Economically, demographically & otherwise, how would (what became) California and Texas have developed if Mexico had retained them post-1848?
Last edited:
I would consider that, at least for California, development would be slow and most of the region remaining agrarian well into the 1870s at least. Mexico had enough on its plate much closer to Mexico City to worry about. The Californios unfortunately were tired of being ignored by the capital and were prepared to rise in rebellion and seek the protection and annexation by another power, Britain or the United States.
I would consider that, at least for California, development would be slow and most of the region remaining agrarian well into the 1870s at least. Mexico had enough on its plate much closer to Mexico City to worry about. The Californios unfortunately were tired of being ignored by the capital and were prepared to rise in rebellion and seek the protection and annexation by another power, Britain or the United States.
Would it be impossible for Mexico to do what other countries have done, and use the immigrants to strengthen itself, thereby making these provinces both more developed and more firmly held?