal organization in Mexico dedicated mostly to international illegal drug trade, assassinations, extortion, car theft, and other organized crime activities. This drug cartel was founded by a small group of Mexican Army Special Forces deserters and now includes corrupt former federal, state, and local police officers, as well as ex-Kaibiles from Guatemala.

    This group of highly trained gunmen was first hired as a private mercenary army and bodyguard troupe for Mexico’s Gulf Cartel. After the arrest of the Gulf Cartel’s leader, Osiel Cárdenas Guillen, as well as other events, the two entities became a combined trafficking force, with the Zetas taking a more active leadership role in drug trafficking. Since February 2010 Los Zetas have gone independent and became enemies of its former employer/partner, the Gulf Cartel.

  21. Ralph B says:

    Mexico sounds good to me…good food, celebrate all sorts of stuff, cool hats. Canada, no way. Weird bacon, always say “eh”, besides they are going to be banging on our door when the ice man cometh.

  22. Pascvaks says:

    (SarcOn) By the last accurate U.N. estimate there were 44,356,279 illegals from Mexico in the United States and we only have 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours and 29 minutes before we will be nearly unable to stop the flow. The Think Tanks all agree that our only hope is to arrest every one of them and hold them for ransom. Doing so will permit the treasury to pay interest on the national debt for the next 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours and 29 minutes. Those in the know inside the Beltway think it’s a Win-Win Proposition. The White House has agreed to appoint a special committee to study the proposal and report to the President in 8-10 months. (SarcOff)

  23. PhilJourdan says:

    Spanish like French? Yea, right! So that is why when I start to speak spanish to my inlaws, and it comes out French (8 years of it in school), they look at me like a psycho gringo? (ok, just for you – ;)

    But one side effect that would be interesting. The combined population would be about 420m. Of that, only 220m would be white (caucausian or whatever you want to call the ones of European ancestry). Current estimates are that by 2050, White/Caucs/Euros would account for 49.7% of the population – in other words, they would be a minority. With the annexing of Mexico, that would occur about 2018. Just think of all the Affirmative Action they would be eligible for!!!!! Woowee, where is that sign up again? ;)

  24. bjordan says:

    Spanish is more like than French than both of them are in comparison with English . I’m a Portuguese native speaker and I’m relatively fluent in all four languages.

    I’ve 2

    – questions for you. what is the problem with not that much white people?
    – a person 50% black and 50% white , is not as black as is white? so that person can be a European descendent. In fact most Europeans couturiers accept 3rd generation in appliance for citizenship for blood line, that mean 12,5% European is enough to be so European that you can be accepted as a national

    I can’t understand how racist the Americans are with that a drop o blood politic.

    the said precious European blood is that weak ?

  25. E.M.Smith says:


    I think you missed the humor in the comment… we labor under an system that gives special treatment to “minorities” and ignores that white males are a minority… It’s basically a way to transfer wealth from white males to non-whites, females, and any other “special” group who can curry favor.

    Not really about “race” so much as about stupid laws.

    One example? My Niece is about as Red Headed Scandinavian Irish mix as you can get. Married a great guy who is dark hair, mostly european look. But is something like 1/2 Mexican. HER kids are of the brown hair / blond type, BUT, because of the surname are “Hispanic” so can get special favor from the government….

    Do I have a “racist” attitude about my Niece? Nope.
    Do I have a dislike of the law? Yup.

  26. George says:

    I have a friend whose daughter married a guy whose father came to the US from Spain. He has a “Hispanic” sounding name. Colleges were tripping over themselves offering him scholarships based solely on his last name. He’s no more Hispanic than I am.

  27. PhilJourdan says:

    E.M. Smith and bjordan

    One example? My Niece is about as Red Headed Scandinavian Irish mix as you can get. Married a great guy who is dark hair, mostly european look. But is something like 1/2 Mexican. HER kids are of the brown hair / blond type, BUT, because of the surname are “Hispanic” so can get special favor from the government….

    Or another example. I am french and scotch (with every other race mixed in, but mostly those). My wife’s mother emigrated from Guadalajara Mexico (before she was born). I am darker than her (she is blond as well). Yet she is a “minority” because of her spanish surname!

    But we annex mexico, and I will be a minority too!! Woo Hoo! ;)

    BTW: bjordan – French and Spanish (and Portugese) are from the same root (latin). But the French sure changed a lot! While not fluent in Spanish, I do understand about 50% of what is spoken, but my brain goes into French when I try to speak it! I use to work with a lady who was born in Mexico City. She would often be called upon to translate for Spanish speakers. One day she was called in to translate for a Brazilian, and she came back shaking her head! Claiming she did not understand any of it (although I am sure she probably could pick up some words). Your english is very good, but if I told you to “just chuck it”, would you understand that? It is slang of course, but all languages have it, and almost no one except native speakers understand it! (and just in case you do not get that reference above, it just means – let’s forget about the subject).

  28. bjordan says:

    you got me with “just chuck it” :)

    for a Portuguese speaker, Spanish is not that hard easier if you are a well educated Portuguese speaker in many ways Spanish is archaic Portuguese they use as current many words that are used some centuries ago in Portuguese. that easiness don’t go the other way around. in Portuguese we talk with more sounds that the Spanish we have more than 10 vocals Spanish has only five, and that goes away with some other letters.

    French is not a natural language as is Spanish but for it’s Latin base is much more learnable than English. grammatically spanking French is closer to the Italian than is to Portuguese ans Spanish. To really understand French I needed to do some classes. the language is different but the way they think the language is much closer to Portuguese and Spanish than is to English

  29. bjordan says:

    to E.M.Smith

    the racism that I’ve talked about is in the low, I bereave in all are equal before the law. and all quota low ore government money endorsement are racist if are based one races of its application.

  30. PhilJourdan says:


    French is not a natural language as is Spanish but for it’s Latin base is much more learnable than English.

    Klingon is more learnable than English! ;) English is the poor b*stard child of the world’s languages, picking up pieces from every other language. I truly admire any non-native speaker who learns the language as that shows a great capacity to learn! The only rule that works in the language is that none of the rules work very well! :)

    the language is different but the way they think the language is much closer to Portuguese and Spanish than is to English

    very true. It is very similar in structure to Spanish and Portugese, they just like to act snooty with the pronunciation. ;)

Comments are closed.