It could never be imagined by the rich foreign investors in Mexico who had observed the patient and ignorant peons, that no matter how pacific, how miserable and subdued a race, the day would come when they must rebel and evolve into a daring and independent race. The same happened in France through the revolution. Read the description written by Mirabeau’s father of the savage-looking, long-haired, barefoot peasants who came down from the mountains, and the older Mirabeau’s prophetic reflections on the subject. The worst offenders and the greatest enemies to Mexican political and economic freedom were the foreigners; they always stood by the oppressors with their financial and moral influence in Mexico, in the United States and in Europe. Without this powerful help Diaz would never have lasted thirty-five years. Foreigners in Mexico were treated with a deference and were allowed privileges unknown to the average Mexican. Porfirio Diaz always raised the spectre of American intervention when he wanted to frighten restless Mexicans. The only friends of liberal Mexico were the Socialists and the organized workingmen in Europe and especially in the United States who understood from the beginning the danger of an enslaved, ill-paid proletariat across the border. The great agitation which exposed the iron rule of Diaz was helped by Socialists and the proletariat in the United States, and made it easy for Madero and his friends to plot and organize a revolution across the border. The foreign bankers, concessionaires, “friends of the friends” of General Diaz, wanted a continuation of peace at any price, even at the price of subjugation of all Mexican liberties, or if that failed, by American intervention, and as a result of it either American conquest or of American police rule as in Cuba. The successor of Diaz had been chosen by the invisible rulers of Diaz, everything about it was cut and dried, and even the list of members of the Cabinet of the successor had been drawn up. When a foreigner was asked about the economic and political rights of the Mexicans, he shrugged his shoulders and answered that Indians and niggers were not fit to rule themselves. The self-same Americans who would have started a revolution in their own country if political conditions had been as oppressive as in Mexico, spoke contemptuously of the valiant struggle of the middle class Mexicans. To my utter amazement I heard an American clergyman inform me after he had listened to a lecture of mine in favor of the Constitutionalists and the prophecy of a speedy downfall of Huerta, that he nevertheless believed Mexico needed strong men like Huerta and Diaz. Americans who invest money in Mexico cannot be blamed for being ignorant of Mexican conditions, but how about foreigners who live years in Mexico and come in daily contact with the people? Is it a wonder that Mexicans are suspicious of foreigners?