Rules And Formal Rules For Informal Rules

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.

Today, instead of weaker Latin American countries being colonized by an imperial power like they were in history, they have been given the appearance of authority while Western

Even though most of Latin America became independent of European colonial rule in the 19c, what were some of the cultural influences and other ties that still existed between the two continents? Between 1810 and 1825, all the Spanish territories on the American mainland gain their sovereignty from Spain. Simultaneously, the power of the Catholic Church diminishes, including its patronage of the visual arts. During these war-torn years, cultural production declines. These years witness political reform and the beginnings of self-fashioned societies. Caudillos or military dictators initially fill the vacuum left by the break-up of colonial rule, including Juan Manuel de Rosas (1793–1877) in Argentina,

In the Americas, one change proved beneficial in the realm of politics. Over a period of ten years political tension grew between the colonial government in the 13 North American colonies and the

Sound institutions will boost confidence across the board and encourage investment so long as no one has to factor into the equation the huge levels of gratuitous uncertainty that stem from useless government intervention. We have to accept that external circumstances will create good and bad times. No economic theory can ward off hurricanes, disease, or war, even if sound social institutions can contain some of their adverse effects. But the purpose of government is not to eliminate all the uncertainties of nature and politics. It is to not add to the confusion by creating baroque structures of taxation, regulation, and government spending that add fresh layers of uncertainty through mechanisms that expend real resources in order to reduce social output.

Economic Development: Growth is associated with structural, social change and change in the important institutions of the economy.

The Spanish settlements and the English colonies were very different in the aspects of politics. While the Spanish had a king to rule the English had the rule of a self government. The differences between the rules were that the Spanish were controlled and the English were uncontrolled. The English colonist had an opinion whereas the Spanish colonists did not. The Spanish made a good profit because of their king’s rules being as strict as they were. The English did not make a good profit because they did not have the strict rules on trade like the the Spanish.

OUTLINE Chapter: 13 – Title: The Age of Empire, 1450-1750 I. Introduction A. Question: What was the difference between the European nations governing their colonies in the Americas? (p.627) B. Context: The Americas were at first the land of the Indians until it was founded by the three ships of Christopher Columbus in 1492, which was followed by other conquests of European nations such as: British, Spanish, French, Dutch, and Portuguese.

European colonization had a significant impact on the systems of government if the New World. Discuss changes and continutities in the political system of one area (North America, Mesoamerica, the Caribbean, or South America) during 1450 to 1750.

Latin America as we know it today has undergone many changes throughout history. The beginning for this time of change was 1808. Spain, the country most widely responsible for the colonization of Latin America, was in trouble with France’s master of conquest, Napoleon Bonaparte. Napolien overthrew the King of Spain and replaced him with his brother, Joseph Bonaparte. The repercusions of this evet rolled through Latin America and primed the atmosphere for revolution. The colonial people of Latin America had no loyalty to the new Jing Joseph. This lack of respect for the new

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

Racial inequality plays a key role in achieving the consolidation of democracy, due to its constant dependency of a class hierarchy. Since the beginning of Latin American history, those who controlled power were considered the elitist class. The elites had the resources and financial stability to hold places of power, and ultimately controlling all around them. In the colonial period of Latin America, the Encomienda and Hacienda systems displayed the different classes and rights each one had in a new light. The encomienda was a system where the royal crown of Spain granted charters of land

The Bourbon Reforms in Spanish America and the Pombaline Reforms in Brazil were both motivated by the European state’s interest in increasing defense, centralizing authority, and expanding economic benefits of the their Latin American colonies.

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.

In the Acemeglu, Johnson and Robinson article, “Institutions as a Fundamental Cause of Long Term Growth”, the authors emphasize how institutions are the main determinant of economic development because stronger institutions allow for more growth in education, security, and health. To observe whether strong institutions determine economic growth it is important to mention the characteristics of a strong institution that allows for fast growth. Strong institutions are able to enforce property rights, a fair judiciary, efficient bureaucracies, intellectual property rights, corporation government bankruptcy laws, and democracy (e.g. “(Lecture 13)”). Going in depth