# Goodbye, DF



## TurtleToo (Aug 23, 2013)

Federal District is now officially Mexico City 

The change went into effect on Friday. As far as I can tell, this means that Mexico City will have its own city-level government, instead of being run by the federal government. Do I understand that correctly? But is it part of the state of Mexico, or not? One article describes the city as "surrounded by the state of Mexico," and "autonomous," which makes it sound like its own entity, separate from the state. But this article mentions Mexico City, in the state of Mexico, in the country of Mexico, which sounds as if it IS part of the state.

In the past I assumed that DF was not part of any state (administratively) in the same way that Washington, D.C. is not part of any state. But perhaps I was wrong! 

Anyway, happy address change to all you former DF-ers!

.


----------



## ojosazules11 (Nov 3, 2013)

It has not been and will not be part of the State of Mexico (Edo. Mexico), but rather it will now be the 32nd state in the country of Mexico. 

Mexico City to become 32nd state |

Nace la Ciudad de México y desaparece el Distrito Federal | Internacional | EL PAÃ�S

Also it is surrounded by the State of Mexico on three sides only. To the south it borders Morelos.


----------



## Isla Verde (Oct 19, 2011)

TurtleToo said:


> Federal District is now officially Mexico City
> 
> The change went into effect on Friday. As far as I can tell, this means that Mexico City will have its own city-level government, instead of being run by the federal government. Do I understand that correctly? But is it part of the state of Mexico, or not? One article describes the city as "surrounded by the state of Mexico," and "autonomous," which makes it sound like its own entity, separate from the state. But this article mentions Mexico City, in the state of Mexico, in the country of Mexico, which sounds as if it IS part of the state.
> 
> ...


For many years Mexico City was a non-autonomous department of the federal government, with its head of government chosen by the president of the country. The first elected mayor was Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas, who took office in 1997. It is not and has never been a part of the State of Mexico. In fact, there are three "Mexicos": the country, the state, and the national capital, which in Spanish is often referred to as simply "México".


----------



## ojosazules11 (Nov 3, 2013)

And now there is a debate as to how to call the residents of the _Ciudad de México_, since they are no longer "defeños". Some say since "mexicano" refers to citizens of the nation, and "mexiquense" to residents of the Estado de México, that "mexiqueño" be used for those from Cd. México. Others argue that the already commonly used term "capitalino" makes more sense, and so far from what I've read, this seems the most popular term. (There's always "chilango", which I'm sure will still be used, but it's hardly appropriate as the "official" term since it often is considered pejorative.)


----------



## xolo (May 25, 2014)

Isla Verde said:


> For many years Mexico City was a non-autonomous department of the federal government, with its head of government chosen by the president of the country. The first elected mayor was Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas, who took office in 1997. * It is not and has never been a part of the State of Mexico.* In fact, there are three "Mexicos": the country, the state, and the national capital, which in Spanish is often referred to as simply "México".


I'm not completely sure this is true. What about 1810-1824? (Before the new federal government created the Federal District). Or before the war of independence?. I'm too busy right now to research this.


----------



## Isla Verde (Oct 19, 2011)

xolo said:


> I'm not completely sure this is true. What about 1810-1824? (Before the new federal government created the Federal District). Or before the war of independence?. I'm too busy right now to research this.


I guess I should have made clear that I was speaking of recent Mexican history, not what was true during and immediately after the War of Independence. When you're less busy, it would be great if you could research this topic and let everyone here know what you've discovered.


----------



## AlanMexicali (Jun 1, 2011)

ojosazules11 said:


> It has not been and will not be part of the State of Mexico (Edo. Mexico), but rather it will now be the 32nd state in the country of Mexico.
> 
> Mexico City to become 32nd state |
> 
> ...


I saw a sign when leaving Mexico City stating we were entering the state of Puebla on the way to Teotihuacán. So it also borders the state of Puebla evidently. I also saw a sign stating the same, entering the state of Puebla, when coming from Querétaro to Coapa a city in the south east in El DF. We passed some pretty poor colonias in that area of El DF. Our friends live in Coapa and said that part of El DF is very cime ridden and the police are horrible. Even the taxis lock their doors there.


----------



## ojosazules11 (Nov 3, 2013)

AlanMexicali said:


> I saw a sign when leaving Mexico City stating we were entering the state of Puebla on the way to Teotihuacán. So it also borders the state of Puebla evidently. I also saw a sign stating the same, entering the state of Puebla, when coming from Querétaro to Coapa a city in the south east in El DF. We passed some pretty poor colonias in that area of El DF. Our friends live in Coapa and said that part of El DF is very cime ridden and the police are horrible. Even the taxis lock their doors there.


I wonder if the new "State" of Mexico City will have exactly the same boundaries as the Distrito Federal. I haven't read differently. The DF was completely surrounded by the State of Mexico to West, North, and East, with Morelos to the south. 

But the greater metropolitan area may reach as far as Puebla State. 

Here are a couple of links to maps: 

Mapa Estado de México

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ef/Zona_Metropolitana_de_M%C3%A9xico.svg/667px-Zona_Metropolitana_de_M%C3%A9xico.svg.png

https://www.google.ca/maps/place/Mexico+City,+Federal+District,+Mexico/@19.3047276,-99.3104323,10.5z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x85ce0026db097507:0x54061076265ee841

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ciudad_de_M%C3%A9xico

According to this last link (the Wikipedia page about Mexico City) the ZMCM (Zona Metropolitana de la Ciudad de Mexico) or the Mexico City Metropolitan Zone was defined in 1990 to include the 16 delegations of the DF, plus 38 municipalities in the State of Mexico. A more recent definition includes the 16 delegations of the DF, 40 municipalities in the State of Mexico, and 1 municipality in the State of Hidalgo. 

So I guess the Mexico City Metropolitan Zone may border Puebla State and Hidalgo, but the former DF, now Cd. Mexico, doesn't reach that far.

As an aside, when I look at how far the DF/Cd. Mexico extends to the south on the Google map (zooming in to clearly see the boundary between Distrito Federal and Morelos), it's halfway into the Parque Nacional El Tepozteco (PNT). The PNT actually reaches to Tepoztlan and is a short walk from my house (technically Tepoztlan is IN the park, but my house is really right near the edge of where it becomes wilderness). I guess if I went for a nice long walk in the "park", I might be able to walk to "Cd. Mexico", at least its southern border!


----------



## Isla Verde (Oct 19, 2011)

ojosazules11 said:


> According to this last link (the Wikipedia page about Mexico City) the ZMCM (Zona Metropolitana de la Ciudad de Mexico) or the Mexico City Metropolitan Zone was defined in 1990 to include the 16 delegations of the DF, plus 38 municipalities in the State of Mexico. A more recent definition includes the 16 delegations of the DF, 40 municipalities in the State of Mexico, and 1 municipality in the State of Hidalgo.


I was wondering if the ZMCM is an actual political entity or just a way of describing Mexico City and its areas of influence. Did the delegations and municipalities mentioned above cooperate officially in any way to govern the ZMCM?


----------



## ojosazules11 (Nov 3, 2013)

Isla Verde said:


> I was wondering if the ZMCM is an actual political entity or just a way of describing Mexico City and its areas of influence. Did the delegations and municipalities mentioned above cooperate officially in any way to govern the ZMCM?


Good question, Isla. My interpretation of what is written (see below - sorry, I don't have time to translate it right now, and I know you can read it) is that it is not an actual political entity, but that there is a degree of official cooperation, as the indicated municipalities in Edo. Mexico and Hidalgo are considered to be "conurbados" with DF/Cd Mex. According to DRAE: 
*conurbación*
_Del ingl. conurbation._
1. f. Urb. Conjunto de varios núcleos urbanos inicialmente independientes y contiguos por sus márgenes, que al crecer acaban formando una unidad funcional.

Here is the text from Wikipedia:
_Zona Metropolitana
Artículo principal: Zona Metropolitana de la Ciudad de México

Zona Metropolitana del Valle de México.
Como consecuencia del crecimiento demográfico del Distrito Federal, en la década de 1970 los municipios mexiquenses aledaños al Distrito Federal quedaron conurbados a la zona urbana. Su integración en la zona metropolitana está relacionada con su condición de zonas industriales, condición que atrajo a buena parte de los migrantes que llegaron al valle de México por aquella época. En 1990 se definió que la ZMCM abarcaba las dieciséis delegaciones del Distrito Federal más treinta y ocho municipios del Estado de México. La más reciente definición, aprobada por el gobierno local, los gobiernos estatales de México e Hidalgo y el gobierno federal, definieron la Zona Metropolitana de la Ciudad de México como el área urbana formada por las 16 delegaciones del Distrito Federal, 40 municipios conurbados del Estado de México y uno del Estado de Hidalgo.51

*Está definición es positiva en el sentido de que todos los municipios están conurbados o cumplen con los requisitos de integración económica y social*. También se aprobó la definición de la Zona Metropolitana del Valle de México, integrada por otros 18 municipios del Estado de México (en total 58), como definición normativa, es decir, integrada por algunos municipios que todavía no se han conurbado, pero que dada la dinámica de crecimiento poblacional y geográfico, quedarán integradas en el futuro próximo._

And here is another link to a page specifically about the Zona Metropolitana del Valle de Mexico (ZMVM), which is a bit bigger than the ZMCM. 
https://es.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zona_Metropolitana_del_Valle_de_M%C3%A9xico&redirect=no

Many/most large cities in various parts of the world have extended beyond their official political borders, and have similar designations, including Toronto (GTA = Greater Toronto Area), Buenos Aires "Gran Buenos Aires", etc. (Mind you, GTA with 6 million seems downright puny compared to ZMVM with its 22 million.)


----------



## Isla Verde (Oct 19, 2011)

ojosazules11 said:


> Good question, Isla. My interpretation of what is written (see below - sorry, I don't have time to translate it right now, and I know you can read it) is that it is not an actual political entity, but that there is a degree of official cooperation, as the indicated municipalities in Edo. Mexico and Hidalgo are considered to be "conurbados" with DF/Cd Mex. According to DRAE:
> *conurbación*
> _Del ingl. conurbation._
> 1. f. Urb. Conjunto de varios núcleos urbanos inicialmente independientes y contiguos por sus márgenes, que al crecer acaban formando una unidad funcional.
> ...


Thanks for doing all of this research, ojos, but I still find these explanations rather vague. For example, that all of the "municipios" in the ZMVM "cumplen con los requisitos de integración económica y social" [comply with the requirements of economic and social integration]. Does this involve actual laws and regulations promulgated somewhere that all of the component municipalities agree to go along with?


----------



## Meritorious-MasoMenos (Apr 17, 2014)

I have no idea what is the truth, but Mexico City friends in the educated and business classes said the name change was designed by a big PR agency for big wigs in both the capital and federal governments who wanted a strong, simple name that would be known around the world - Paris, Rome, Tokyo, New York City ... and, the Distrito Federal? That just doesn't cut it in the 21st century, went the thinking. Of course, Mexicans interchangeably just called the DF, "Mexico," especially Mexicans living outside the capital, which the big shots wanted that term to be reserved over time just for the country itself.

The Mexicans I know all hoot in derision over calling it "Ciudad de Mexico." There doesn't seem to be anything short and snappy that would be as instantly evocative as "Paris," or "Singapore."

That's all anecdotal, of course.

I myself sometime suspect, ****** imperialist running dog that I am, that the top PR people would secretly have loved to suggest that the name be changed officially to "Mexico City," which would have been instantly a world class name instantly recognizable the world over to speakers of all languages, and so snappy and short,, but nationalists would've strung them up along Avenida Reforma.


----------

