The Foundation (CEPS) in its analysis, trying to explain political leftist tendencies of the 21st century in Latin America, especially in Venezuela. They concluded that the neo-liberal policies and the Washington Consensus had a particularly negative impact on the social sphere, which was wrangly implemented and probably caused increased social tensions and violence. Then they warn to be alert of Bolivarian Alternative in Bolivia, Ecuador and Venezuela. These countries are characterized as insufficiently ambitious in its internal politics and ideological suffer from insecurity heads of state or their ambivalence. Bolivarianism the mainstream of political theory based on the life and work of Simon Bolivar. Bolivarianism became over the years a matter of worship with support of the Bolivarian countries (Bolivia, Colombia, Peru, Ecuador, Panama and Venezuela). A strong link is given to Simon Bolivar and his concept of unity of the Latin American area. Venezuela spearheads the ALBA alliance, which is an example of the Latin American left "convergence" in South America. Hugo …show more content…
Venezueal sees Bolivia as its suburbs of economic policy based on the energy riches of these two republics (Venezuela - oil / Bolivia - Natural gas). Venezuela conceives its geopolitical space a rather broad and ambitious as it primarily relies on its oil wealth. Energy nationalism its potential considerably damaged. In this respect, compete with Brazil and recently with Colombia about an oil influence in the Latin American area. The driving venezuelan force has two positive and one negative aspects. These positive factors is its integrative dynamics and ability to fill national budget of petrodollars. The State is aware that the main raw materials are the most valuable natural resources - oil, natural gas, iron ore, gold, bauxite, coal and other minerals. Its negative component directed to the ideological
With other Latin American uprisings occurring Simon Bolivar led the South American independence. Bolivar was a wealthy Creole born in Venezuela but educated in Spain. Influenced by Enlightenment ideas, Bolivar called for independence for all South Americans. He gained firm control of his native Venezuela in 1819. His armies then turned toward Columbia and Ecuador. In the south Jose de San Martin rallied Argentinean forces against Spain. Bolivar and San Martin met in Peru, which became independent along with Upper Peru (Bolivia) in 1824. Although Bolivar was unsuccessful in uniting South Americans into a single nation, he is known as the continent's "liberator."
Bolivars tone is one of authority and demand in which he shows his trust in the law by saying “ the rule of the law is more powerful than the rule of tyrants”, that he believes if it is done his way , a non-democratic way. Despite having some enlightenment ideas his thoughts on government organization(hereditary senate) and non-democratic governments go against these values. In contrast to Bolivar , L’overture doesn’t put as much trust in government on the contrary, he fears that there justifying detestable plans and justifying them as being acts of patriotism. He knows that the interests of those in power don’t have the people’s welfare at heart. He knows that slavery is not the way to a better Santo Domingo and that it being reinforced will only bring “total ruin and inevitable destruction”. His tone shows outrage and demand for him and his people to be
Revolutions hit Latin America, and the fight for independence would change history forever. In the early 1800’s the lower class known as Mulattos, Mestizos and mid-class creoles were in a battle for a new form of government, against the abundant and powerful peninsulares. Rebellions in Latin America were fueled by the unjust distribution of food, wealth, and power.
In the late 1990 's, Latin America was facing a turn towards left-wing governments as they started drifting away from neoliberalism. This was coined as the 'Pink Tide ' of Latin America which took place from around 1998 until around 2009. The origins of the term came from a New York Times reporter who commented that the election of the Uruguayan Leader was “not so much a red tide but more of a pink one” (Pittsburgh n.d.). A red tide symbolizes communism whereas a pink one leans towards a moderate reign of communism with the integration of socialist ideas. Countries in Latin America turned to neo-liberal policies “which privatized public companies, cut foreign investment, public spending, etc” (Arditi 64). These were prompted by such organizations as the “International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank which referred to the actions as the 'Washington Consensus '” (Arditi 67-68). The Pink Tide “rejected privatization of state services and liberalized international trade” (Arditi 72). In other words, this push by domestic resistance from Latin American governments created the Pink Tide via rejecting the Washington Consensus. Since then, it seems that the Pink Tide is receding due to the rise of center-right to right opposition members. Moreover, the factors that triggered the Pink Tide has since diminished. Therefore, it is highly unlikely that there will be any
As Charles Bergquist observes, "Crises in Colombia tend to generate cycles of violence instead of mutations in the political regime." The reason is simple: regime changes in Colombia tend to produce very little change in anything other than nominal rule. Since Colombia's independence from Spain in the early 19th century, Colombia has seen a series of civil wars and secessions (Venezuela, Ecuador, and Panama the last coming rather conveniently at a time when the U.S. was prepared to pay millions for a canal through its nation preparation that later resulted in a multi-million dollar redress to Columbia). Colombia's political history, therefore, has been colored by outside influences pulling on the two dominant liberal and conservative parties, with violent exchanges, and long periods of instability being the consequences. While regime changes have occurred, they have not produced significant improvements. Rather, Colombia in the 20th century has become a nesting ground for paramilitary forces and drug traffickers, with U.S. Central Intelligence operatives contributing heavily to the violent conflict that has risen between regimes. This paper will examine the regime types that preceded the Rojas Pinilla regime in mid-20th century Colombia, analyze their similarities and differences, and discuss the extent to which Rojas Pinilla reached his goals and objectives.
The documents that provide the most evidence for this topic include “The Americas: A Hemispheric History” and the “Venezuelan Declaration of Independence”. Document 3 portrays the outcomes of the Latin American Revolution on the natives, It talks about how people gained popular sovereignty, utilized virtues of republicanism and citizenship, used European Enlightenment Philosophies, and codified laws and the Constitution. This portrays how following the separation of Latin America, they were able to gain the necessary freedoms to establish their own rules and regulations, thereby forming nations/countries. Document 6 also provides a valuable source of information as it gives a passage from a country’s Declaration of Independence. It talks about their rights to freedom, and it explains the results and principles formed following the revolution. The author has written this document to justify and claim independence from Spain, and form an independent nation. During this time period, the Creole Revolutions were occurring in Latin America. The creole class, native-born with European ancestry, resented the power that the Spaniards provided to the Peninsulares. Through a series of revolts and battles, these coalesced into the Latin American Independence Movements. Following reformation movements and support from external sources (such as the Roman Catholic
Comprised of landowners, lawyers, judges, priests, military officers and public officials, the creole and mazomba leaders of Latin American society found insatiable inspiration from the American and French Revolutions of the eighteenth century, and flooded Latin America with a liberal movement for independent nations. Conservatives, in contrast, sought to preserve the traditions of the colonial period, and the Orthodox rule of both the church and foreign-born royal authorities. Yet Old World flavor soured bitterly in a New World teeming with liberal thinkers and daring rebels. Desiring to surpass Old World peninsular and reinós rulers, creole and mazomba won control over local resources and economic development.
Venezuela, located in the Latin American region, is a country that has been characterized by its abundance of oil reserve. A natural resource that has shaped the history and development of the country, affecting its economic, social and most important is political spheres. For many years Venezuela was controlled by authoritarian regimes. The country, being very important in the sense of geo-politics due to its abundance of oil, has been a key player in the international arena and most important, to those that for many years kept the country under their regime. It was not until 1958 that Venezuela experienced the change to democracy and a stable democracy was kept between the two main political parties of the time, Accion Democratica (AD)
Simón Bolívar was said to be a revolutionary during the period of the early nineteenth century because he wanted to change Latin America. His goal was to promote change and gain independence for the Latin American states from Spanish rule, and
After the age of enlightenment, colonies and nations around the world began questioning their rulers and ruling nations. Liberal and nationalist ideas spread across Europe and the world, especially after the French Revolution. When these beliefs spread to the colonies of America, independence movements and revolts occurred. The Latin American revolution and Haitian revolution were both significant events during the 19th century that affected both their respective nations and the world. While both revolutions resulted similarly such that a social hierarchy based on race existed after independence, they differ in that while the Latin American revolutions placed an emphasis on ending the Spanish casta system, Haitian revolution was based on freeing slaves.
The ELN operate in Columbia additionally, they have ties to Cuba, as well as other Latin American countries. The objective of the ELN is to topple the current Colombian government and establish a communist model (Stanford, 2012). The ELN’s motivation stems primarily from the revolution in Cuba, as well as a large Catholic influence.
In the past couple of decades, populist ideas spread through all of Latin America. First, Cuba adopted these ideals with the arrival of Fidel Castro to power in 1959. Then, Hugo R. Chavez adopted Cuban ideals in Venezuela in 1998. Since Venezuela adopted populism, it spread quickly throughout countries in South America. All of the countries that adopted populism deteriorated throughout the years reaching a point of social unrest. Populist governments like Chavism are prejudiced to the country and its citizens. In Venezuela, Chavism led to ridiculous crime rates, huge monetary devaluation, corruption inside the government, famine, and social unhappiness.
The oil-rich Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, located on the northern coast of South America, was for many decades considered among the wealthiest nations in the entire continent. While having the largest proven oil reserves in the world has often proved a tremendous boon for Venezuela, the very black gold that has been the cause of its success has also proven to repeatedly be its kryptonite. Over half of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product stems from petroleum exports – which equates to approximately 95% of total exports. It is really not too hard to imagine what drastic consequences shifts in global oil prices could have on the economy.
The main purpose of the following report is to provide information about the profile of The Bolivarian Republican of Venezuela; in order to study the current situation of the country for further investigations in the future that may help to understand the opportunities and risk involve in importing and opening new markets in Venezuela.
With an economy dominated by the production of oil, Venezuela has enjoyed the highest standard of living in Latin America. In spite of its success in the oil industry, agriculture and manufacturing also play important roles in Venezuela’s economy. With this in mind, it would seem as though Venezuela’s economic state has flourished. Rather, it has suffered from the effects of political influence, corruption, and poor economic management. The distribution of wealth across Venezuela has caused the elite to benefit at the cost of the working people. This is mainly due to the economic and political structure of the country. Even with the plentiful resources Venezuela possesses, it is constantly being threatened by political instability,