Structural Adjustment Programs

Many of these factors had either been introduced or improved by Castro and just the idea of having a country that is third world having these factors so long ago is an indication of how beneficial Fidel Castro was to Cuba. The extent to which the US — a superpower — felt threatened by a third world country like Cuba is also an indication of how beneficial Fidel Castro was to Cuba. This source further explains how under Castro there were food shortages, increased rationing and growing scarcities. The introduction of sanctions under Castro’s rule is said to have been damaging because the source these sanctions upset and disadvantaged the middle-class and therefore were a social disadvantage. This source also explores how the suspension of US exports under Castro was damaging as these badly affected people like retail merchants, manufacturers and industrialists and many of them found it difficult to remain in Cuba. Therefore, this particular policy under Fidel Castro proved to be both socially and economically

The Latin American countries have been subject to many changes ever since the American continent was discovered. These changes have mainly affected the economy, culture and power changes these countries have suffered throughout the years. According to Jon Charles Chasteen on his book “Born in Blood & Fire” During the twentieth century, there were three main events that changed the course of Latin American countries and their economies. These three events were, the emergence of nationalism, the end of World War II, and the Cuban revolution. However, in my point of view, the event that created more impact in Latin America and the future of these countries has been Cuban Revolution. It is not a secret that the Cuban Revolution created a big impact to the country’s future, unfortunately this revolution not only changed Cuba, but also the entire region of Latin America.

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

During the late twentieth century, nations throughout the Western Hemisphere found themselves exhausted economically due to a combination of recessions which occurred from the late sixties to the early nineteen eighties-caused most in part due to energy crises and government regulations to combat inflation (due to counteract Cold War spending). Combined with growing economic interdependence, due to the need for foreign resources needed for the sustainable growth and expansion of consumer-based manufacturing markets in the developed world-beginning post World War Two, the United States and impactful developing states sought to create regional zones of economic integration that could provide solutions to internal economic concerns of employment, growth, and governmental sustainability, as well as provide a platform for prosperity in regards to capitalism, inter-market sustainability, and geo-economic authority within the region. In order to do this, beginning in the late nineteen seventies, pro-capitalistic states, such as Chile, Mexico, and most recognizably the United States- , and different economic institutions-such as the World Bank and the IMF- pushed for a new wave of liberalism, emphasizing revamped laissez-faire policies. This resurgence of classical economic liberal ideology, which is known as neoliberalism, emphasized growth

The relationship between the United States of America and Latin America nations has been turbulent since the beginning of colonization. The United States had withheld a sense of superiority since its inception. Their view of Pan-Americanism is only shared by them; Canada and most Latin American nations do not share this view. They viewed Latin America’s struggle for independence as a necessity, but did not pledge their assistance until it coincided with American interests and objectives in the area. The author mentions Latin America’s one-crop economy, but they do not emphasize the role the US played in their economies or how much they were involved in their own politics. Recent events, in regards to Cuba, have made certain parts of the chapter

Throughout United States history, there has not been a more prominent and long lasting threat like the one of communism. It has been a threat to the democratic and capitalist ideals of the U.S. since before World War I, throughout the Cold War and is still until this day. When one thinks about communism, you conjure up images of the Red Scare that the Soviet Union induced and of other dictatorships throughout the western hemisphere and one might overlook the Marxist ideals that were being spread throughout our neighboring countries. These western countries were allies that the U.S. could not afford to lose during the Cold War. Latin America, which has many ties to the U.S., both geographically and politically, could pose a very strategic threat to the U.S. in its battle against communism. To understand Latin America’s communist history is to understand how much influence and intervention the U.S. had in the region during the Cold War. This report will serve to explain how communism spread to the western hemisphere, why the U.S. government had to stop that spread, and how they were able to stop many communist revolutions in Latin America.

A more recent attempt is the adaptation of neoliberalism in poor countries. We can see neoliberalism in work and its impacts on the working people in Behind The Seams (2001), Fruits of Injustice (Brandt, 2002), and Maquilapolis (2006).

When the liberals took the power away from the conservatives, commercial agriculture and product exportation took place. Eventually, came two agricultural modernization strategies; the radical policy strategy and the reform policy strategy. As stated by James Mahoney, “when successfully implemented, a radical policy strategy gave rise to radical liberalism, as in Guatemala and El Salvador. The reform strategy led to reformist liberalism, as was the case for Costa Rica” (230, Mahoney). Aborted liberalism took place when the two strategies mentioned before were not successfully implemented. The point of these liberalisms was to provide a structured and organized foundation for “military-authoritarian, democratic and traditional-authoritarian regimes” (230, Mahoney). In Guatemala and El Salvador, radical liberalism made changes in the military-authoritarianism aspect. In Costa Rica, electoral incorporation allowed politicians to go after the demands of democracy. In Honduras and Nicaragua, US intervention cut off the reformist and radical liberal ideas. Liberalism changed a lot of things Central America and was a part of the development of each

9. Review Klein, Chapters 2 and 3. She explains the influence of US economists, especially Milton Friedman, in designing development strategies, and of the US in installing or supporting governments that would carry them out in several countries that had been pursuing a ‘middle’ development path of ‘regulated’ capitalism in which the state played a large role in supporting social welfare and the development of local businesses. You can expect test questions on this material, including the role of the US in ‘regime change’ in these countries, the role of US-trained economists afterward, and the path that these countries were supposed to pursue.

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”

The Americas, now known as Latin America, has gone through many changes in its history, from being conquered by Spain and Portugal, to the people fighting for its independence and finally, making a living as newly independent countries. From the years 1850 to the end of the 19th century, each region had influences, specifically those that dealt with the after effects colonial rule had on the land. Nations that made up Latin America began modifying different portions in their government in attempts to benefit the majority of the people. More or so, they accomplished this goal, each with their own challenges. Evidently, changes within the social, political and economic systems were focused on external factors.

Annotated Bibliography: Latin America - A Survey Black, Jan Knippers. Latin America: Its Problems and Its Promise: A Multidisciplinary Introduction. vol. 5th ed, Westview Press, 2011. Jan Knippers Black is a professor of Human Rights, International and Comparative Politics of the Western Hemisphere, Women's Rights, and Globalization at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey.

Many foreign policy makers in the western hemisphere and other developing countries often behave as if capitalism and democracy are inseparable. Nevertheless, there are some scholars that argue that the relationship between this political and economic systems are not complicated. Democracy and the market economy are two systems that are closely intertwined and mutually reinforcing or weakening. Since both of them are related to freedom. If one of these systems is strengthened , the other also strengthens and weakens if one weakens the other. Most Latin American countries, including Nicaragua have struggled to establish a democratic political system and have a capitalist economic system, since this so called “capitalism” is hierarchical,

Fidel Castro’s Cuban Revolution is still discussed today in many households and academic facilities as one of the most important events that contributed to the current state of many Latin American nations. Due to the importance of this event, it is considered as an emotionally fueled topic for anyone who is associated with the Latin American identity. Many discussions are based on an emotionally fueled response, which give rise to two main arguments. The first of which is that Fidel is a hero amongst Cubans and Latin Americans for revolting against the authoritarian dictatorships prevalent in the region. The counter argument states that Fidel was an even more cruel dictator, who tainted Cuba, along with other Latin American nations. However, both arguments are too simplistic, and do not encompass the common facts that have been outlined in this school of thought. The political critics and theorist that have contributed to the academic discussion include Thomas Wright, Jorge Casteñeda, Peter Winn, and Che Guevara. All have interesting opinions and arguments about the Cuban Revolution, each with a different perspective. After analyzing this school of thought, the Cuban Revolution benefited Latin America as a whole in its early years, as it finally included agrarian reform in the main discussion, and it created the leftist platform that contributed to the “Pink Tide.” However, in the long term, Castro’s regime became more authoritarian and crippled its citizens’ political

This was the first time Latin America entered the global market; although this was a great achievement, Latin American citizens were being exploited for their labor. As a result, exploitation of Latin America established a new era referred as Neocolonialism. Today, it no longer had the momentum to achieve economic prosperity as it once did before World War II; in addition, Latin American countries are now classified as developing countries due to social and political conflict deeply rooted in its society.