>> i both welcome you and thank you for supporting your local independent bookstore. tonight we're honored to have mr. joseph whelan to discuss his new book, "invading mexico." a graduate of the university of wyoming and the university of colorado denver, joseph began his early stint in writing as a reporter, state editor for the casper, wyoming, star tribune. he has spent the last 30 years as a reporting editor. mr. whelan and his wife pat now live in kerry, north carolina. in the fall of 2003, mr. whelan released his first book, jefferson's war," which the fort worth star telegram woo a bit of

sturdy history. it was soon followed by the 2005 release of" jefferson's vendetta: the pursuit of aaron burr and the judiciary," elegantly written and smartly conceived. tonight we are here to celebrate his newest release, invading mexico. so please, join me in giving a warm welcome to mr. joseph whelan. [applause] >> i want to thank you for coming, and i want to thank quail ridge for inviting me. this is my third visit here. really appreciate it. um, let's start by talking about what the mexican war was and was not, and then i'll go into some more of the details. mexican war is one of america's o forgotten wars.

the civil war 15 years later all but erased its memory. this has robbed us of insight into the origins of other wars. for example, in important ways the mexican war is a distant echo of the iraqi war. and mexico's abiding distrust and resentment of the united states can be traced to the mexican war. the mexican war also hastened the civil war. it might not have been fought if the mexican war had not opened the volatile slavery debate. now, the mexican war's often confused with the texan war for independence from mexico ten years earlier in 1836. the texas revolution is known for the battles of the alamo and san ha sin toe -- ha seen toe and the exploits of sam houston and davy crockett. the mexican war is known as polk's war. the 11th president, james k.

polk, supervised it from its beginning in may 1846 to the treaty signing 21 months later. the peace treaty transferred 530,000 square miles from mexico to the united states, incredible territory. from mexico we obtained the future states of california, new mexico, arizona, nevada, utah and parts of colorado and wyoming. literally 42% of mexico's territory at that time. the major battles were fought at palo alto, monterey and buena vista, the gates of mexico city. always outnumbered, the americans won every major battle. sometimes, as in buena vista, they were at a three to one disadvantage. nearly 13,000 americans died during the war. more than 11,000 of them from

disease and other noncombat causes. american officers who received their baptism of fire in the mexican war later led the armies during the civil war. among them were ewe lis access s. grant, robert e. lee, stonewall jackson, george mcclellan and james longstreet. the mexican war was america's first war of invasion. it was fought on multiple fronts across thousands of miles from the texas border to mexico city to san francisco bay, in snowy mountains and deserts, in summer heat and winter cold, on tropical beaches and in densely-populated cities. general zachary taylor's army fought on the rio grande river and northern mexico. i've got a map here. this is where the war started, and taylor's thrust into

northern mexico followed this red line. the other, the second front that opened after about a year of the war was at veracruz by genuinefield scott. he landed here and marched 260 miles to mexico city. there are other fronts too. john c. fremont led fighting in california, general steven carryny marched from kansas to santa fe to san diego and fought two major battles outside los angeles. a brigade of mormons that followed kearney's path nearly starved. alexander donaldson led a famous troop of missouri volunteers from santa fe to chihuahua, mexico. the hour yangs marched more than 2,000 miles and won two battles.

after they marched from here to here, they marched all the way to monterey and then to the coast, and then they took a ship back to new orleans. it's a real epic. donaldson was called the zen upon the of the age. the treaty ending the war, the treaty of guadalupe hi call the go in february 1848 cost the united states $18 million or 37 cents per acre. it was the second best land bargain in u.s. history after the louisiana purchase which brought the u.s. 828,000 square miles for $15 million. just as the mexican war treaty was being signed, california was learning of a gold strike that would become the gold rush of '49. during the, what they called the roaring 40s, america's industrial age was in its early years. railroads and steamships were

being rapidly built, and samuel morse's telegraph linked washington and baltimore, soon thereafter, rich monday. the penny press and the dime novel were launched. waves of immigrants were arriving from ireland and germany, and every spring when the snows melted, immigrants in their prairie schooners poured onto the great plains bound for oregon and california. manifest destiny was the era's catch phrase. in 1845 the editor of the new york morning news, john o'sullivan, wrote that america, quote: had a manifest destiny to overspread the continent, allotted by providence for the free development of our yearly multiplying millions. in other words, america was entitled by divine sanction to occupy north america from atlantic to pacific, and most americans believed this. manifest destiny was more than

an expansion of slogan. it was actually part of a subterranean, ideological struggle that dated to the nation's founding. the champions of the two competing visions of america were thomas jefferson and alexander am illton. hamilton. hamilton envisioninged an america of cities with busy harbors and smokestacks. jefferson favored a nation of independent landowners. he did not want america to become be like europe where people worked for wages and became political subjects and not participant bees. participants. jefferson's ideologicalty seven cants included andrew jackson and james k. polk, the president responsible for the mexican war. jackson and polk knew that for jefferson's so-called yeoman farmers to flourish, large amounts of virgin land were needed. so it was no coincidence that jefferson, jackson and polk

together added 2.1 million square mile toss the united states, although jackson invaded florida before he was president. when jefferson took office in 1801, the u.s. land area was 891,000 square miles. when polk left office in 1849, it covered nearly three million square miles. what became the 48 contiguous states. since then just 700,000 square miles have been added, most of it alaska. i emphasize land because the mexican war was all about taking land from mexico. the mexican war was the first, but by no means the last, american war began on a questionable pretext. we have seen it happen since then. the sinking of the maine at atlanta, the alleged gulf of tonkin incident and the purported weapons of mass destruction in iraq. polk said the war was about

indemnities in the disputed texas/mexican border, but his secret purpose was to obtain california. in 1846 the united states had no pacific ports but longed to have them. america and england shared occupancy of the oregon territory, and california belonged to mexico. despite repeated attempts by the united states to buy it. mexico wouldn't sell california until the issue of texas was resolved. even nine years after the texas revolution, mexico still regarded texas as a rebellious province. but the united states refused to discuss texas which had become a state in 1845, and with good reason. mexico regarded the river whose mouth is at the rio grande at corpus christi as its rightful

border, whereas the united states said that it was the rio grande river. territory there is 120 miles in length. so neither side would give in on this. polk calculated that applying pressure on the border would force mexico to the bargaining table or begin a short, relatively bloodless war ending with america getting california. president zachary taylor sent troops to corpus christi, ostensibly to protect against invasion. but that was a very, very remote possibility at that time. when mexico still would not negotiate and when rumors reached polk that england might make a lay for california, he sent taylor to the rio grande, and that did it. mexico, indignantly declared it had been invaded, and proclaimed a defensive war. the mexican cavalry ambushed

u.s. dragoons along the river in 1846. polk could now claim american blood was shed on american soil, but some of taylor's officers -- including ewe lis sis s. grant -- believed they'd been used as bait to catch a war. [background sounds] >> so when word of the attack reached washington, polk's allies pushed a war resolution through congress and put a two-hour time limit on depavement then -- debate. then they used up an hour and a half of the two hours reading the accompanying documents out loud. the 14 house members and two senators who voted existence -- against the war bill were vilified as traitors. by then taylor had already won

two battles along the rio grande and was preparing to invade mexico. the battles were fought right along here. at palo alto and -- [inaudible] at first there was tremendous support for the war. public rallies were held around the country, young men rushed to enlist in the militia. when their own state's militia quotas were filled, they went to neighboring states and enlisted. the public support faded as the war dragged on and the casualty list grew with no end in sight. polk believed the war would last just three months, but national pride would not permit mention b coe to quit so long as an invader occupied it soil, even as it lost every battle. during the 1846 midterm election, president polk's democratic party lost control of the house of representatives. the reconstituted house launched

investigations into the war's origins and its conduct. it demanded reames of documents from the white house, and it passed a resolution declaring the war had been unnecessarily and unconstitutionally begun by the president of the united states. a freshman congressman from illinois, abraham lincoln, said the president cannot be permitted to make war at his pleasure. congressman stephen a. douglas said anyone who criticized the war was no friend of the united states and was a traitor in their hearts. so war opponents were forced to walk a tight rope, voting for war funds to show they supported the troops while criticizing the policies that necessitated these expenditures. we've seen this happen, too, during the vietnam and iraq wars. mexico had struggled from coup

to coup since winning independence from spain in 1821, so they'd just been an independent country for 25 years when the war started. cynical generals such as antonio lopez desanta ana rose to power again and again by forming shifting coalitions among the wealthy landowners, catholic church, and the military. when they were toppled from power, they looted the treasury on the way out the door. santa ana had already been president three times and was exile in cuba in 1846. he promised polk he would stop the war and negotiate a treaty if polk led santa ana through the american blockade of mexico. polk did so, and an that anna became a -- santa ana became president a fourth time. but instead of making peace, he led the mexican army in several battles against the americans.

the mexican war inspired the first major american anti-war movement. war opponents thought it morally reprehensible for a rising industrial giant of 20 million people to invade a bankrupt nation of seven million in order to take its territory. congressmen john quincy adams and joshua giddings led the congressional opposition of the war. other war foes included clergymen, abolitionists and transcendentalists like ralph waldo emerson and henry david thoreau. thoreau was living at walden pond at this time. he refused to support the war in any way. one day he went in to concord to have a shoe repaired, and he was arrested for not paying his poll tax. so he spent the night in jail. his aunt paid the tax, and he

was freed the next morning, free to join a huckleberry-picking party, actually. but this experience inspired him to write "civil disobedience," the essay that in turn helped inspire mahatma gandhi, the vietnam anti-war movement and martin luther king. many war opponents believed the war's secret purpose was to add new slave territories, but this was not true. while polk was a slave holder himself, slavery was not a factor. nonetheless, the mexican war reopened the explosive national debate over slavery, laying the foundation for the civil war. slavery's bait had largely lain dormant, but in august 1846 congressman david wilma of pennsylvania proposed abolishing slavery in any new territories obtained as a result of the war.

the south bristled at this direct threat, and the so-called wilma proviso led to congress' first far-reaching debate of slavery. it only intensified until 1861 when words no longer sufficed. the mexican war was a war of firsts; first war begun on a dubious pretext, first anti-war movement, first successful offensive war, first occupation of a enemy capital. it also marked the day but a of -- debut of large numbers of west point graduates in combat. and for the first time american newspapers sent reporters to cover the war. cover a war. the public now read dramatic battle accounts rather than dull government reports. in 1846 five new york newspapers began sharing war news and costs, and so was born the associated press.

the world's large and oldest news-gather, organization. news-gathering organization. the new american field artillery was the war's great military innovation. using horses, gun crews quickly moved wide artillery around the battlefield the to support troops. the u.s. field artillery was the best in the world and decisive in several battles. when the war began, america had just 8,000 regular troops. tens of thousands of volunteers from practically every state poured in to augment the expeditionary force. volunteers were largely untrained, many could not even take care of themselves in camp. they succumbed to diseases in shocking numbers. best of them, in addition to donaldson's mountain volunteer, were the mississippi rifles led

by jefferson davis, future president of the con confederate states of of america, and the texas rangers were superb horsemen and ruthless guerrilla fighters. the american and mexican people vastly underrated the u.s. regulars who were arguably the best troops in the world at that time. it was true the enlisted ranks contained a large number of recent immigrants and men who had failed in civilian life, and they did serve long enlistments at low pay. but the regulars were also well drilled and disciplined, hardened to living outdoors and well equipped. their confidence in victory never flagged no matter how outnumbered they were. late in life ewe lis access grant, a lieutenant during the mexican war, raided zachary taylor's -- rated zachary taylor's little army the best in which he's ever served.

more than 30 battles and skirmishes. from start to finish, it was polk's war though. from the white house, president james polk oversaw every detail. commanding generals in the field, scott and taylor often were not consulted at all. polk's plan was to capture the mexican provinces north of the 22nd parallel -- 3 32nd parallel, today's u.s./mexican boundary. that's up here. and to send taylor's army to conquer northern mexico. this was taylor's army. when mexico still refused to concede after he did this, polk opened the second front down here at very -- varian cruz.

more than 08 ships, more than p -- 80 ships, more than 10,000 crews. vera cruise surrendererred. scott embarked on his famous march to montezuma, 260 miles away. interestingly, the duke of wellington who was the victor after waterloo, kept a wall map of the campaign in his study and followed scott's campaign. he thought scott was just the greatest general of his time, which he was. polk wanted to be president of the whole country, not a partisan president. but he was a democrat to the core. he worked hard to prevent scott and taylor who were both whigs from reaping any political profit from the war. there was reason for this. george washington, andrew

jackson and william henry harrison had all been generals who became presidents. but in the process, polk made enemies of both his generals. yet he congratulated himself on remaining nonpartisan. his efforts failed to prevent zachary taylor from succeeding him as president. polk wound up the mexican war and brought the troops home before leaving office, but he survived his presidency by only three months. he died of cholera in nashville in 849. 1849. taylor lived just a year later, dying in 1850 while in office. his successor was millard fillmore. throughout the 19th century, the mexican war was deplored, and james polk was vilified for i. - for it. historians of that era and many of the generals during the civil

war had been junior officers in that war, just thought it was morally reprehensible, the whole affair. but polk's reputation improved in the early 20th century with the rise of american nationalism. today historians rate james polk as one of the ten best u.s. presidents. yet he remains one of the most obscure. as harry truman observed in ranking polk with george washington, thomas jefferson and andrew jackson, quote: he said exactly what he was going to do, and he did it. and this is true. polk, in fact, accomplished everything he promised when he took office. he lowered the tariff, established an independent treasury, he annexed texas, and he took possession of oregon. and most importantly, he achieved his fifth secret goal, and that was to obtain california. it all turned out well for the united states, but not for

mexico; bankrupt and ravaged by chaos and revolution. only with dictator diaz's iron-fisted regime beginning in 1876 did mexico stabilize and begin to develop an industrial base. i want to add something about james polk. he's one of the two presidents born in north carolina. the other one being andrew johnson. he was born near charlotte. andrew jackson may count as half a president. he was born -- [laughter] right on the north carolina/south carolina border. both states have claimed him at various times. polk's family moved to tennessee when he was 11, but he returned to north carolina to attend the university of chapel hill. graduated with first honors in mathematics and the classics. then he went back to tennessee and became a lawyer and politician.

he was so closely allied with andrew jackson that he was called young hickory. this was a huge advantage because no one knew, first of all, when he ran in 1844 who polk was. but because jackson was the most popular president of his era, being associated with him was great thing. in 844 -- 1844 polk had become the first dark horse presidential nominee. kind of emerged from the democratic convention in baltimore. as a compromise candidate to hold the party together, he pledged to serve one term, and he stuck to his pledge. polk once wrote in his diary that he's the hardest-working man in america, and if he wasn't that, he's certainly the hardest working american president. his every waking hour six days a week, sometimes seven, was occupied by public business.

sara polk, his wife, was her husband's partner in politics and government. they had no children, and this was their life, politics and running the country. she was of educated at the moravian female academy in salem, north carolina. and she was the only first lady to serve as her husband's secretary. in the white house, the polks often worked side by side at their desks far into the night. polk was a micromanager who distrusted whigs. taylor and scott paid a steep price for being whigs and sometimes acting on their own. nicholas tryst who'd negotiated the peace treaty also fell out of favor with polk for disobeying orders and was punished for it. test was the -- tryst was the negotiator chosen by polk and secretary of state james buchanan to accompany winfield scott to mexico city and negotiate a treaty.

at the time, he was chief clerk in the state department. but he was -- earlier he was a counsel in havana. early in life he had studied law, and he married a jefferson granddaughter, virginia jefferson randolph. when he got to mexico, tryst angered polk by agreeing to an ill-advised armistice outside of mexico city that gave santa ana time to fortify the city. polk and buchanan recalled him. by the time the recall reached him, there was this three week lag in communications between mexico city, sometimes longer and washington. by the time the recall reached mexico city had surrendered, peace talks had begun. and tryst received the recall, and he packed up to leave. to obey it. but mexican officials, british

diplomats and scott urged him to stay and continue the talks. so tryst disobeyed his orders, resumed the negotiations, and he signed the very treaty that polk had wanted. but polk never forgave tryst. even though his actions spared the united states the draining guerrilla war. tryst was dismissed from the state department. polk refused to pay his salary or expenses after the date tryst received his recall. for years afterwards tryst barely avoided bankruptcy. it was only in 1871 when he was 7 o 0 years old -- 70 years old during president grant's administration congress voted back pay with accrued interest, and grant named him postmaster in alexandria, virginia. any questions at point? [laughter] yes, sir. >> you mentioned early this your presentation that when the war

began, mexico proclaimed a defensive -- [inaudible] did they have any military strategy other than just to fight defensively and maybe kill enough gringos that we'd go home and leave them ahone? what was their military strategy? could you elaborate just a little bit? >> well, i don't know what their strategy was other than to send troops to the rio grande. and to stop the united states from sending troops down there. they had no invasion strategy, and i think -- actually, i think they believed they could beat the u.s. army. as i said, the mexicans held the u.s. forces in low esteem, and they had a larger force, and i think they thought they could defeat 'em down there, and that would be the end of it. but it seemed -- as soon as taylor crossed the river, the

mexican, mexican general command sent an emissary up there to warn him that they had crossed the river, and they were in mexico and to, please, go back and nothing would happen. but, of course, he had his orders to go all the way to the rio grande. so something was going to happen, and everyone knew it. yes, sir. >> i'd like to hear a little more about the election of 1848. i mean, was it a repudiation of the war? the whig party which was, which was the opposition party to polk, won the presidency, right? >> that's right. >> oddly enough, won it with the general who had been the main commander in polk's war. but was this about, was the main issue in the election the war,

and was it a repudiation of the war, i guess, is my question. >> no, i don't think it was. because polk wasn't running again. the candidates were taylor was the whig and louis cass who was the governor of michigan was the democrat candidate. but then martin van buren was involved in the race too. and so they split the vote, and they split the democratic vote especially this new york where van buren was strong, and taylor won new york, and he won the election. but it was a matter of the democrats who had formed this coalition to behind james k. polk fragmenting again in 1848 and not really clearly deciding on a candidate. in fact, the democrats dime polk and said -- and asked him to run

again in 1848, but he said he had given his pledge, and he really wanted to leave office. he'd had enough. yes, sir. >> was it during this time or early or later that the french had designs on mexico? >> that was later on. that was about 20 years later during the -- actually, that was during the civil war. emperor max mill yang went to mexico, yeah. that happened in the 1860s. the french, or part of the french, banked on the south winning the war or at least splitting the country, and then they were going to be able to deal with confederate states of america, this french entity down in mexico. but, of course, the the south lost the war, and they were just kind of stuck down there. and eventually the emperor was

overthrown and executed. yes. >> tell us about the flying artillery, please, and did he come from napoleon? if yes or no, did any other tactics come from napoleon? >> um, okay. that did not come from napoleon, but it came from europe. the, in the 1830s the u.s. command sent some of their top officers over to europe to study the european artillery. they wanted to revamp the american artillery at that time, so they toured germany, france, all these countries in the 1830s, and they came back with a plan to establish flying artillery and demonstrated it to the, i think, to martin van

buren at that time. and they got funding to establish an artillery, flying artillery outfit in every artillery regiment in the army. so there were, like, four artillery baa toll ons -- battalions, flying artillery battalions in the army. one of them was led by braxton bragg, probably recognize his name from the civil war and fort bragg. he was one of the outstanding ones. he, in fact, at buena vista he, at buena vista he performed tremendously and was at this pivotal part of the battle. but, so the european tactics. winfield scott was a student of, as far as infantry tactics go, he was a student of tol kick,

en. actually he had a whole library that he carried around with him, and he, scott had fought in the war of 1812, and he'd been forced into a couple of situations where he'd had to fight defensively, and he was wounded, and it was really a bad situation and campaign in qanta. he vowed -- canada. he vowed he'd never fight defensively again. he'd always go on the offense. so he studied napoleonic tactics and came up with his method was to never attack the front, always attack the flank, you know? feint going this way, move this way. taylor was just the opposite. he would fix bayonets and charge straight ahead. but scott was, he was not only a strategist, but he was an excellent -- he was probably the

best tactician in the war. and i would say he's the best general the united states had between the revolutionary war and the civil war. yes, sir. >> senator william haywood of north carolina, he and polk were at chapel hill together. and i've read that he was considered one of the most powerful men in congress because of his association with polk. how did senator haywood feel about the mexican war? do you know? and what happened with this and polk. >> i don't know. >> and also how was polk perceived in north carolina? >> pretty well. i think it was a democratic

state down here generally. and he came back, i think, for a reunion of his class in chapel hill, and be i think -- but he knew hayward, though, even in washington. and when hayward decided to leave office, polk tried to talk him out of it. but it seemed like he left office during the war. so i don't know -- i would imagine he supported polk. it seemed like the democrats did and a lot of the southern whigs did too. >> you mentioned the battle of buena vista and santa ana both. what's your assessment of who won the battle of buena vista, and further, why did santa ana thereafter or retreat and go back to mexico city? what do you understand about the military aspects of it and then the mexican response and internal reaction.

>> well, that was kind of an interesting thing. the reason that polk, that santa ana went to buena vista, santa ana was here at san luis, and here's buena vista, here's very cruz. santa ana, someone in the mexican army intercepted and killed a messenger, u.s. army officer, who had orders from scott to taylor that said taylor was to hand over all of his regulars to scott for this invasion at veracruz, and it talked about the invasion and about when it would occur too. so this document was rushed back to santa ana, and taylor -- who knew he was supposed to get two sets of these orders but only got one -- went out and found

out what happened to the other messenger, that he'd been murdered in this town. so he knew that santa ana had this information. he assumed and the americans assumed that he would go to veracruz and reinforce veracruz and to repel scott's invasion. santa ana actually was a pretty good strategist. he -- not a good tactician, but a good strategist. he decided the thing to do was with taylor's army weakened up there at monterey, he would go north instead of to veracruz. he thought he could beat taylor, defeat his army, drive all the way to the rio grand, capture all that territory that had been taken by the americans and force the americans to the peace table. to negotiate a treaty favorable to mexico, more favorable. and that that would preempt scott's invasion of veracruz, everything. so it was a great gamble.

so he set out with 20,000 men from san luis. scott -- taylor had about 5,000 troops. and at some point -- and he didn't have that many scouts either. he really didn't know santa ana was coming until he was almost there. but one of his officers had chosen buena vista as a good battleground because it was kind of boxed in a little bit by the mountains. there were ravines that cut it up, it looked like an area that was defensible. and so they chose that as the battle ground, the place they would fight santa ana. and he crossed this high desert in the late winter and lost about 2,000, 3,000 men crossing it. desertions and then they just

died along the way. and they got to buena vista, and they were, they were out of food. he told them they would fight, they would beat the americans, and they would get their food supplies. that was their incentive. so the battle began. now, santa ana was not a good tactician. he could have won that battle probably if he had done what napoleon always said to do; bring the great brunt of forces to bear on fragments of the army. what he tried to do was he tried to attack everywhere -- instead of attacking everywhere at once where he could have overwhelmed the americans, he tried to attack one area and then another, and the americans were able to shift troops around. and then he never used his reserves that day at all. and so at the end of the day there was no clear victor, but

he did leave the battlefield that night and begin his withdrawal. his march back to san luis. he really had no place else to go. his troops had no food. so what he did was he raced ahead of the army, went to san luis and proclaimed that he had won this great victory. and church bells are ringing, and he sent a messenger to mexico city, and they celebrated this great victory. then the army arrived, what was left of it -- about 10,000 men -- and they were just in terrible shape, and the people saw what had happened. so he took a fragment of that army, went down to, down to this area here to try to stop winfield scott, and he raised some more troops, started all over again.

losing battles. yes, sir. >> telling the story about the army joining santa ana? >> oh, yeah. the san patricio brigade. yes. they were mainly irish immigrants, and they were in the regular army. and in the u.s. army at that time there was a lot of need for this sentiment among the officers, especially the west point officers, and they did not like the irish. so they would punish more severely, and they felt like they were just kind of abused and left out. they were not appreciated, they didn't get the promotions, and so mexicans, who were catholic

like the irish were -- started sending leaflets over the river and said if you, you know, we share the same religion, come across the river, join our forces, you know? we'll give you -- and at one point they gave them cash in, like -- and, like, 40 acres or something like that. so they cross the river in great numbers, hundreds of them, and at one point taylor posted guards along the river with orderlies to shoot to kill because -- with orders to shoot to kill. they'd kill them in the water, it was a pretty bad situation. but enough of them got over that they were, they formed a brigade, and they were made an artillery brigade. and they were quitefective. and they fought -- quite effective. and they fought at monterey and at buena vista, both battles.

buena vista they were the best thing that the mexican army had going there. and then down near mexico city a bunch of them were captured in battle. and about 0 of them were -- 40 of them were executed. and they timed it so that they were hanged just as the american flag went up over -- [inaudible] yeah. so, some of them, some of them who deserted before war was actually declared, they weren't traitors. i mean, it wasn't a capital offense, and they were branded as traitors. not as traitors, deserters with a d branded on their cheeks. it was really awful. >> one more question. >> can you speak to the two military academies, chipotle peck and west point?

we hear about the gods of our civil war and the icons, we hear very little about the military academy. >> well, they were mainly teenagers. they weren't, they were kids. and when american forces attacked, the mexican regular officers tried to evacuate these teenagers. but some of them stayed and fought, and some of them committed suicide, actually, jumped off the parapets as the americans came in clutching the american flag. there's a whole legend about that. and there's a monument to these, these cadets, the national academy cadets. and i think even today at sunset every day there's some ceremony that they do to honor these cadets. as far as them being a force in the mexican army, they really

weren't. they were very young. some of them might have become officers, but they were not. of the officer corps in the mexican army was made up mainly of the upper class, the rich. the so top heavy, it was just ridiculous with officers. >> i want to thank everybody for coming tonight and a special thanks to mr. whelan. thank you again. [applause] be sure to check our calendars and our web site for other events that you might be interested in. thank you again for coming. >> every sunday at 6 p.m. eastern booktv airs a program from our archives that coincides with a significant occasion that happened that week in history. for more history programming, check out american history programming.

ah-tv features 48 hours of people and events that help document the american story. watch american history tv on c-span3 or visit c-span.org/history. >> here are some of the top-selling nonfiction titles at independent bookstores around the country according to indiebound.org. this list reflects sales as of may 9th. >> second is anna quinn lin's lots of candles, plenty of cake. cheryl strayed is third with "wild." fourth is mr. lehrer who is

appeared on booktv, and you can watch that program online at booktv.org. former u.s. secretary of state madeleine albright is fifth with her memoir, "prague winter." followed by "unbroken" by laura hillen brand. seventh is "the power of habit" by charles duhigg. lending explanations to forming breaking good and bad habits. "let's pretend this never happened" by jenny lawson is eighth. ms. lawson recounts her upbringing in rural texas, her high school years and her marriage. in "the presidents club," time magazine's nancy gibbs and michael duffy examine how prime ministers from hoover to obama worked -- presidents from hoover to obama worked with and against each other during their terms in the white house. then at ten, susan cain examines the lifestyles of introverts with "quiet." go to indiebound.org and click

on indie bestsellers. >> in the last 2,000 years, we have seen all kinds of formulations where power is concentrated in the hands of the commercial interest. so much so that they have led to wars, they have led to sectarian differences, they have led to a lot of consequential effects. in our history there were some of the founding fathers who wanted to put the corporation in the constitution by way of subordinating it to human beings. but that provision never got through. you see, at that time they remembered and they knew about the enormous power of the east india company which ruled india with an absolute iron hand for many years with devastating human casualties. they knew about the hudson bay

company that was in north america. and while the modern form of the corporation was being established with the textile mills some years after the constitution was ratified in new england, their reference point was the menacing power of these gigantic corporations. they didn't want a replay in proliferating form in the country that they thought would succeed their constitutional structure in the usa. now, what is important here to realize is that there has been a whole series of ways to fight back. people have fought back. they've fought back as workers, they've fought back as parents, they've fought back as buyers and shoppers, they've fought back as farmers, they've fought back as women, they've fought back as slaves. they have fought back. and we have in our history the

following ways that they've fought back. they've fought back trying to use the vote. they fought back with regulation of these companies. you can see the farmer and worker fightbacks in the 19th century to create some of the foundations of fair labor standards and protecting farmers from the banks and the railroads leading to the populist progressive movement. they won cases now and then. some of them fugue back as owners, shareholders. some of them fought back as cooperate i haves, a new model that wasn't so commercially determined. it was owned by the farmers or owned by the consumers. some of them fought back by organizing rallies and demonstrations. you can see the occupy movement in that mode at the present time. some of them fought back by striking.

some of them fought back by forming unions. some of them fought back by whistle blowing, by blowing a whistle inside these companies and taking the terrible information to the public, to the prosecuting attorneys or to legislators or to the media. now, because they have fought back they've attracted the attention of various transformations of corporate structure and power. corporations have as their monomaniacal purpose the aggregation of sales, aing the regaition of profits, the aggregation of executive bonuses, and to do that they have to control capital, labor, technology. we're not talking about small business now. small business has it own main street accountabilities. doesn't have anywhere near the power. we're talking about these large, multi-national corporations that

now number about 500 real big ones operating globally, and the 1500 or so corporations who control the majority of 535 members of congress getting their way. that's the terrain. pleasure and these corporations are counseled by very brilliant corporate attorneys who are really the strategists of the power brokers that are the circle, the accountants and the publyists and the lobbyists and the shareholder-controllers. all of these are animated and directed by these corporate law firms which themselves are concentrated in, perhaps, three or four hundred firms. and, let's face it, they are geniuses. in concentrating power. the creativity of the modern

corporate system is probably one of the greatest intellectual achievements -- however nasty, however corrupting, however destructive -- in american history. they are always dynamically trying to figure out how to blunt, co-opt, weaken, undermine or even smear all of these ways i just mentioned to hold these corporations accountable. to hold them responsible. the more they succeed, the more these corporations can be charged with not delivering an adequate level of economic activity for the people since they control the gateways, since they control the capital labor and technology. and, indeed, the evidence is truly overwhelming. in 1900 there were a lot of poor people in this country. in the year 2011, there are a lot of poor people in this country. there are a lot of uninsured

people for health care in this country. in this 1900 -- in 1900 there were a lot of up insured -- uninsured people for health care. the difference is that the worker productivity has increased 25-fold adjusted for inflation. per worker. so why is there any poverty? why do 15 million children go to bed hungry at night? why is poverty increasing even though the gross national product continues to increase? two general reasons. one is power is so concentrated that the wrong things are being produced, and the important things are not being produced in sufficiency. for example, well distributed health care with a focus on prevention. for example, adequate food supplies with nutrition. for example, public transit of a

modern and convenient style. the wrong things that are being produced, huge portion of the economy, making money from the money, the paper economy, speculating on top of speculation, the derivatives. they keep using other people's money, often pension money, mutual fund money, people's savings. by speculators who often don't use their money, they use our money. and they use our money to generate huge fees and profits that are generally unregulated. so we have, number one, not the right things are being produced, not the right things in the right way are being produced, environmentally-benign ways, respectful of descendants' ways, respectful of climate change,

acid rain, land erosion, oxygen depletion in the ocean, etc. the second aspect is what is produced is very poorly distributed. this is the achille's heel of corporate capitalism because no matter how much is produced in the aggregate apart from the quality of what's produced and what isn't, the one claim they have to legitimacy is they know how to grow an economy. they know how to build the gdp. they know how to aggregate capital. and if they can't distribute it in a way to prevent people from slipping behind as they are now, they lose their legitimacy. the highest wage for the majority of the workers in this country adjusted for inflation was 1973. it has been downhill ever since. >> you can watch this and other programs online at booktv.org.