How Did The Middle Class Affect Latin America

The Vanguard of the Atlantic World by James Sanders seems to do little more than reiterate the concept that American republican modernity was debated by various countries located in Latin America in regards to their status as a united global political power. Not to say that these nations were united in terms of alliances, or treaties, but rather that some intellectuals adopted the concept of a “sisterhood” of republic democracies. The analysis of the political systems in Latin America after their independence from European nations is not where the disappointment lies, but rather the lack of context given to various components in his research that were supposed to show the transition of Latin America during its state of transformation from colonial territories to independent republican nations.

The populist governments, seen in the 1950’s and 1960’s in South America, spurred industrial growth and a sense of “consciousness” amongst the inhabitants of the Latin American countries. The industrial growth greatly benefited the middle-class and the working-class; however, the poor were driven into shantytowns and rural areas. To illustrate the great poverty of this time in Latin America, people living in “shantytowns” resided in vast settlements built of cardboard and other available materials such as metal and sheets of plastic. These “towns” frequently lacked proper sanitation. One could imagine how living in these shantytowns would degrade the human spirit and foster a sense of worthlessness. The abrupt shift in the social classes

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.

Supreme Executive Power led the Mexican people with the purpose of installing a workable ex-

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.

Models for post-revolutionary Latin American government are born of the complex economic and social realities of 17th and 18th century Europe. From the momentum of the Enlightenment came major political rebellions of the elite class against entrenched national monarchies and systems of power. Within this time period of elitist revolt and intensive political restructuring, the fundamental basis for both liberal and conservative ideology was driven deep into Latin American soil. However, as neither ideology sought to fulfill or even recognize the needs or rights of mestizo people under government rule, the initial liberal doctrine pervading Latin American nations perpetuated

When the Europeans first arrived in Latin America, they didn’t realize the immensity of their actions. As history has proven, the Europeans have imposed many things on the Latin American territory have had a long, devastating effect on the indigenous people. In the centuries after 1492, Europeans would control much of South America and impose a foreign culture upon the already established civilizations that existed before their arrival. These imposed ideas left the continent weak and resulted in the loss of culture, the dependence on European countries, and a long standing ethnic tension between natives and settlers which is evident even to this day. The indigenous people of South America, which

American attitudes towards Latin America can be summed up as an extension of larger global directives, and the exclusion of foreign powers in the region. This was highlighted especially during the Cold War as US involvement was essentially in competition with the USSR. Latin America was therefore a mere pawn in the larger context of US-Soviet competition for global dominance. The actions and methods used are also characterized by the lack of an international authority, or an atmosphere of inter-state anarchy, which shaped their calculations in the endeavor to increase their influence over Latin America. When one analyzes the situation, it seems only rational that the United States treated its southern neighbors so, due to the geographical

This is a good thing about Latin America because it would probably impact the economy if it wasn’t there. It is the Panama Canal. The Panama Canal is a waterway that brings together the Atlantic Ocean and Pacific Ocean. It really helped trade in Latin America. The canal was built by the Americans in 1904 and a lot of leaders took over the project, including John Wallace, John Stevens and George Washington Goethals. The project was finished in 1914 after taking 10 years to build. The Panama Canal is an important feature to Latin America because it is a quicker way to import and export goods or cargo. It made it easier because instead of going all the way around South America you can go through Panama which saves you a lot of time. That means a lot of more ships pass through. If there was no Panama Canal like I said it would take a lot longer to travel to bring stuff somewhere by water. I also think there would be less ships traveling because not a lot of people would like to travel a long time at sea. I also think a lot of people would die because the trip would take so long. That is how the Panama Canal impacted Latin America in a good way.

What comes across your mind when you think of Latin America? Latin America consists of many different cultures, people with ethnic backgrounds; Mexico, Central America, South America. Latin America has the diversity in its people, and succession has brought along what makes Latin America what it is in modern times. In the article “Latin America: Myth and Reality,” the author mentions that “stereotypes spring from ignorance and bias,” which I think is significantly appropriate to bring up in this conversation (“Latin America” 3). Latin America is united by their differences, and I think most of the stereotypes are disappearing, while people are becoming more educated. But to comprehend what lies behind the mask, we all must disregard labels, and instead appreciate Latin America for who they all are. To mention a few, let’s dive into the article to understand some common stereotypes that someone might have.

With the increase in industrialization, particularly rail roads and steam boats, Latin America could efficiently export more goods. The installation of railroads and increased trade stabilized the economy of many countries. As long as Europe and the United States required raw materials, the economy would continue to grow. With the economy growing, political stability followed. This is demonstrated in Chasteen’s essay “Governance did become more orderly. As the profits of the export boom rose, government revenues from import/export taxes rose too…Higher government revenues afforded middle-class people new employment opportunities…Greater stability and prosperity attracted further investment from aboard intensifying trade, and the cycle repeated itself” (Chasteen, 207). As more money flowed into the continent, the more the government improved. Using the available revenue from the export boom, local governments could afford better equipment and put down rebellions with less casualties. The government was better able to provide more individuals with employment opportunities, thus stabilizing the politics in the Spanish Americas.

Galeano portrays this moment in Latin American history as the instant U.S investors took control over the industries. He details the dangers they went through when producing one item to export for the benefit of foreigners, and how they later imported the processed goods from those same foreign countries, injecting money only overseas. The fact that Latin America needed imports to survive initiated the imperial link the U.S has upon it. As stated by Galeano, “The growing dependence on foreign supplies produces the growing identification of the interest of U.S. capitalists operating in Latin America with U.S. national security”11, bluntly showing the relationship between the United States and Latin America. “With petroleum, as with coffee or meat, rich countries profit more from the work of consuming it than do poor countries from the work of producing it”12. Because profit was not being retained in the Latin American countries, nationalization of the industries became of importance. The United States offered intervention in order to protect everyone’s interests with the proposal of free trade, but this was no more than another manipulation to continue having power over Latin America and its resources: “Latin America’s big ports, through which the wealth of its soil and subsoil passed en route to distant centers of power, were being built as instruments of the conquest and domination of the countries to which they belonged, and as conduits

Poverty, or the inability to afford basic human needs, is an issue that is spread worldwide. There are people everywhere who cannot afford shelter, food, healthcare, or education. It seems easy enough to ignore the bum asking for change on the street, but it becomes near impossible in regions where whole families are begging on the street. This rings true in Latin America and it is extremely frustrating to see social inequality this extreme. This essay will examine how much poverty exists in Latin America, why the amount of poverty is so disproportionate and what can possibly be done to alleviate the amount of poverty in these countries.

Harris, Richard L., and Jorge Nef. Capital, Power, and Inequality in Latin America and the Caribbean. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2008. Print.

La tierra mas hermosa. The most beautiful land. Latin America and the Caribbean maintain the humble beauty of many indigenous regions. The rugged mountains of Bolivia are scattered across graded lands. The Quechua people can be seen wearing richly decorated ponchos as they plant seeds for forming. Weathered volcanic lavas are stretched over the lands of Guatemala, and the heavily wooded forest trees can also be seen in the eastern slopes of the Andes. The azure blue oceans of Havana sparkle as the golden sun illuminates the sky. These humble lands have always been here; streams of people have flowed through these lands for centuries. It is only the globalización that is relatively new, and along with that comes the life one lives in these lands--pobreza y viviendo en el infierno [poverty and living in hell]. The impact of globalization in Latin America has caused a ripple in the lives of many individuals living in Latin America and the Caribbean. Although globalization is not a new concept, the process of globalization has drastically expanded and involved into social, political, and economic changes that weakens the sovereignty and power that helps create policies and reform government institutions.