OK, so he was hanged for murder. Nobody’s perfect.
According to the University of Southern California historical archives, Tiburcio Vasquez (1835- 1875) was California’s second most notorious bandit. At the age of 14 he stabbed a constable, then embarked on a life of crime. He became the leader of his own gang, which ranged up and down central and southern California, robbing and killing. Vasquez was convicted of horse-stealing and sentenced to San Quentin prison in 1857, escaped, stole more horses, and was finally released in 1863, after playing a role in four prison breaks that resulted in the deaths of twenty inmates. For the next ten years he and his gang committed a string of burglaries, robberies and murders in the San Benito County area, finally ending with his capture in 1874. Convicted of two murders of the six attributed to him, Vadquez was sentenced to death, and executed by hanging the next year. Shortly before the noose was placed around his neck, Vasquez dictated an explanation for his actions:
“A spirit of hatred and revenge took possession of me. I had numerous fights in defense of what I believed to be my rights and those of my countrymen. I believed we were unjustly deprived of the social rights that belonged to us.”
I know what you must be thinking: “What a perfect historical figure for the Mexican-American community to honor by naming an elementary school him!” At least, that’s what the fools who run the Alisal Union School District in Salinas, California think. With angry, vengeful, gun wielding criminals shooting up elementary schools these days, the school administrators obviously believe that naming an elementary school after someone who approved of hatred and revenge as a justification for violence is timely and appropriate.
The defense offered for this hateful and arguably racist act—after all, Vasquez targeted Anglos, which is what made him popular in his day—is beyond belief. Some misguided souls in the Hispanic community view Tiburcio Vasquez as a folk hero for approximately the same reason some people regarded Jesse James, Bonny and Clyde and Adolf Hitler as folk heroes—they robbed and killed other people that their admirers didn’t like much. Nonetheless, other school districts have had the good taste and sense not to name schools after such homicidal “heroes,” and the failure of the Alisal Union School District to follow their example is the equivalent of spitting at the rule of law as well as healthy ethical standards of American society. Francisco Estrada, an approving member of the naming committee, told reporters that the convicted murderer was a really a good man and a role model to the youth of East Salinas. Estrada says Vasquez was framed, which is also what some claim about Billy the Kid, Sacco and Vanzetti and the Rosenbergs. Nobody has been so irresponsible as to name schools after them, however. “When do we stop having our heroes branded as villains?,” Estrada asked plaintively.
How about when you stop making heroes out of criminals like Tiburcio Vasquez, a desperado who killed, robbed, and admitted that he was motivated by hatred and revenge? Hatred and revenge are not ethical virtues, not heroic qualities, and not proper motives to encourage in the young, unless raising more Adam Lanzas is your objective.
District School Superintendent John Ramirez Ramirez told Fox News that Vasquez is a terrific role model for Mexican-Americans. Good to know! “When you have individuals who have been struggling for so long, dealing with oppression and systematic oppression, then you bring up leaders who have fought against resistance, of course they are going to be role models to you,” he told Fox News. “Vasquez is an individual who did that prior to us — who can be sort of a hero to us.”
No, he can’t. When there is some scholarly consensus that Vanquez wasn’t a killer and a criminal, as the record now says he was, and was really, as his admirers claim, the model for Zorro, then honors like school dedications might become responsible and reasonable. Until then, honoring him is honoring a murderer and a criminal who was duly tried and executed, no different than naming a school after John Dillinger or Al Capone, both of whom, by the way, were regarded by some as “folk heroes” while they were alive. The decision to name an elementary school after Tiburcio Vasquez at best extols violence as a remedy for social ills, and at worst celebrates murder and mayhem, as long as it is perpetrated against whites.
And by deciding to do so, this school district’s leaders have shown that they are too reckless, irresponsible and biased to be entrusted with overseeing the education of children. They are despicable. Someday, perhaps Salinas will name schools after them.
__________________________________
Pointer: The Blaze
Graphic: Vdare
Ethics Alarms 
John Dillinger never killed anyone. He was accussed of one killing but was never convicted. Some members of the Indiana Forensics Department recently determined Dillinger could not have been at the bank in East Chicago, Indiana where the slaying of a brave police officer took place. Dillinger was being pursed by Florida Police. at the time of the shooting. Keep in mind that during Dillinger’s bank robbery spree that only the individual who killed someone was accountable. In other words of members of the gang could not be tried for a murder they did not commit even if it occurred while they participated in the robbery. That is actually how the law should be today but it’s not. Before you trash someone perhaps you should do some research first. Your credibility is certainly questioned as a result of your cavalier approach.
I never said John Dillinger killed anybody, and I couldn’t care less whether he did or not, though there is a very good chance that he did. He was a notorious criminal, and I said that naming a school after Vasquez was the equivalent of naming a school after Dillinger or Al Capone. I stand by that. Arguably, naming a school after Dillinger would be worse.
Dillinger’s bank robberies would have certainly had him charged with several felony murders today, so your argument boils down to technicalities anyway. Nor do I comprehend why you are making it. Unless you intend to make the idiotic case that there should be a Dillinger High School, your post appears to be designed to defend the honor of John Dillinger. Weird.
Mr. Marshall I am not advocating that any school be named after John Dillinger. I have worked tirelessly to correct inaccurate history surrounding Dillinger. My grandmother was his sister and near her passing she asked that I try to make sure that people knew he was not a killer. It was very important to her and her father, John Sr. In speaking of her notorious brother she would always tell me and others not to romanticize or villify him. She would continue that he was a bank robber and their is no honor in stealing but he was not vicious or mean-spirited. John became quite bitter in prison for what the trial judge later stated was an inappropriate sentence. The judge, Mr. Williams, asserted he was new to the bench and was trying to make certain the citizens knew he was going to be tough on crime. Please understand that I realize that what John did was wrong and that he did indeed travel with convicted killers but in speaking with those who actually knew him as well as one of the gang members I am satisfied that he never killed anyone. My concern is that you associated my great uncle needlessly with a very poor decision by a misguided school board and administration. I believe that you will be proud to know that on behalf of my grandmother and her beloved father John Sr., a Christian elder, I have created the John Dillinger Troubled Youth Fund. The fund is a 501-3c not-for-profit corporation that works to keep kids safe and away from gangs. Additionally it’s based on thee Christian Bible. No one, even after I’m dust, can ever make money from the fund. Every cent must go to assist young people. Hopefully that will explain why I was upset with how you used John’s name. Our family is trying to turn something bad into something good. I and others feel the biggest danger our young people face our gangs. In my heart I believe you too care about youngsters and what influences them. It’s my hope that you better understand my initial response and I wish you the best in assisting our young people. Thank you for allowing me the time to clarify my initial response.
The Alisal school district’s area is directly adjacent to mine but in the same community, so I’m a tiny bit familiar with the issue. I’ve disbelievingly read most of the few published responses of a couple of their board members and their superintendent. For some reason the other board members haven’t been available.
From what I’ve read it’s apparent the individuals involved, all of whom have Hispanic surnames, believe the available published history concerning California is biased and untrue, and Vasquez should be considered a popular hero in the same vein as was Robin Hood. For the crimes he committed against his own people, which they believe were minor, they readily forgive him. And to their way of thinking he’s a folk hero who should be idolized.
I believe this is sad, bad community leadership, obviously a major ethics fail, and is more than passingly ironic because the area they represent is one of the major Mexican prison gang battlefields currently in crisis in California. They are preparing to hold up a killer, thief, robber and rapist as a person their future students should emulate. Which, for a gang area, should build up the prison population and a much shorter than normal life expectancy.
My heart breaks for the students who will be negatively impacted by this dreadful decision.
It should be noted here that Vasquez should not be compared to the legendary figure of Robin Hood. Vasquez was a murderous criminal who tried (in modern tradition!) to justify his crimes under a veil of higher motivations. It’s an old enough concept from Latin America, God knows. The real Robin Hood may have been no better. But the legend insists that his activities were centered on true patriotism and directed solely against tyranny. The crux of the matter, I think, is that while he fought mainly for oppressed Saxons under a foreign ruling class, he nevertheless worked for the return of a king who was of that same class. Many Californianos were bitter about their defeat in the Mexican War. Many still are! But they were never the victims of a despotic regime. They fought FOR one!
You are completely wrong about Tiburcio Vasquez, the “Mexican War,” and your idea that to justify “crimes under a veil of higher motivations …[is a]…Latin American Concept.” There was never such a thing as a Mexican War. What did take place, before robbing them of their country, was the murder of thousands of Mexicans upon their soil by the U.S.A. The U.S.A, which is not a Latin American country, justified these crimes with its “doctrine of Manifest Destiny.” Californios may not have been the victims of a “despotic government,” but with certainty they were victims of the Anglo Saxon greediness, love for expansion and dominion. I respect the Alisal Union Board for naming their new school Tiburcio Vasquez, a hero to the Californios. Unfortunately, while this has given many people the opportunity to revisit and correct California HIStory, five of your responders chose to repeat the history written by the conquerors. By the way, what happened to Mr. Leyva?
Unfortunately for your theory, revenge killings are still not recognized in any civilized culture as legal or ethical or virtuous, or something that should be taught to children as worthy of honor. Your version of history is one big rationalization. It makes no difference how you interpret history. Tiburcio Vasquez was a criminal. If Mexican Americans are determined to honor people like him, they should become just Mexicans, and leave our values across the border.
If you are reasonable enough to put semantics aside you would have to admit that our federal government, with our approval, has engaged in “revenge killings.” In fact, recently, we all had the chance to view one of these revenge killings on television. Oh, am sorry, I forgot this is not a civilized culture (No civilized culture would ever sanction the execution of any human being).
I agree with you, to you it makes no difference how I interpret history, because at the end of the day your view about Tiburcio Vasquez will be unchanged. Go on! Keep omitting facts if all you want to do is to arrive at the same conclusion. It is for this reason that you cannot tell me what happened to Mr. Leyva. Don Leyva shot and killed another man at Tres Pinos. While Tiburcio Vasquez was not present during this incident and had no control over Leyva, this killing was still attributed to him. This is not my version of history, but it is a fact you conveniently overlooked when you googled Tiburcio Vasquez. What am I saying! To find this information you will have to be less lazy.
I do not take offense at your last comment because this is how your kind has always behaved. I do not wish to call you a racist but by suggesting that Mexican-Americans who wish to honor heroes like Tiburcio Vasquez should stop viewing themselves as Americans and move to Mexico is extremely unethical. Comments like these do but only one thing: they serve to instigate racism. Mexican-Americans are as American as any other American. If you are incapable of tolerating other people’s views perhaps you should move to China. There it would be your way or the highway. My ancestors, after the Anglo-Americans raided Spanish pueblos, stole horses, and declared California the Bear Flag Republic, were told something similar by U.S.A naval officer Revere. He gathered all the indian chiefs who lived in California and told them: “…you have nothing to fear from us, if you do what is right…if you are faithful to your new rulers…We shall not displace you, if you act properly…you can easily learn, but you are indolent. I hope you will alter your habits, and be industrious and frugal, and give up all the low vices which you practice, but if you are lazy and dissipated, you must, before many years, become extinct (Zinn, Howard. A People’s History Of The United States. New York:HarperCollins, 2003).”
Now I wonder, did they become extinct or moved to Mexico?
1. “I do not wish to call you a racist but by suggesting that Mexican-Americans who wish to honor heroes like Tiburcio Vasquez should stop viewing themselves as Americans and move to Mexico is extremely unethical.”
Racism has nothing to do with it, though it’s a convenient way to attempt to cut off discussion when you are firing blanks and nonsense. The issue is citizenship and the rule of law. If anyone is going to be a citizen of this country, he or she is obligated to respect the laws, which means, as a bare minimum, not celebrating criminals who break them, or teaching children to do so. Obviously. Jerk.
2. Attempting to re-litigate a criminal conviction that is more than 100 years old, using bias and rumor is intellectually and historically dishonest. Defenders of this particular murderer essentially say he wasn’t a criminal because they say so. He didn’t even deny that he broke the law. He just thought he had a right to. Anyone who thinks this is an appropriate attitude in civilized society should be unwelcome anywhere—Mexico, the US, Poland, Madagascar, the Moon. Clear enough?
3. Since you are a single-issue visitor, I don’t expect you to have the grasp of basic ethics that you should have, or that a regular reader here would have, so I will patiently say this: 1) Your opening statement admits, in essence, that Tiburcio was a killer 2) Legally sanctioned capital punishment is neither a crime, nor for revenge. Your statement is ignorant. 3. The fact that someone else may engage in unethical conduct does not excuse Tiburcio, or anyone else, for their unethical conduct.
4. Quoting an America-hating bigoted demagogue like Howard Zinn is a stereotypical response from someone who reasons like you do. It was inevitable. You are a walking, talking parody.
“4. Quoting an America-hating bigoted demagogue like Howard Zinn is a stereotypical response from someone who reasons like you do. It was inevitable. You are a walking, talking parody.”
This is an excellent tactic to employ in your attempt to discredit anyone who questions your understanding of U.S.A history. I once met Dr. Zinn and had a brief dialogue with him. Also, I have read three of his works, including A People’s History of the United States, a best seller. To label Dr. Zinn, a World War II veteran, a historian, an author, and a professor, as an “American-hating bigoted demagogue” is not only repulsive but irresponsible. You Sir, on the other hand, are an incorrigible bigot who is unable to engage in a discussion while still displaying a level of decency.
I too have read Mr. Zinn. If you are going to rely on eccentric, agenda-driven, and yes, America-hating scholarship based on 1) sales 2) veteran status, 3) ability to write a book and 4) being a professor, you will place your brain at the mercy of all sorts of nut-cakes, as I’m sure you have. Zinn crammed all of a remarkable, substantially proud history into his anti American template, either because it was good business ( a niche!) or because he was emotionally scarred by his experiences in World War II. The latter I can sympathize with, but it doesn’t excuse warping generations of young Americans. It is exactly as perverse and misleading to write the history of the US giving disproportionate emphasis to the ethical misconduct and dilemmas it has had to work through as it is to ignore them. Tow wrongs don’t make a right.
I am no bigot, and I have the proper reaction to someone who assigns bigotry to the directive: Learn to be loyal to, and respect the rule of law and the culture and history of the nation you live in as a citizen, or go someplace else. There is nothing bigoted about it, but there is plenty bigoted about extolling someone who killed whites because he felt his people were aggrieved.
I do NOT discredit “anyone who questions [my] understanding of U.S.A history,” for though I graduated with honors (at Harvard) in American Government with a magna honors thesis on the character of the American Presidents, and have been a lifetime student of the history of my country for decades, I am always looking to be enlightened—but not by anyone who is deluded, warped and stupid enough to think it is reasonable, helpful, responsible, accurate, just, fair, intelligent, patriotic, or historically justifiable to name an American elementary school after a criminal gang leader who was sentenced to prison once and to hang once, based on multiple crimes of theft and violence that he justified by saying he was full of hate and anger, or by someone, like you, who would defend him. I nearly said “stoop,” as I would have to stoop to defend him, but you do not.
From what I’ve read of the late Mr. Zinn’s works, he would probably want to name a school after Tiburcio Vasquez too. Meanwhile, if you are not typical of the clones of the 60’s hippie pacifist “Amerika” haters who Zinn’s warped histories attracted to his cult, you would be the first one I’ve encountered who breaks the mold. Every time, almost, that someone comes on board here and begins spouting the “America is a racist, evil, imperialistic scourge of the world” conspiracy theories, he or she eventually quotes Zinn admiringly. I have seen this since the 60’s. I feel sorry for the people who had their young minds diverted into hatred of their home by his bile, but I have encountered them for decades, and they hold no surprises. And you too are typical of them.
You should drop the Keith Olbermans “sir” stuff, by the way. It’s pompous, its a cliche, and it doesn’t make you sound impressive or resolute. It makes you sound like Keith, and you see what has happened to him.
He probably likes Howard Zinn too.
Trinidad: I’m aware that your version of history is the accepted and taught version in Mexico. It’s also a object lesson in what’s still referred to as “third world mentality”. Essentially, it’s a matter of denial compounded by the need for rationalizations and mythologizing on a grand scale in order to come to terms with what you must otherwise acknowledge as severe national/cultural shortcomings. This is further accentuated by the need to explain away Mexico’s present state- which is a further indictment of your nation and heritage. It is the last resort of an inferior nation to blame its own lack of success on the imagined depredations of others. Mexico is and remains its own worst enemy. An it will remain a third world hog-wallow as well until it manages to summon up the intestinal fortitude to look to itself and to God for solutions instead of blaming America.
Stevy, I do not know if this version of history is the “accepted and taught version” in Mexico. Perhaps you should go there and find out for me. If you go, don’t bother to bring your assault riffle since the U.S government is making sure there is a continues flow of weapons into Mexico. When this seems to be failing it “fast” and “furiously” makes sure the ATF takes over the, not trafficking, what is the word I am looking f…oh yeah, exportation of weapons. And on your way back, buy your own drugs and traffic-there I go again- and import it yourself. Wouldn’t you agree with me that it is unethical to have a poor Mexican get arrested for, in some way, supporting your habit?
Greediness and not the U.S.A (How many times do we have to tell you that the U.S.A is not America? Just because it is in America does not mean it is America), is Mexico’s problems. In the last decade, we witnessed in shock the greed and deception displayed in Wall Street. Wait ! That was not in Mexico. I can respect your unwillingness to learn and comprehend the history of Californios; however, when you sit there and argue that the U.S.A (you and me) is/are not to be blamed for Mexico’s, and other countries’, miseries, you leave me no other option but to conclude that your feeling of superiority has blinded your intellectual abilities. I wish I could share more with you but I need to get going so I can start strengthening my intestines to be able to look into myself and god.
P.S. Thanks to Mr. Duane for answering my question.
If you and Duane aren’t the same person, you have both been infected by the same destructive thought fallacies and rationalizations.
What is the world does “fast and Furious” have to do with Tiburcio Vasquez—especially on this blog, which has called out that criminal fiasco and the subsequent government cover-up from the start? How does pointing out alleged misdeeds of the US government justify naming an elementary school after a murderous hoodlum?
Mexico, spectacularly corrupt for its entire existence, burdened by destructive cultural elements bequeathed by the Spaniard conquerors, with a tendency toward strong man dictatorship and a sick fondness for self-glorifying populist criminals, and a disgraceful waste of human resources through terrible mismanagement of a great and rich country, is fully responsible for its problems, and blaming its backwardness on anyone else is one of its problems. Nobody denies that the US concocted a false justification to go to war with Mexico and as a result was successful in acquiring California and the rest. Nobody denies that Andrew Jackson just took Florida from the Spanish, or that Napoleon had no right to sell the Louisiana Territory, or that the Europeans had no right to just take the New World. But once land has passed into law and ownership, there has to be an end. California is no longer Mexico. The Native American were screwed over. Slavery existed. Using ancient wrongs as a phony justification for law-breaking and mistreatment of those who had nothing to do with those wrongs is self-indulgent, destructive and pointless.
Sorry, Jack, but I DO deny that James K. Polk manufactured a causus belli against Mexico. He, as did many on both sides, saw that the annexation of Texas would inevitably lead to war. What he did was prepare for it. On paper, America should have been easily defeated by Mexico, as the regular Army and Navy were small, neglected and inexperienced. Polk did what he could to change that, plus helping to devise the briliant strategy that made the war so spectacularly successful. It should be remembered that the Mexicans invaded Texas first, only to be thwarted at Resaca de la Palma and Palo Alto by a small, but determined force under Zachary Taylor. His force was spearheaded by volunteer Texas units who had every motivation to return a favor to Mexico.
Steven, I’m a Polk fan, but he was a cold, calculating utilitarian. He planned on getting his hands on the Southwest before he was even elected, and the provocation (American blood spilled on American soil!) was a phony as a three dollar bill. I always felt comparing the Mexican War to the Vietnam war was an outrageous smear on Vietnam. I’m happy we have all those states (and Texas, which Americans, if not America, essentially stole), but I’m not going to argue that we got them fair and square.
He was a cold, calculating utilitarian all right… thank God. No one else could have prepared for, fought and victoriously concluded such a vast and (for America) unprecedented form of war in such a short period. As I said, Polk knew that when Texas would inevitably join the Union, Mexico would invade. And why not? Santa Anna was psychologically unable to accept his bitter defeat and the loss of Texas- a loss of face that no tyrant can accept. He also had a veteran army of much superior numbers. But he was still the same arrogant screw-up he’d always been on a seriously contested battlefield. He had learned nothing from San Jacinto and went on to prove it in this new war. But he started it! That Polk foresaw it as he did and brilliantly prepared for it is not, by any means, to his discredit. Abetting his preparations was the likewise brilliant leadership of Zachary Taylor, Winfield Scott, Robert Stockton, Stephen Kearny and the lower level decisiveness of such men as Jefferson Davis, Braxton Bragg (before he went nuts!) and Samuel Ringgold. Innovation and leadership was what prevented the war from going the opposite way in a big way.
The greatest one term President by miles, and easily one of the top 10 (with George, Abe, Andy, Monroe, the Roosevelts, Reagan, Ike, and oh, I don’t know, either Truman or Cleveland. 4 Republican, 4 Democrats, a Federalist and a Republican-Democrat). Polk was and will always be the original Dark Horse, but he was a brilliant man. Read his memoirs, if you have not already.
What is the title, Jack? I can probably order it through B&N.
It’s his diary, actually. I doubt that it’s in print—I read it for my thesis. Widener has a copy, as does the Library of Congress and other libraries.
Thanks for the info. The best step would probably be to access the Library of Congress.
1. I am as appalled as anyone over the “Fast & Furious” scandal that, along with so much else, left a fine American dead. As if Eric Holder didn’t have enough crimes under his belt! Don’t start trying to throw him in my face. He’s no more an American at heart than you are.
2. The fact that stupid, ill-parented young people buy drugs, that “gangstas” (many from your country) distrubute them and that they have thus brought Mexico to America is a well-known reality that got started when I was a kid. However (except for such places as California) we make no excuse for it and fight against it. Just because the criminal demand is there doesn’t excuse your countrymen in supplying it.
3. Am I to understand that when scandals occur in a massive, complex (and now, government saturated) economy such as our’s, that this somehow is an attack on Mexico? As though you didn’t have enough of your own?! Mexico has been one gigantic scandal throughout its history… and that includes pre-Columbian times! The only real chance you gave yourselves for a free, prosperous future was with the passage of the constitution of 1824. When Santa Anna overthrew it, everything went to Hell… and it’s still there!
4. I’m sure you’re very aware that an skewed, anti-American version of Mexican history has been taught in what passes for schools in Mexico for quite some time. After all, you’re practically quoting it here.