Discuss the aims and methods of either Madero or Carranza during the Mexican Revolution.

The question requires that candidates offer a considered and balanced review of the role of either Madero or Carranza during the Mexican Revolution. Candidates may offer equal coverage of aims and methods, or they may prioritize their discussion of one. However, both aspects will be a feature of the response. For the case of Madero, candidates may refer to his initial aim of destroying Diaz’s regime, for which he organized the Anti-Reelectionist Party, and promoted armed insurrection. Furthermore, candidates may include a discussion of his concept of “liberal democracy” but argue that only limited political reform was enacted. Candidates may also describe Madero’s economic and social aims as moderate and refer to his limited reforms in education or his refusal to enact a land reform. For the case of Carranza, candidates may refer to his aims of political stabilization, but argue that he aimed at limited social reform. In terms of methods, candidates may refer to his fighting against the Villistas and Zapatistas; the constitutional reform; or his reluctance to effectuate provisions of the 1917 constitution. Candidates’ opinions or conclusions will be presented clearly and supported by appropriate evidence.

The question as to the aims and methods of either Madero or Carranza was an infrequent choice and rather evenly split between the two. For Madero, candidates were much more focused on his aims than methods. For Carranza, candidates mostly developed the aims of the 1917 Constitution.