Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Liberals and conservatives in latin america
costa rica and political observations
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Liberals and conservatives in latin america
TOMÁS GUARDIA
A DICTATOR FOR THE GREATER GOOD
Throughout the initial decades on the process of state formation in Costa Rica there were a number of dictatorships, however none were as influential as that of Tomás Guardia. Coronel Guardia was at the head of a military coup motivated by yet another oligarchy rivalry, however once in power, he severed his ties to the coffee elite (Acuña Ortega et al. 2000). Guardia was able to consolidate a base of support outside of the coffee oligarchy, particularly within the army. During the years of the dictatorship Guardia succeeded in transforming the military from a political extension of the dominant class into an autonomous, professional organization (Mahoney 2001).
In addition to the restructuring of the military apparatus, one of the main outcomes of this dictatorship was the drafting and promulgation of the 1871 constitution. This would be the charter that would remain, save for some short interruptions, until 1948 – and even then it would serve as the basis for the following constitution. Reflecting a visionary outlook, the constitution of 1871 established political and economic freedom, alongside individual rights, as guiding principles of the state.
The liberal reform period had begun during Guardia’s dictatorship and was subsequently largely based on his legacy. The liberal motto of “Order and Progress” was put into practice. It is during this period that political leaders and decision makers, including Guardia, would begin prioritizing freedom of enterprise and capitalist progress in such a way that little consideration was given to the possible ramifications of foreign investment (Acuña Ortega et al. 2000). In this sense, the period of liberal reform in Costa Rica was a cont...
... middle of paper ...
...k: Cambridge University Press.
Mahoney, James. 2001. “Radical, Reformist and Aborted Liberalism: Origins of National Regimes in Central America.” Journal of Latin American Studies 33 (2): 221–56.
Pereira, Luiz Carlos Bresser, and Peter Spink, eds. 1999. Reforming the State: Managerial Public Administration in Latin America. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Sibaja Hernández, Miguel Alexander. 2013. “Formación Del Estado Costarricense: Período Republicano (1821-1914)” April 26. http://www.slideshare.net/PATOLUCASWEB/1-formacin-del-estado-costarricense-perodo-republicano-1821-1914.
Stone, Samuel Z. 1982. La dinastía de los conquistadores: la crisis del poder en la Costa Rica contemporánea. San José (Costa Rica): Editorial Universitaria Centroamericana (EDUCA).
Weber, Max. 1978. Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. University of California Press.
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.
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.
Affairs 12.3/4 (1971): 378-415. Jstor.org. Center for Latin American Studies at the University of Miami. Web. 13 Apr. 2014.
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”.
An International Conference, October 18, 19 and 20 2001., Museo Del Oro, Casa Simón Bolivar, Historic Center of Cartagena, Cartagena De Indias, Colombia. Toronto, Canada: Department of History at York University, 2001. Print.
...a of Latin America: The Age of Globalization 3 (2010). Modern World History Online. Web. 11 May 2014.
Burns, E. B., & Charlip, J. A. (2007). Latin America: an interpretive history (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson Prentice Hall.
...nuel Antonio, Newman, Edward. Democracy in Latin America: (Re)Constructing Political Society. The United Nations University Press, 2001. New York, N.Y.
Bethell, Leslie. The Cambridge History of Latin America Vol. III. Cambridge University Press, London, England. 1985.
LaFeber, Walter. Inevitable Revolutions: The United States in Central America. New York: W.W. Norton, 1984. Print.
“In the 1840s, a new generation of politicians emerged, challenging the persons and policies of those who had held power since the end of the 1820s” (Safford, 67). It was a political change in Latin America because before there were only caudillos that only filled the political role in a country and those caudillos still acted like the kings during the colonial period. With new liberals that challenged the norms at the time period led to radical changes, such in Mexico. Since the caudillos didn’t do much that was different that their former colonist rulers. After the Wars of Independence, caudillos came into power because of the liberalism failure to get away from the colonialism legacy. Many of these caudillos took advantage of the failure of these changes that were promised by liberals. Caudillos such as Jose Manuel de Rosas from Argentina took control over the country and caused many problems between the people. Even though Rosas brought order in Argentina, he failed because of the strict leadership and may people feared off until he left in exile to England in 1852. That is one of the differences is that caudillos were the leaders that still follow the colonialism legacy, while the new liberals in the 1840s were the ones that actually
Galeano, Eduardo. Open Veins of Latin America: Five Centuries of the Pillage of a Continent. Translated by Cedric Belfrage. New York: Monthly Review Press, 1997.
Mignolo, W. D. (2005). The Idea of Latin America (pp. 1-94). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Much G. L., 2004, Democratic Politics in Latin America: New Debates and Research Frontiers, Annual Reviews
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.