Few historical figures in Mexico generate so much contention as Porfirio Diaz, the dictator who served as the nation’s president for more than 30 years between 1876 and 1911. As expected, the 100th anniversary of his death, on July 2, is sparking a good deal of controversy, most notably regarding the possible repatriation of his remains from France, and whether he deserves any kind of “official” recognition or homage.
A 
A former soldier from Oaxaca who rose to the rank of general and helped oust French-imposed emperor Maximilian, Diaz’s presidency – known as the Porfiriato – was a period of economic stability, characterized by huge foreign investment and policies that favored the country’s wealthy landowners and business elite. But Diaz woefully neglected Mexico’s rural masses, eschewed democracy and ruthlessly repressed any kind of dissent.
His intransigence led to the outbreak of the Mexican Revolution and his eventual fall from power. He fled on a boat to Spain in May 1911 and settled in Paris, where he died in exile. He is buried in the famous Montparnasse Cemetery, alongside literary luminaries such as Jean-Paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir.
The image of Diaz as a tyrant was shaped for many years by revolutionary literature and the nationalistic mindset of Mexico’s rulers. Since the 1990s, however, some revisionists have shed a different light on the Porfiriato and its achievements. The revaluation of Diaz began to kick in under the neo-liberal presidency of Carlos Salinas de Gortari (1986-1992) and the re-opening of the country to foreign investment.
Nonetheless, repeated attempts by Diaz’s descendants to return his remains to Mexico have been rejected. The most recent commission to explore the possibility was set up in 2010 but the idea was eventually rejected.
In a special council session to be held in the city of Oaxaca on July 2, local politicians will make another call for Diaz’s remains to be brought home to rest in the Templo de la Soledad in his native city.
While some commentators believe such a move would be unhelpful at a tense time in Enrique Peña Nieto’s presidency, others, including author Alvaro Uribe, believe Diaz should be considered a hero for his remarkable development of Mexico’s infrastructure and economic accomplishments. “Even in his bad moments Diaz was never the worst leader Mexico ever had,” says Uribe. “If the remains of President Gustavo Diaz Ordaz (blamed for the 1968 student massacre in Mexico City) can lie in Mexico, why not Don Porfirio’s?”
Nonetheless, the centenary of Diaz’s passing won’t be completely ignored. An exhibition exploring his life and legacy is running all this month at the Instituto Naciona1 de Estudios Historicos de las Revoluciones de Mexico (INERHM) in Mexico City (Plaza del Carmen 27, San Angel).
But for INERHM Director Patricia Galeana, the idea of giving Diaz any kind of official homage is a no-go. She says his descendants should be allowed to bring home their forebear’s remains and hold private ceremonies but the government should not be involved in any way.
Historical analysis of Diaz and his legacy has gotten much wrong about the man, say some of his descendants. “A statesman of his stature is what Mexico needs today, “ said his great-grandson, Jose Eduardo de la Cruz Diaz, in a recent interview with the daily Milenio. “He governed with a firm hand, not with weakness.”