In Nicaragua, the Somoza family had begun a dictatorship, since 1936, that was disliked by most of the population and only supported by the small percent of the elite (Klerlein). There was so much support from the upper class, which was made up of one percent of the population, for the Somoza rule because the dictatorship tended to favor them and discarded the lower classes. Many of the lower class were made up of farmers who had little to no education and the Somoza regime wanted to keep it that way as well (Klerlein). This contributed to the fact that there was a large gap between the “income distribution” and how the elite were starting to take control of land that was owned by the “poorest citizens” (Klerlein). There was political and social
…show more content…
During Porfirio Diaz the middle class was not allowed to own land so they had to resort to low paid jobs like sharecropping (Good 1). The rural population had also lost a lot of their land to railroad building and “by 1910 an estimated 90 percent had lost land” (Kirkwood 123). They Ley Lerdo Law also affected the rural population because the land was no longer owned by the state and could be worked by many, instead this land was handed to the Mexican elite and they would chose what to do with it (Kirkwood 123). Since the middle class and any other class below could not own land it created a disparity between the poor and rich (Good 1). Basically, the rich were becoming richer and the poor were becoming poorer. Dissatisfaction with the Diaz regime grew, especially among those of the middle class and lower (Good 1). Not only were people dissatisfied with Diaz but also with “unpopular local leaders” whose harsh rule made citizens “foster unrest and resentment towards the government” (Kirkwood 132). When it came to choosing political leaders, “Diaz was very corrupt” and he often “jailed or assasin those who opposed him” (Good 1). This is where Francisco Madero comes into play and challenges Diaz into a re-election, promising the Mexican people that no one would have a dictatorship over them again (Richmond
During Porfirio Diaz the middle class was not allowed to own land so they had to resort to low paid jobs like sharecropping (Good 1). The rural population had also lost a lot of their land to railroad building and “by 1910 an estimated 90 percent had lost land” (Kirkwood 123). They Ley Lerdo Law also affected the rural population because the land was no longer owned by the state and could be worked by many, instead this land was handed to the Mexican elite and they would chose what to do with it (Kirkwood 123). Since the middle class and any other class below could not own land it created a disparity between the poor and rich (Good 1). Basically, the rich were becoming richer and the poor were becoming poorer. Dissatisfaction with the Diaz regime grew, especially among those of the middle class and lower (Good 1). Not only were people dissatisfied with Diaz but also with “unpopular local leaders” whose harsh rule made citizens “foster unrest and resentment towards the government” (Kirkwood 132). When it came to choosing political leaders, “Diaz was very corrupt” and he often “jailed or assasin those who opposed him” (Good 1). This is where Francisco Madero comes into play and challenges Diaz into a re-election, promising the Mexican people that no one would have a dictatorship over them again (Richmond