First of all, the wars that took place between 1808 and 1825 created a lot of instability within the continent. Economic, social and politic instability occures for a long period of time. Most of the Latin American nation were plagued by revolt, civil war and dictatorship. Political instability took place because independence didn't create any stable political regime since every institutions didn't have a specific identity and had to create it trough new national symbols to brake the link with the past.On of the main political debate was in between liberalism and conservatism. Conservative wanted to maintain the traditional social structures in order to ensure stability when liberals wanted to create a more dynamic society and economy by ending …show more content…
What I mean is that a country can't survive without insitution to rule it. The independence lead to a big chaos of people and group of people trying to take the power and make the rules. Conflics and war are not efficient and that is one of the reason why the war of independence that took place had a lot of negative effects on the economies. During the war, the mining sector (main economic force of the continent) was realy affected and for exemple, the silver production dropped almost by half after the independance. Political turmoil did not end with independence and it led to the fragmentation of political power, militarization of society, and mobilization for war of ressources and men. After independence agression by a given group was not costly enough to be avoided. The lack of stabilizing institutions made imposible to achieve efficient economic organizations. The colonies were not ready to governe themself and the gain from the independence involved higher cost of administrating many political unit. To pass from a big an close economy to small and not stable economies such as the new republics created a lot of non negligible …show more content…
First the political instability led to a lot of civil wars .Those war subverted trade, destroyed property and productive assets and absorbed labour causing output to decline in the long-run by 50 %. Second,the end of the Spanish colonial rule left the Latin American countries without viable institutions. Insitutions are necessary for a country to be economically efficient. According to Prezeworski and Curvale, they are the ''primary'' cause of economic development. So that is the reason why politic instability led to an economic instability. Whitout institutions it is hard for a country or for a continent to resolve conflict not using force or military resources. Fighting is realy bad for development because it paralyzed production, development and investing gets less secure. So because of that political instability created by the new independence, economy couldn't grow and start stagnating. So disorder cost after independence insceased transaction costs as political and economic institutions were redefined throughout
In conclusion, the liberal era wasn’t good for Latin America because it created economic devastation in most regions. Liberal leaders had promising changes, but they failed because they didn’t had the resources or allies. They fail to create political communities and equal citizens. Liberals attempt to break the colonial patterns and follow European trends, but Latin America societies were not ready for these reforms.
During the War for American Independence, 78 men were commissioned as general officers into the Continental Army by the Continental Congress. Many of these generals commanded troops with differing levels of competence and success. George Washington is typically seen as most important general, however throughout the war a number of his subordinates were able to distinguish themselves amongst their peers. One such general was Nathanael Greene. At the end of the Revolutionary War, Greene would become Washington’s most important subordinate, as demonstrated by Edward Lengel’s assessment of Greene as “the youngest and most capable of Washington’s generals.” Washington and Greene developed a strong, positive and close relationship between themselves. Greene began his life in the military after having been raised a Quaker. With limited access to literature and knowledge in his younger years, Greene became an avid reader which equipped him with the knowledge necessary to excel as a general during the war. Through his devoted study of military operations, firsthand experience and natural abilities as a soldier, Greene became an excellent military commander. He would become known for his successful southern campaign, during which, he loosened British control of the South and helped lead the war to its climax at Yorktown. Throughout the war, he was involved in a number high profile battles where he built a reputation of being an elite strategist who also understood unconventional warfare, logistics, and the importance of military-civil affairs and had a natural political/social acumen. The thesis of this paper is that Greene’s proven reputation of being a soldier, strategist and statesman would cause him to become the second greates...
The British had control of America. The colonists living there did not have very much
The American Revolution of 1775 to 1783, not only gave colonists freedoms from the British government, but set a foundation for improvements and change across multiple platforms. Though the newly found nation held many promises, it also faced many struggles and imposed a large threat to the native people of North America. Striving to create a more limited government that would ease the fear of central power from the past experience of British rule was met with the need for funding and stability following the war. This weak of a government created an imbalance unsuitable for any newly found country. The ideologies of the United States government also created a premise for freedom movements throughout various societal platforms. Some proved to be a positive step in the right direction, while others suffered immense consequences.
The American Revolution was a political upheaval that greatly influenced the society we have today. A series of events that lasted from 1765 through 1783 affected how and why the American Revolution occurred. American colonists had been living under English control, which was the greatest and most powerful nation at the time, but after a while the colonist’s opinions on the English's way of government and ruling changed. Even though all of these events affected the colonists and their opinions, there were three main occurrences that caused colonists to decide to separate from England. These events were the Boston Massacre of 1770, The Intolerable Acts of 1774, and the French and Indian War that lasted from 1756 through 1763.
By the start of the American Revolution, over half a million African Americans, mostly enslaved, made up the American population. Some may say that America won their freedom from Great Britain through the efforts of supreme and elite white male leaders, but as Gary Nash argued, the true radicalism of the American Revolution was advocated by those who felt the most dissatisfied with their living conditions. This sheds light on the important issue of whether or not the American Revolution benefited those who were the most discontented in their situation. Some may argue that the American Revolution changed the lives of many citizens, such as the higher class citizens and the middle class citizens, but those who were oppressed did not socially
The American Revolution was the first time in US history that the people stood side by side to defeat a common enemy. It caused a dramatic shift in the American Society. The pre-colonists looked towards the king when problems arose, but now had to find solutions to their own problems. After the revolution, the US was faced with the pressures of setting up a government, shifts in the social society, and an independent economy.
Freedom was the embodiment of the colonists’ ambitions and efforts who lived hundreds of years ago. Even now, soldiers fight and die to secure the liberty of American citizens. The American Revolution was a turning point for the 13 soon-to-be-independent colonies of the New World. Who knows where America would be if those colonists did not step up and battle for independence? This shift of authority is key to the development of the new country.
Another long-term impact of European imperialism that impacted the political and economic development is the economy they left behind. For most of the Africans, the change they wanted to see after independence was economic. The problem is the economy that the Europeans left behind. Europeans left Africa in worse shape when it comes to the economy than before they came. The Europeans abused the Africans.
Whether it is Hernán Cortés’ rapid conquest of the Aztecs, or the United States-backed military coup in Chile, foreign interference has had a significant, and almost constant, impact on Latin America. Throughout history, however, the manner of intervention has changed. During colonial times, the Spanish and Portuguese colonized Latin America and were responsible for establishing the region’s political and economic infrastructure. During contemporary times, foreign countries intervened subversively in Latin America’s economic and political affairs, pursuing their own business interests and toppling governments that did not abide by capitalist ideologies. In each case, however, Latin American countries have fought the intervention; upper
The age of imperialism brought about the colonization of smaller weaker countries in Africa, Asia, and the Middle East by the major powers of the world, most notably Britain and France. These colonized countries were used for the benefit, mostly economic, of the mother countries for much of the 19th and 20th centuries. As time went on problems facing the colonial powers toward the end of the 19th century sparked a rapid change of decolonization. Although the decolonization was a major victory for countries seeking independence, in many cases these the damages of colonization caused many issues. The newly independent nations faced countless challenges such as continued interference from colonial powers, neo colonialism, social issues within the state itself, and most notably economic instability.
This section will address the general trends occurring in the region and will discuss the relationship of the Latin American left to neoliberalism, dependency development, the consistency of the region regarding policies of the Left, economic performance, and resistance to U.S. hegemony.
After their independence, there were some corrupt one party leaders in office. These leaders would take away their food, homes, and medicine, so they could become more rich and powerful. Worst of all, these leaders would let thousands starve and die from easily treated diseases.
Scholars have debated not only the nature of Iberian colonialism, but also the impact that independence had on the people of Latin America. Historian Jaime E. Rodriguez said that, “The emancipation of [Latin America] did not merely consist of separation from the mother country, as in the case of the United States. It also destroyed a vast and responsive social, political, and economic system that functioned well despite many imperfections.” I believe that when independence emerged in Latin America, it was a positive force. However, as time progressed, it indeed does cause conflict.
To start, globalization in Latin America during the periods covered in our class was an extremely important factor. From the time of its discovery, Latin America was seen as a land of many opportunities for the Europeans. With promises of gold,