Latin American Countries On How They Can Best Establish New Democracy While Avoiding Democratic Decline And Breakdown Essay

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.

In the midst of the prevalence of democratic transitions, a number of developing countries are seeking to achieve the successful consolidation of civil order in modern days. Among those participants, Mexico and Nigeria has been spotlighted for the completely contrastive endings at the end of their long-adventures towards democratization since their independence; Mexico, from its independence, has maintained the political stability despite the authoritarian single-party regime and even accomplished the solid democratization at the time of the 2000 election whereas Nigerian regime has been deteriorated by a series of military cues d’états and

The Spaniards made what we now know as Mexico into a racially segregated country, where the Europeans had priority in the casta. The white Caudillos were at the top of the pyramid, while the middle class, and then the Mexican Campesinos and the Mestizos were on the bottom. Each group of people worked against each other to try and distinguish themselves from another group. After Mexico gained its independence and the colonials went back to Spain, Mexico had to find a way to function as a country on their own. Society, let alone a democracy would not continue to work if all the racial groups continued to fight against each other. The different groups needed to learn to work together, which is what complicated Mexico forming a democracy. Colonial, racial, religious, and economic legacies served as roadblocks to Mexico’s independence and ability to establish a lasting democracy, because Mexicans could no longer compete against one another like they did under Spanish rule.

Q6. During the time, many Latin American countries were slowly trying to find their way to a democracy. A democracy is a government by the people. A democratic way of life includes practice such as free elections, citizen participation, majority rule, minority rights, and a constitutional government. Many nations would begin to follow the democratic practices as well as beginning to accept their own democratic forms of government; however, to achieve a democratic government it would take years. The struggle for democracy in other nations would occur well beyond the 21st century. DUring this time, countless nations were breaking free from authoritarian rule and turning to democracies instead. More specifically, it would spread widely throughout

What would it take for one country and their people to do whatever is necessary to attain freedom and rules that would pertain to a better future? Throughout the revolutions, these questions have been answered, but fight after fight is the most noticeable action as seen so far in the chapter. This leads to the question, how would a new government cause issues, instead of helping? Latin America faced many issues dealing with independence and struggled in many areas and needed to develop a new strategy, so the issues with independence can be resolved. However, the development of the nation did not occur well due to the structure of their new government and the people wanted them to know that the old system was what they were looking for and the treatment of the people was not stable.

Revolution started to take over the world. The French Revolution started to happen, and ideas of enlightens started to spread. Latin America’s Spanish King was just removed, and the Creole generals started to lead wars of independence. Now was the time to begin a Revolution. The uneven distribution of resources lead to conflict and Revolution in Latin America by geographic luck, advanced weapons, and unfair social class.

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

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)

The rise of the middle class had a potent impact on Latin America. The middle class consisted of “a high percentage of the intellectuals, authors, teachers, and journalists” and also they had the most influential voice in the late 19th century (Charlip & Burns, 177). One of the most important points about the middle class was that they were not only the true nationalists in Latin America but also they regarded the United States as their model, thus they tried to learn something beneficial from the United Sates for their nation’s prosperity and citizens. For example, the middle class was impressed by the high North American literacy rate and also considered the high literacy rate “seemed to provide the proper preparation for an industrial society”

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.

It is impossible to separate the history of military dictatorships in Latin America from the history of economic exploitation and of US intervention in the region. The history of slavery and other forced labor in the pursuit of large-scale agriculture and resource extraction in the time of the colonies has created a legacy of economic exploitation. This poverty and inequality has in many cases led to popular uprisings and calls for reform, which provided the reason (or the excuse, depending on your point of view) to use military force to restore discipline. The United States' willingness to support strong regimes capable of securing its interests in the region also has played a decisive role. These

150). Democracy is supposed to be about equal opportunity but when bribery is brought into the balance it disrupts the scale to tip the scales into the favor of the politicians which goes against the principle of democracy (“Rise of Democracy”, para. 1). In the majority of Latin American countries there is a system called “compulsory voting” which makes it illegal not to vote. Although it is illegal not to vote, in Brazil’s case, only 78.90% of eligible voters voted for the presidential campaign in 2014 (“Voter Turnout”, para. 3). While there is a huge amount of corruption in Latin America, it can be overcome. In September of 2015, a crowd of Guatemalans chanted at President Otto Perez Molina, “Resign, now.” Their voice was heard as the ex-Guatemalan president stood down from office and is now in prison awaiting trial over an alleged corruption scandal (Watson, p.1, para. 1-3). This is just a glimpse of the power the people can hold. If the voters can get a current president out of office than imagine what can happen if everyone were to vote for who they truly believe is worthy of representing and governing the country.

After many countries in Latin America received their independence, limited change of conditions occurred and the elite maintained control in the new republics. The basis for economic inequality remained the same and the patterns persisted. In the early 19th century, the majority of countries had developed republican democracies yet the upper class still had the power to act in their own interests. A direct bearing established the extent of the elite’s ability to influence the formation of government policies. Landowners opposed any institutional change that could transfer power

Despite the democratization movements in Latin America and Eastern Europe in 1980s and 90s, Middle Eastern authoritarian regimes proved to be resilient. Despite the recent Arab Spring protests, most Middle Eastern nations live under authoritarian regimes. How do these authoritarian regimes survive for so long? What are the factors that contribute to their longevity?

Now days democracy has been establish in every Latin America country except Cuba, which is still a socialist state. It seemed that every other alternative form of government such as Marxism or Leninism has failed and been replaced by democracy. Furthermore it looks like people in Latin American really enjoy democracy and its’ benefits, as they also consider it to be the best form of government. After the failure of authoritarian leaders and the military intervene their lives, Latin American citizens wanted to change their system into a more fair and honest system, democracy. Democracy is usually defined as a system of honesty, equality, freedom of rights, though for Latin America countries it means gains, welfare and patronage. Latin