In the article “Successes and Failures of Neoliberalism” Evelyne Huber and Fred Solt describe economic, social and political consequences of the introduction of neoliberalism in Latin America in the 1980s and 1990s. To contrast the positive and negative impacts of neoliberalism Huber and Solt have taken into account five indicators: growth, economic stability and absence of volatility, poverty, inequality and quality of democracy (Huber and Solt 151).
In a wide view of the regions' situation, growth performances reflect an increase in the first half of the 1990s but a decrease in the second half due to the effects of financial crises (Huber and Solt 151); which also had an effect in the increase of economic stability and absence of volatility (Huber and Solt 151). Furthermore, poverty and inequality decreased in the 1990s as a result of the changing class structures in the region (Huber and Solt 152). Finally, the quality of democracy, measured by the number of liberal democracies, did not show any improvement during both decades (Huber and Solt 152). Overall, the progress in these five aspects, as Huber and Solt state is “not particularly encouraging” (152).
In order to examine the details of the consequences of the neoliberal reform, the authors have compared less liberalized to more liberalized economies and moderate to drastic reformers (152). They have taken into account the five indicators mentioned above. Firstly, the result of economic growth rates suggests that liberalized economies provide better conditions for economic growth. Nevertheless, radical approaches to liberalization have substancial costs and directly influence the decrease of growth rates (Huber and Solt 154, 155). Secondly, the data that...
... middle of paper ...
...ding the effects of the neoliberal reforms in Latin America in the last decades. Nevertheless, their opinions differ on whether there are merely negative consequences or if the situation can be seen in a more positive manner. Although the articles are about the same topic, Walton decides to research which economic, social and political policies have been chosen and how these affect the region. Huber and Solt, en cambio, focus on how these policies have affected growth, economic stability and absence of volatility, poverty, inequality and quality of democracy.
Evelyne Huber and Fred Solt “Successes and Failures of Neoliberalism” Michael Walton “Neoliberalism in Latin America – Good, bad or incomplete”,
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”.
Those groups who bled and died from 1910-1917 for a more just and equitable Mexico were subsequently denied the fruits of economic growth and transparent political representation. Efforts to accelerate growth since the mid 1930s “have tended to produce- or at least, to reinforce- a highly inequitable pattern of income distribution” (Hansen 71). According to Roger Hansen, the author of The Politics of Mexican Development, “no other Latin American political system has provided “more rewards for its new industrial and commercial agricultural elites” (87) since 1940 and “in no other major Latin American country has less been done directly by the government for the bottom quarter of society” (87). Mexico’s development created a middle class and brought a certain measure of industrialization but further disenfranchised the poor. Mexico’s leaders implemented a development policy which violated the ideals of the revolution by shirking the responsibilities of a social democracy.
Mignolo, W. D. (2005). The Idea of Latin America (pp. 1-94). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
...nuel Antonio, Newman, Edward. Democracy in Latin America: (Re)Constructing Political Society. The United Nations University Press, 2001. New York, N.Y.
Peeler, John A. Latin American Democracies. Chapel Hill, NC and London: The University of North Carolina Press, 1985. Print.
Harry E. Canden. , & Gary Prevost, (2012). Politics Latin America. (4th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Neoliberalism is a form of economic liberalism that emphasizes the efficiency of private enterprise, liberalized trade, and relatively open markets. Neoliberals seek to maximize the role of the private sector in determining the political/economic priorities of the world and are generally supporters of economic globalization. During the 1930s and the late 1970s most Latin American countries used the import substitution industrialization model to build industry and reduce dependency on imports from foreign countries. The result of the model in these c...
Mignolo, W. D. (2005). The Idea of Latin America (pp. 1-94). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
As the Latin American nations set out to construct a new government and society in the 1800´s, two opposing models aroused regarding which one would best benefit the countries. ¨Civilization vs. Barbarism¨ by Domingo Sarmiento, a recognized Argentinean revolutionary, contrasts Jose Marti´s ¨Our America¨ ideology which critiques U.S. capitalism and focuses on developing a good government based on the needs of the nations and each nation´s autochthony. Contrastingly, Sarmiento, guided by his beliefs in democratic principles, declares his preference towards the European urbanized way of life as the key to progress and stability for the nations. Despite the differences in the models proposed by Marti and Sarmiento for the New Nations to follow,
In its essence, neo-liberalism advocates free trade, private enterprise, the free flow of capital across borders and, importantly, restrictions on the power of trade unions. These restrictions are important to study and discuss because the world today is no longer regulated by the orthodox laws of economics where supply equals demand (more or less). Instead, we witness radical inequalities and volatility in market conditions. Unemployment remains frighteningly high in many parts of Europe while many workers in parts of Asia and Africa suffer exploitation and work punishingly long hours in extremely poor conditions for a pittance.
Much G. L., 2004, Democratic Politics in Latin America: New Debates and Research Frontiers, Annual Reviews
In order for any country to survive in comparison to another developed country they must be able to grow and sustain a healthy and flourishing economy. This paper is designed to give a detailed insight of economic growth and the sectors that influence economic growth. Economic growth in a country is essential to the reduction of poverty, without such reduction; poverty would continue to increase therefore economic growth is inevitable. Through economic growth, it is also an aid in the reduction of the unemployment rate and it also helps to reduce the budget deficit of the government. Economic growth can also encourage better living standards for all it is citizens because with economic growth there are improvements in the public sectors, educational and healthcare facilities. Through economic growth social spending can also be increased without an increase of taxes.
Many factors can lead to the underdevelopment of a country. The most common sign of underdevelopment is that of a “Dual Economy”, this takes place when a “small modern elite and middle class make up about 20-30% of a country’...
Prebisch, formerly the head of the Central Bank of Argentina, saw the world as two distinct areas: a center of economic power in Europe and the United States and a periphery of weaker countries in Latin America, Africa, and Asia. Prebisch concluded that Latin America’s underdevelopment was because of its importance on primary exports. The periphery was underdeveloped because it needed to create more sustenance and raw materials for export in order to import a specific amount of industrial imports. Andre Gunder Frank expressed that external monopoly resulted in the foreign expropriation, and thus local unavailability, of a significant part of the actual economic surplus produced in Latin America. Therefore, the region was actively underdeveloped by not generating at its potential and losing its surplus to Europe and North America. Peripheral countries were kept from accomplishing development because they sold their products at prices below their value, while rich countries sold products at prices above their value (Peet and Hartwick pp. 188 -199). Thus, in contrast to modernization theory, which emphasized the benefits of free trade, foreign investment, and foreign aid, these theorists argued that free trade and international market