Modern Latin America - Essay Example

? Modern Latin America Modern Latin America As the initial colonial outpost of the early-modern European world, Latin America has for a long time witnessed multifaceted procedures of cultural cross-pollination, adaptation, as well as suppression. Starting in the 15th century, millenarian Amerindian societies, heirs to the well-off local "scientific" practices surrendered to European institutions of learning, as well as to new-fangled dominant forms of symbolizing the natural world (Edwards, 2010). The colonial age in the Latin world should be considered as the region’s most influential years: the laws, norms, movements and conflicts, were significantly influential in deciding the character of the land today. It is known that the Spanish people were the only prominent power that fought over the Latin world to acquire their control (Keen & Haynes, 2012). This is why they have some much influence even to the Latin world of today. As Spain’s political power was merged in the second half of the 16th century, so was its capacity to control and regulate the colonial economy. Functioning in line with the mercantilistic strictures of that era, Spain endeavored to capitalize on ventures through exporting valuable products, such as silver and later other agricultural commodities and minerals (Keen & Haynes, 2012). They also supplied the new colonial market with already manufactured goods in order to create an encouraging balance of trade for the Latin world. Nevertheless, the strongly regulated trading dominion, based in Seville, was not always capable of providing the colonies effectively, and; therefore the Latin world later saws its independence (Edwards, 2010). This was after a number of successful fights against the Spanish army. Therefore, what changes marked the transition to independence? This paper will discuss the above question especially noting the issues of the Church, race, political legitimacy, neocolonialism, imperialism, sovereignty and national identity. Some of the three primary factors that this paper considers being the landmark of Latin America’s independence are the Catholic Church (separation of the church from the state), imperialism (a free market, the extension of public education and industrialization) and political legitimacy. Church The Church in Latin America bore the marks of its colonial and Iberian past following independence. Spain Catholics adopted a custom of strong faith, a vital doctrinal of enduring piety and knowledge (Keen & Haynes, 2012). Adherence itself was a means of knowledge because, in the Mass, people learnt the scriptures, the doctrines, as well as the secrets of the Catholic faith. Portugal broadcasted an orthodox Catholicism, as well, but with a lower degree of adherence and a less doctrinal knowledge. Everywhere, religion and faith in Latin America was a religious conviction of the citizens and the Church went to receive the observance and the admiration of the mestizos, Indians and other popular people (Edwards, 2010). Supreme groups were less devoted, and the prominent respect for the Church in the 19th century was the apostasy of the influential people, not the neglect of the masses. The Iberian convention in religion favored a well known, honored and a state-ran Church (Keen & Haynes, 2012). But, following independence, the church opted to separate itself from the states. The influential, wealthy and privileged people of the Church were perceived by the new states as an opponent focus of adherence, a source of revenue and a substitute power. The risk of state control emerged in a new form after independence (Edwards, 2010). The Church, therefore, had to look to its own assets and these, in the early 19th century, were thinning. The church was granted an advantaged position because it was also prevalent in Europe at that time. The entire region was typified by great rates of Catholicism after independence. Catholicism rates reached as high as 90% out of the entire Latin American population. Following independence in Latin America, the church became more independence to the people rather than the government (Keen & Haynes, 2012). The church was strictly against repression and violence. A number of schools (primary and secondary) and also other institutions such as hospitals started were fully run by the church instead of the former partnership between the church and the state (Edwards, 2010). Imperialism Investments and technology, after independence, in Latin America focused more on extraction, transport of raw materials and processing, which remained the area’s main exports well into the 20th century (Keen & Haynes, 2012). Liberal regimes offered generous allowances to foreign investors to erect railroads, as well as other infrastructure, which would offer further monetary growth. Railroads, greatly perceived as the symbol of modernity and progress in Latin America, facilitated great communication and transportation between ports and productive areas (or, in the case of Mexico, border regions) but did not connect interior regions to one another (Edwards, 2010). Latin American governments' effort to modernize their region through seeking foreign investment and importing technology was well-suited to the welfares of capitalists in Europe and the United States. By the late 19th century, western European and American industrialization had created sufficient capital to start venturing in other regions of the world, on one hand, and required secure sources of raw materials, on the other (Edwards, 2010). Venturing in buying raw materials from Latin America's natural resources and also infrastructure were a perfect match. After independence, British, American, German and French started to open banks branches in Latin American towns to ease financing and conduct business with citizens of the region (Keen & Haynes, 2012). Between 1870 and 1930, tens of thousands of kilometers of railroads were constructed in Peru, Costa Rica and Chile; William R. Grace, an Irish entrepreneur of shipping firm, initially handled Peru's large stores of guano and then signed an agreement to manage the Peruvian state railroads; Standard Oil Company’s John Rockefeller started to survey oil fields in the region; the Guggenheim brothers, on the other hand, invested in Chilean and Mexican mines; and, for the first time, the Royal Dutch Shell began to develop Venezuelan oil deposits (Edwards, 2010). Americans such as Rockefeller, Meiggs and the Guggenheims increasingly seemed to control foreign investment in the region, particularly after the First World War. United States investments in Latin America, after the region’s independence, served to justify the growth of both United States and Latin America’s imperialism, particularly between 1898 and 1934 (Edwards, 2010). Political Legitimacy Soon after independence, in a majority of Latin America nations, the right to vote was broadly extended to the male populace. All free and independent men were enfranchised, comprising of those who were from the Indian populace (Edwards, 2010). After independence, the electoral laws set up few boundaries to the male grant. They were not rooted mainly in literacy or property barriers. Nor were cultural features included. The requisites of sex, residence and age were common to each and every area, whereas, in a majority of them, dependent males (servants) were also barred. Slaves were also ruled out all over. The chains of command of the colonial society were, therefore, partially eradicated, in support of new political categories (Edwards, 2010). These early boundaries were retraced the 1820-30s. In a majority of areas of the area, the influential people increasingly credited the complexities in establishing a stable political order to the prolonged suffrage. The initiation of the Spanish doctrinaire's separation between passive and active citizens opened the way for a new meaning of the ideal citizen. In numerous places, there were suggestions to bring in income, property or literacy credentials to the franchise (Edwards, 2010). These rations, nevertheless, did not, at all times, find their way into the law, and, from that point forward, the electoral history of each and every country followed a unique and zigzag path not easily incorporated in a general pattern (Keen & Haynes, 2012). In conclusion, there are numerous proportions to the history of these region’s transformations. As we have read, the above three factors contributed to the integration of fairly large sectors of the populace in this region. This integration did not cause the consolidation of political fairness, and racial and social gaps between the few. Instead of evaluating these developments against a perfect path that leads towards democratization, the current literature has emphasized their intrinsic significance in reference to the authentic, historical, procedure of nation building. In doing this, it has established a rich, multifaceted and difficult field of inquiry. References Edwards, L. M. (2010). Paths to progress in modern Latin America. Retrieved from http://worldhistoryconnected.press.illinois.edu/7.3/edwards.html Keen, B., & Haynes, K. A. (2012). A history of Latin America, Volume 2: Independence to present. Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning. Read More