The article appears strongly biased towards idolizing Vidaurri and attacking the liberals whom he betrayed, beginning with the opening paragraph’s claim that the reason for his break with them was that he realized Juarez was only out for self-aggrandisement. Vidaurri clearly had an appetite for power and worked hard both to expand his fief and to secure it from the authority of the central government, even to the point of contemplating secession from Mexico altogether. I don’t think that necessarily makes him a villain of Mexican history; nor do I think serving as Maximilian’s finance minister makes him a villain of Mexican history. But portraying him as an unalloyed hero and champion of democracy and free enterprise, struggling against the cynical machinations of Mexico’s greatest national hero, seems completely unwarranted; and if that’s what editors of this article want to do, they’re going to need much better sources than the only one the article cites right now: a website run by a Vidaurri family member who openly states that one of his goals is to rehabilitate his ancestor’s image. Accordingly I’ve added the NPOV tag to the top of the article. Binabik80 (talk) 00:49, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
- I am the family member, and if you have read all of the letters and read my blog from cover to cover you will see that I have a bibliography page and letters supporting the facts. Furthermore, if you read General Slaughters letter you will see that it clearly states” P. S. I should tell you that I had arranged everything for the departure of Mr. Vidaurri, but he resolved not to leave until after Juarez was in place.” this means that until Juarez was secure in office, he would not leave, he would never have abandoned Mexico and left his country defenseless.
- People need to study the letters that have been compiled before they start throwing accusations. Also, he was approached twice to take on the responsibility of the Presidency and twice he declined, so much for power hungry? Someday hopefully soon there will be a credible historian who will write an accurate bio. – Anita Rivas
P.s Also, the proof as to who did more for Mexico resides in the fact that Monterrey, Nuevo Leon is the center of commerce for all of Mexico. What about the rest of Mexico, what did Juarez leave behind exactly but corruption and poverty. Dn. Santiago Vidaurri never committed crimes against humanity or his country.
The truth is that Mexican history in itself is biased, no one ever brings up the fact that Benito Juarez was a corrupted politician who filled his bank accounts with Mexico’s money by selling off pieces of land,condoning bribery, and taxing the poor. I am livid because this is personal to me.
The problem with my writing is that I am not a historian of genealogist, I am a family member and I’m very passionate about this topic. If I were a credible historian no one would give me crap. My benefit, that I am the only real person speaking out against the corrupted Juarez regime.
As some of you may recall in a previous entry, I did say that Juarez did some good for the people, but the bottom line, Mexico is still a mess and that is what he left behind, the proof is in what he left behind and you can’t count his statues as prosperity.