Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Negative impacts of neoliberalism
Good effects of liberalism
Negative impacts of neoliberalism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Negative impacts of neoliberalism
Latin America Turns to The Left Within the last 20 years many Latin American nations have changed course from a neoliberal polity to one that is sided more to the left wing spectrum. “A significant part of Latin America is governed today by political movements and governments that call themselves ‘leftist’ or are classified as such by external observers.” (Luna) Furthermore, the shift in direction politically has been classified by 3 factors; “1) opposing incumbents by mobilizing economic and political discontent; 2) being able to bring together a broad, socially heterogeneous electoral constituency in the context of fragmented societies; and 3) having a charismatic leader who was able to achieve 2 by pursuing 1.” (Luna) These dramatic shifts originally began as protests against the lack of incorporation and equality within the neoliberal governments. Over time, these movements gained momentum and ultimately resulted in a noticeable shift throughout the entire region of Latin America. “Lula in Brazil, Nestor Kirchner in Argentina, Tabare Vasquez in Uruguay, Michelle Bachelet in Chile, Evo Morales in Bolivia, Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua, and Rafael Correa in Ecuador.” (Lynch) According to Maxwel A. Cameron, this succession to left wing politics occurred due to ‘the disenchantment with neoliberalism, the poor performance of democratic governments and the waning of US influence in the Western Hemisphere created opportunities for the left throughout the region.” (Cameron) A major failure of neoliberal polity was its inability to provide political equality and arguably more important, equality economically. “There is a fundamental contradiction between a regime based on political equality such as democ... ... middle of paper ... ...nd the points they were trying to make. Ultimately, I came to the conclusion that a fair amount of the material written within this article was simply beyond my realm of comprehension and focused more on understanding the main ideas as opposed to understanding all of the supporting details. Both authors have lived, studied, and worked as professors within Latin America and have extensive awards and credentials in the field. Works Cited Cameron, Maxwell A. “Latin America’s Left Turns: Beyond Good and Bad.” Third World Quarterly, Mar2009, Vol. 30 Issue 2. Lynch, Nicolás. “What the Left Means in Latin American Now.” Constellations: An International Journal of Critical & Democratic Theory, Sep2007, Vol. 14 Issue 3. Luna, Juan Pablo; Filgueira, Fernando. “The Left Turns as Multiple Paradigmatic Crises.”Third World Quarterly, Mar2009, Vol. 30 Issue 2.
This paper will be exploring the book The Vanguard of the Atlantic World by James Sanders. This book focuses upon the early 1800 to the 1900 and explores the development of South American political system as well expresses some issues that some Latino counties had with Europe and North America. Thus, Sanders focus is on how Latin America political system changes throughout this certain time and how does the surrounding countries have an effect as well on Latin political system. Therefore, the previous statement leads into some insight on what the thesis of the book is. Sanders thesis is, “Latin American’s believed they represented the future because they had adopted Republicanism and democracy while Europe was in the past dealing with monarchs
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 racism and economic exploitation, and paved the way for all-consuming, cultural wars in the centuries to come.
Time and rules have been transforming countries in many ways; especially, in the 1850’s and the 1920’s, when liberals were firmly in control across Latin American region. Liberalism can be defined as a dominant political philosophy in which almost every Latin American country was affected. A sense of progress over tradition, reason over faith, and free market over government control. Although each country was different, all liberals pursued similar policies. They emphasize on legal equality for all citizens, progress, free trade, anti-slavery, and removing power from church. Liberals declared promising changes for Latin American’s future. But Latin America had a stronger hierarchical society with more labor systems, nothing compare to the United States societies. Liberals weren’t good for Latin America. What I mean by “good” is the creation of a turning point or some type of contribution towards success. I define “good” as beneficial or helpful. The Latin American economy was stagnant between 1820 and 1850 because of independence wars, transportation and the recreation of facilities. I describe this era as, “the era when Latin America when off road”.
Benitez, Gerardo, Latin American Perspectives: The Maquiladora Program Its Challenges Ahead, THE WHARTON JOURNAL, December 11, 1995.
Mignolo, W. D. (2005). The Idea of Latin America (pp. 1-94). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Burns, E. B., & Charlip, J. A. (2007). Latin America: an interpretive history (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson Prentice Hall.
In the past years, Brazil has celebrated itself as a great economic performer with emerging markets and increasing influence on the international stage. However, in 2013, Brazil was paralyzed by huge demonstrations expressing deep discontent with their governments’ performance. In this paper, I look at the sudden onset of the protest and the absence of it in the previous years. I will argue that despite these protests, the government of Brazil maintains a hegemonic culture that propagates its own values and practices. Brazil experiences the process of modernization from the above, which does not quite reflect the demands of the lower class. Using Brazil as an example, I will expand on how the political leadership establishes and maintains its control.
De Lourdes Rollemberg Mollo, Maria and Alfredo Saad-Filho. "Neoliberal Economic Policies in Brazil (1994 – 2005): Cardoso, Lula and the Need for a Democratic Alternative." New Political Economy March 2006: 99-123.
All throughout the 20th century we can observe the marked presence of totalitarian regimes and governments in Latin America. Countries like Cuba, Chile, Brazil, Argentina, Nicaragua and the Dominican Republic all suffered under the merciless rule of dictators and military leaders. Yet the latter country, the Dominican Republic, experienced a unique variation of these popular dictatorships, one that in the eyes of the world of those times was great, but in the eyes of the Dominicans, was nothing short of deadly.
After gaining independence, Latin American countries had difficulty in how to govern the newly instated states. In the chaos, people took advantage of this and instated themselves as dictators. They had simply took the position from the Spanish that they tried to vanquish (class notes). The power structure remained and the people who fought for independence were largely ignored and continuously oppressed. These dictatorships had remained in power until very recently. Paraguay was finally freed from the dictatorship in 1989 (Chapter
“Capitalism is a world system. But some of its parts have more than their share of leadership.”(Cardoso xxi). Latin America, like much of the third and second world has received far lesser dividends from the fruits of capitalism. In fact due to its close geographic location to the united states and its strong early history of colonialism Latin America is a shining example of how economic dependency has evolved. From its moment liberation Latin America has been seen as a economic tool by the west, particularly by the USA, and continues to be economically dominated to this day. From the Eve of conquest the region has used its economic power mostly to the benefit of another nation.
Filmmaker Oliver Stone embarked on a journey across the Latin American continent pursuant to the filling of gaps left by mainstream media about the social and political movements in the southern continent. Through a series of interviews he conducted with Presidents Hugo Chávez of Venezuela, Cristina Kirchner and former president Nėstor Kirchner of Argentina, Evo Morales of Bolivia, Fernando Lugo of Paraguay, Lula da Silva of Brazil, Rafael Correa of Ecuador and Raúl Castro of Cuba, Stone was able to compare firsthand information from the leaders themselves with that reported and published by the media (“Synopsis,” n.d.). It gives light to the measures these leaders had to take in order to initiate change in their respective countries, even if their public identities were at stake. Several instances in the film showed the mismatch between these two sources, pointing at the US government’s interests for greatly influencing the media for presenting biased, groundless views.
Much G. L., 2004, Democratic Politics in Latin America: New Debates and Research Frontiers, Annual Reviews
Burns, Bradford E. Latin America: A Concise Interpretive History. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education, 2002.
Populism flourished in Latin America for a few years of the twentieth century due to the changes in the socio-economic structure that discriminated workers based on class and gender. The social, economic, and political conditions that existed in Brazil and Colombia in the early years of the 20th Century created an environment that incubated and ultimately gave birth to populist politics.