In the years following the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and the annexation of Texas, Mexican families were left with no choice but to live under oppressed conditions: most fell into the economic dimensions of poverty. Hispano land claims were also claimed by the same Americans who were responsible for the Mexican-American war. As a result, Hispano land grant activists were angered because they viewed property as both a historical and societal asset. To support this claim, I will discuss the socioeconomic importance of property rights by analyzing the communal devastations that resulted from the loss of land and by observing Hispano interactions with the U.S. government. While Hispano land grant activists push for better rights inside their communities, they draw on cultural identities and historical content as reasons for resistance. Having owned land for 500 years and tracing their roots back to the conquistadors, Hispanos poured their sweat and blood, expanded their resources, and endowed their successors through inherited practices. To them, the land becomes a fight for life: in the film, there are hand-painted placards called Tierra o Muerte, which in translation means “Land or Death.” The sign gives a clear indication that the Hispanos been defending their land and culture for centuries; land gives meaning to their life and provides them a…show more content… In 1967, Reies Lopez Tijerina organized La Alianza, a gunmen squad, to demonstrate that their Hispano property rights were something to not take lightly by the U.S. government: the group called for equal treatment for housing and wanted to free imprisoned activists. One highlight of La Alianza’s actions featured a raid on the Rio Arriba County Courthouse -- the organization strongly believed that their land was taken away from an unethical standpoint, claiming that the loss of land damaged Hispano culture and
