The Politics Of Latin America

Those creoles pushing towards revolution to free themselves from Spanish rule felt that the Spanish crown was only abusing, discriminating and holding them back form growing economically. The elite felt they were not part of a revolution seeing themselves only as people who were All those part of the social context of Latin America, felt differently within Indians, on side of the Spanish King, though great abuse fell through. "Nonetheless, the Indians of New Spain (and elsewhere) enjoyed a set of legal privileges, exemptions, and protection which significantly interferes with their complete integration into colonial society, and kept them in a legal bubble of tutelage ruptured only with the advent of independent Mexican nationhood in the third decade of the nineteenth century (Van Young, 154). The point here is that where these and other legal and administrative remedies were applied in favor of the Indians of colonial New Spain, they were applied in the kings' name. Furthermore, religious and civic ritual of all kinds constantly stressed the centrality of the Spanish king to the colonial commonwealth, and his benevolence and fatherly concern with the welfare of his weakest subjects (Van Young 155). "Situated as they were between the Spaniards and the masses. The creoles wanted more than equality for themselves and less than equality for their inferiors" (Lynch, 44). The creoles discriminated against those in lower classes than themselves.

However, even after gaining independence both regions still had a societal social structure based on race. Social structure seems to exist in many colonies around the world, as demonstrated by the Spanish colony in the Philippines. The Philippines social structure was very similar to the Latin American casta system, except that most americans in Philippines were regarded as high ranking than native asians. Similar to in Latin america, the main revolutionists who fought for independence were the “middle tier” Ilustrados. These Ilustrados, much like Creoles, were educated native Filipinos who played a massive role in Filipino nationalism against Spanish rule. The power and influence of the Ilustrados are yet another example of how many revolutions in history are led by the “mid-ranking social

Even after the Spaniards left Mexico, while the casta was said to be abolished, fundamental ideas stuck, making it difficult for Mexico to form a democracy. At the top of the Caste, prior to Mexico gaining its independence, were “Peninsulares,” which consisted of people born in the Iberian Peninsula. Since Hernán Cortés colonized Mexico, he established himself as a “Caudillo,” making himself on top of the casta as well. As a Caudillo, Cortés saw himself as a strong man, fit to rule alone. The theory of one-man rule can be traced back to the Colonial period. Other legislative bodies simply went along with the Caudillo’s decisions, (Reading Mexico City 1). The second class citizens were known as “Criollos,” which were people born in the Americas. Criollos had a limit to the amount of power they could attain, preventing them from overthrowing the Peninsulares. Lastly, the Mestizos were at the bottom of the caste, where there were many varieties of them, (Reading Mexico City 2). “To Iberians (peninsulares), mixture was generally viewed as contamination” (20, Reading Mexico City 2). Eventually, the Criollos fought against the Peninsulares because they wanted more power, while the Mestizos fought against independence. The Mestizos felt as though the

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

“More than by force do they dominate us, by deception” were the words of Latin American revolution leader, Simon Bolivar. The Latin American revolution was a fight for independence from Spain, their mother country. In the colonies people were divided into different social groups. Beginning with the higher-classes the different classes were Peninsulares, Creoles, Mestizos, Mulattos, Indians and lastly slaves. The Creoles, American-born Spaniards, led this revolution for three reasons: desire of political control, to provide protection for their economic interests, and their fear towards social unrest.

Comprised of landowners, lawyers, judges, priests, military officers and public officials, the creole and mazomba leaders of Latin American society found insatiable inspiration from the American and French Revolutions of the eighteenth century, and flooded Latin America with a liberal movement for independent nations. Conservatives, in contrast, sought to preserve the traditions of the colonial period, and the Orthodox rule of both the church and foreign-born royal authorities. Yet Old World flavor soured bitterly in a New World teeming with liberal thinkers and daring rebels. Desiring to surpass Old World peninsular and reinós rulers, creole and mazomba won control over local resources and economic development.

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

Things appear different after five hundred years, yet it does not take much examination to realize that everything is the same. We focus on the minute changes, but these major themes of power, history, and the struggle for the control of knowledge are eternal and transcend the everyday. De las Casas wrote to a king to try to prevent a tragedy that he could not. Today the Latin America people face similar fates to their ancestors five hundred years prior. While the outcome is not as bloody, the loss is just as grave. Western knowledge seeks to destroy the last remaining semblances of the vast groupings that make up the term “Latin American culture.” It is not an active action in appearance, but the passive grouping into the West’s categories of race and culture has subtle motives of destruction. People are no longer ruled by kings, they guide themselves under the burdensome weight of Western knowledge and ideas. The existence of options, choices beyond growth and development, establish awareness that there is a way out of this evil. Latin American people were not born in the West, but are continually defined and judged by the system. Under such forces, it appears that the only two choices are to assimilate or bear the burden of being considered inferior. Decolonial thinking provides new pathways that lead to a new age for Latin America, providing the people recognize these pathways and are willing to take the steps to follow

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

Pinochet was put into power . This is a perfect example of how the US foreign policy replaced genuine democracy with dictatorship for their own benefit, and again, supposedly in the name of National Security. Latin America was a victim of US foreign policy and corporate greed.

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.

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

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