Latin America After Independence Essay

To what extent was Mexico’s independence from Spain a “full-scale assault on dependency”? This essay will investigate how the Mexican independence from Spain was only slightly a “full-scale assault on dependency”, due to several political and social conflicts. Firstly, Mexico remained a monarchy (but not under the control of Spain) after the insurgency. Secondly, there was still an official state religion in Mexico. Another reason is because social conflicts reduced the desire for independence .On the other hand, it assaulted dependency because there were some changes within the social hierarchy, and because Mexico was free from Spain.

     Latin American Independence was the drive for independence from Spain and France by the Latin American people. There were many contributing factors that ultimately led to the uprising of Latin American colonies. Europe's strong hold on the economic and political life of Latin America, was creating friction between the Latin Colonies and the European nations. Eventually, this would become enough for the Latin American people and the drive for independence from France and Spain would begin.

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.

Central America Central America, just south of Mexico and North of Panama, consists of just six countries; Guatemala, Belize, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica. Of those six, all share a distinct common history except for Belize. Belize for one is incredibly small, and while Spanish is the official language of other Central American countries, in Belize English is spoken. So throughout this paper as I carelessly say 'Central American' I am not including Belize whose history and development was far different than the others. Although Central America is located close to the United States in relation to the Eastern Hemisphere, our ways of life are indescribably different.

In the 19th century the scramble for control was under way when the Americans, Japan, and the Germans entered, other countries struggling with their empires. In the late nineteen century became a new age of imperialism in where technology and communications brought empire’s within reach. Many counties were joining the hunt fort new colonies, Americans preferred an indirect imperialism. The concept was first popularized during James K. Polk presidency, where he led the United States into the Mexican-American War of 1846. America’s version was that to “export products, ideas, and influence”, they viewed it as a “pure” version so they can share their values of democracy, and Christianity.

Prior to its independence Latin America had been controlled by external forces for hundreds of years. To be freed of control from these outside interests did not in any way guarantee Latin America a return to the status quo. In fact, the inhabitants of Latin America had done very well in assimilating their in house controllers. They adopted European language, religion, color, and just about everything else that the European culture had to offer them. Although they were free to do as they please and run their own affairs in the global neighborhood as we know it, they struggled to create an entity for themselves. They embody too much of what is not native to their region, yet the people that used to represent their land 500 years earlier

The American Revolution did much more than any of our founding fathers had ever imagined, it started a movement that would threaten the very roots of colonialism across the globe. Setting an example of how a David could overcome a Goliath, the United States inspired regions such as Latin America to fight for their rights and liberties as well. One such region that embraced the message was Upper Peru, which would later be known as Bolivia. With some key tipping points that caused the war, the leaders of the soon to be formed nation rallied its troops and won several major battles, but even they couldn’t prevent the tough times that lay in the early years of the nation. From the year 1809, Upper Peru was engaged in a

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

Politically, Latin America became infamous in the eyes of other countries for frequent regime collapses and violent tactics, which frequented the Latin American civilization. Just as in the Western Society, two politically active groups, the liberals and conservatives divided the country. The liberals who were strongly influenced by Westerners, trusted parliamentary governments, civil rights and constitutions, and wished for a great reduction in the power of the church. The liberal party believed strongly in the need for an extended education, and tended to

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

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.

During the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, the United States was the most dominant power in the Western Hemisphere. European nations conceded to the United States their right of any intervention in the Western Hemisphere and allowed the United States to do whatever they wanted. The United States took this newly bestowed power and abused it. The United States intervened in many Latin American countries and imposed their policies on to these countries against their will. A perfect example of this aggression is what occurred in the Dominican Republic in 1904. The United States intervened in this sovereign nation and took control of their economy and custom houses. A memorandum from Francis B. Loomis, the United States Assistant

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.

Because the Indians and Spanish lived in different areas in Latin America, the Indian culture and society did not change significantly. Or did there society change?