Latin America has fought its way from colonial domination to its current, primarily democratic configuration in the modern era. The legacy of colonial rule has remained in the Latin American states, however, and has greatly affected the region’s political and economic development. Widespread wealth disparities still remain, and are a result of colonial era economic development that created rigid class structures and ugly political backlash. For those states who have seen the most development, their economic direction also remains linked to the developed world. Dependency theory – or the theory that the developing countries are economically beholden to the developed countries of the world — remains popular and has led modern Latin American states toward finding their own path in the era of globalization. Latin America is still a developing region, and struggles to balance developmental policy alongside out right independence.
The colonial conquerers that entered Latin America did so looking for profit to increase the wealth of their home countries as well as their own personal prestige. The Spanish conquistadors were the first Europeans to enter the Latin American region set on complete conquest. They brought devastation and then domination to the Aztecs in current day Mexico and then the Incas in today’s Peru. The indigenous people who were not killed by Spanish arms fire or disease were forced to harvest the land for the Spanish Crown, which created the colonial economic framework seen throughout the rest of Latin America as Spain, and then other European powers, expanded their control across the region. The primary function of the colonies held by Spain, France, England, Denmark, and Portugal, to an extent, was the enrichment of the crown at the expense of the local peasantry. It also allowed European citizens an alternative approach for success via meritocracy. Since prestige was no longer easy to grasp in the Old World, the New World offered many opportunities for advancement. After decades of domination, a mixed Latin American culture arose. European men outnumbered women in the New World by at least a 7-to-1 ratio, which created a new mixed ethnic group, Mestizos, that now make up the vast majority of Latin America.
In the decades following colonial domination, Creole leaders of European descent became the dominant class, holding land and running haciendas with indigenous people, Africans, and Mestizos serving as the primary laborers. However, those among the laboring class wished to gain status and advance past harvesting crops for colonial overlords. As the colonial powers declined, local political structures began to break down and new opportunities via colonial militia arose. The armed forces allowed simple laborers to advance in society through the achievement of military rank, which also proved attractive to many creole leaders. By 1800, there were only 6,000 members of the Spanish army in the New World in comparison to 22,000 Latin America-born servicemen. Such an imbalance obviously did not suit the colonial powers, and was a factor in the oncoming independence movements.
Following independence, the class structures set in place during the colonial era were still apparent. Military leaders continued to gain power and took full control over several Latin American governments, instituting bureaucratic authoritarianism. The military regimes took technical lines on economic development, instituting a number of policies the region over that proved effective for short periods, but eventually fell under the weight of global economics. Argentina’s Jose Peron, who gained status by way of the Argentine military, utilized the labor classes’ desire for change to institute import substitution policies to jumpstart development. Chile’s working class also clamored for change after years of under-development and elected a socialist president in 1970, who was then deposed by military technocrats in 1973 led by General Augusto Pinochet. Brazil also came under the rule of military leaders in 1964, who remained in control until 1985. Peru, Cuba, Haiti, Honduras, and Venezuela have all seen military authoritarianism since their independence, as well.
Today, military rule in Latin America is no more, unless Cuba is taken into account. The technocrats failed in their long-term plans, with many undone by the widespread desire for liberty and democracy. The rise of democracies the region over meant a new trend toward United States-promoted neoliberal free trade policies. The fear of outside domination is still palpable across Latin America, however, and exists as a side effect of past colonial rule and economic downturns connected to global economic changes. The technocrats produced by Latin American militarizes predominantly came to power in order to solve economic slowdowns as perpetrated by fluxuating global market prices. The democracies of today’s Latin America must deal with similar economic issues, although no major economic crashes, such as the Great Depression, have occurred in the modern era to force new, widespread political structural changes. The main economic conflict in today’s Latin America is whether or not to fully accept American free trade policies, which would be instituted through joining the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), or take on more region-specific policies to retain independence and a buffer from global economic problems. CARICOM and MERCOSUR have arisen as regional alternatives to the hemispheric FTAA.
The colonial legacy has deeply affected the political and economic conditions in Latin America, and remain heavy on the minds of Latin American leaders. The colonial era led to the rise of bureaucratic authoritarianism throughout the region, and set a number of governments, including those of Argentina, Chile, and Brazil, on the path toward political suppression and economic disaster. Fear over renewed domination through a sort of economic neo-imperialism has led many South American leaders to fear further economic integration with the developed world. Leaders such as Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez and Bolivia’s Evo Moralez have arisen to represent the paranoia of Latin America, and the region’s growing anti-American populism.
Related Posts:One Response to 'Latin America: Struggles of Governance and Development'
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
on November 11th, 2007 at 8:53 pm
[…] Latin America: Struggles of Governance and DevelopmentLatin America has fought its way from colonial domination to its current, primarily democratic configuration in the modern era. The legacy of colonial rule has remained in the Latin American states, however, and has greatly affected the region’s political and economic development. Widespread wealth disparities still remain, and are a result of colonial era economic development that created rigid class structures and ugly political backlash. […]