Chapter 6: Neocolonialism

The neocolonial times were a little different than colonialism, mainly because Latin America exports boom created a different society relying on a new leader, Great Britain. In this post independent period the most important thing is that although these new States were already formed, there was a real modification about who was the economic power in the region. The new economic power was now in the hand of the British merchants. The export driven economy relied on goods like sugar cane, coffee, bananas, cocoa and etc. Of course some “ industrialization” also occurred since the landowners had more money to invest, the urban population had access to good education and many famous intellectuals like Machado De Assis for instance

There was a Great export Boom and the beneficiaries were mostly the large landowners and urban merchants, the middle class grew rapidly but the majority of Latin Americans saw no benefits from progress.

In Mexico for example a lot of the peasants were pushed off their land, eventually they became employees of landowners and most of them were peons living in the rural farms, hacienda. These landless peasants had no land to grow their crops, and their wages were often too small to support a family.

There is also a coffee boom in Latin America, in Brazil specifically European immigrants are needed after the abolition of slavery. In Argentina and Brazil most of these immigrants were Italian. There is also industrialization of sugar and mining, which created a division in societies between poor and riches.

There is also a growing of authoritarian rule, tax revenue increases, increased revenue also increase the size of the government, creating jobs and also attracting more foreign investments. In general the governments were more orderly, which in Brazil prescribed an authoritarian rule for order and progress, becoming the slogan of the flag.

In Brazil there was an Oligarchy, so landowners pretty much enjoyed local autonomy and manage local elections and any political situation to their own benefit. These oligarchies were controlled by states, being the two most powerfull ones Minas Gerais and Sao Paulo.

Chapter 5: Progress

The attempt to integrate Latin America into the free flow of international trade was a liberal social and economic transformation that would change the future of Latin America and Europe. Latin America middle class was urging for more infrastructure and the industrial revolution in the US and Europe was producing far more capital to be invested also in Latin America, especially in coffee and sugar. Although the Industrial Revolution was only beginning, the real revolution was with the creation of railroads and the use of steamships, these new technologies spread the new agricultural investments everywhere. The introduction of a telegraph was also a great progress. The main idea was that Latin American “elite” wanted to be modernized, like the European society, so exporting was the best way to import progress from Europe. It’s not like there were no more caudillos and patrons, they were still there, part of the society, but the people were really getting into the new wave of progress brought by the liberals. The conservatives did not want progress, nor did the Catholic Church, with its power and wealth, conservatives wanted the “peaceful” times in the past where the mestizos knew their place, when they were not part of the progress.

The Mexico Example: Mexico is a great example about the Church power vs. liberals, since Church power was absolute in Mexico. The Catholic Church in Mexico owned lots of properties that never went through an agrarian reform, within time these properties grew so much to the point that the Church owned half of the farmland, plus other properties. The problem was that the conservative priests refuse to accept government over the clergy, it was a strong impact caused by the conflicts between religion and government. Eventually some liberals were able to impose a liberal reform, like the Juarez Law for example. Interesting enough the conservative European send Maximilian to be the Mexican emperor, and he actually tried to be “patriotic” eating Mexican food, dressing as a Mariachi, complete fail obviously, Juarez as a liberal and real nationalist was far more interesting and reliable to the Mexican population. It is interesting how Juarez was able to have the US as his ally to “get rid” of the French and eventually become president, eradicating the French and the power of the church in Mexico. Other countries as Colombia, Chile, and Honduras etc. went through similar events between liberals and the Church.

A very interesting point in my opinion was the idea of progress in Argentina and how different it was from other Latin America countries. Argentina’s liberals were able to really introduce the European culture to its people in a very different way, not imposing it through Church power, but actually investing on very close European ties in education, culture and all kinds of information influences, like books and newspapers. Also most of the liberal rulers in Argentina really invested in public education and really succeed in transforming Buenos Aires in a very European city until this day. Interesting enough the Argentinians still consider themselves much more European than Latinos, maybe they should all go back to Europe then….

Of course Brazil also had a very different history when compared to other countries in Latin America. Brazil had Pedro II, interesting character, a conservative with liberal ideas of progress, rare! To make it even more interesting he was actually very influential to Brazilian society in the sense that the Brazilian elite was also very conservative but at the same time with some liberal ideas. Eventually the liberals were able to achieve a lot of progress related to reforms and slavery, and Italians went to Brazil basically to do the former “slave work”. Whenever I read about Brazilian history I have the feeling the urban elite was far more into the liberal ideas, just because they really wanted to be more “European” and have access to progress and technologies, while the rural land owners really did not want to share their lands.

Fidel, The Untold Story

So this is a very strongly Pro Fidel movie, and I really enjoyed. For a long rime I have been fascinated with Fidel, Che and the Cuban revolution. And because I am so fascinated about these very interesting figures, although I do not consider myself a pro or against Fidel (is this possible?) but I was glad to see a positive movie about Fidel had his lifetime achievements.

He is such an intriguing figure and most of the time portrayed as a villain, a ruthless dictator that took the freedom away from his people, and this movie presented a lot of important facts that weather one likes Fidel or no, it is worth watching it. I like to think I have seen this movie before, because the entire time while watching it I had Deja Vu feelings. I did watch many movies about him and Che before, most likely this one too...

Anyway, Fidel was a brilliant man, and like most brilliant leaders he knows how to speak and have his people on his side, watching the Cuban population, and actually Latinos in various parts of the world listening to him and going crazy on the streets was just unbelievable. He is really able to get his people and sell his ideas, no matter what they are, in a very successful way. His remarkable speech where the people had their riffles up was just WOW!! No wonder why he was such a threat.

Although this movie showed a lot of the same, I was very interested to see how important the Cuban government role was to the African struggles. In fact not only Africa, I was surprised to learn how Fidel support other countries all over the world including Vietnam. He somehow shaped the international relations scenario by intervening in these issues that could have had a totally different outcome if it wasn’t for him.

I think nowadays when talking about Cuba a lot of people think of it as a miserable nation, with a leader that did not succeed. People tend to see Cubans as unfortunate people not able to leave their countries, deprived of so much technology, which to an extent I agree. But I really could never agree with someone saying that Fidel failed, that he did not succeed. I think his ideals were always very clear and this movie absolutely shows that, he did achieve what he wanted. It is incredible to think that a country is still surviving completely independent of the US.

Another good thing achieved by Fidel in this movie that many seem to forget is how he invested on education and especially sports.

But to me what makes it really interesting about this man is the fact that he survived, with all the CIA attempts to kill him, he is still alive. He survived and he succeeded, and I cannot think about any other leader with such atypical history like Fidel.

Independence in Spanish and Portuguese America

3.Independence

The wars of Independence in Latina America did not start as a revolution from bottom to top, the population was very diverse and they have nothing in common aside from being born on the same place to just decide to rebel against the white Europeans. The exception was Haiti, where the slaves rebelled and succeeded. Independence in Latin America has much more to do with the events in Europe and how they destabilized colonial rule. Some countries like Mexico and Peru had similar patterns of Independence, Argentina and Venezuela followed another pattern, and Brazil, the exception had its own way of achieving independence.

In Europe the Spanish crown was going through many problems of incompetent ruling king, bankruptcy, long term-loans and a very unpopular government. Neither Spain nor Portugal could escape the repercussions of the French Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars. In practical terms Spanish-American independence began to exist in 1808 when the Spanish king was imprisoned by Napoleon. Even though Brazil and England had a good relationship, the French Revolution and Napoleonic wars also started the process of independence in Brazil.

In the late 1807 when Portugal refused to declare war on their old ally England, Napoleon invaded Portugal. So the Portuguese Royalty fled to Brazil followed by an entourage of over ten thousand people establishing the Portuguese court in Rio de Janeiro. Interesting fact is that Spanish crown was usurped by a foreign in Spanish America while the Portuguese crown was closer than ever to Brazil.

Spanish America rebellions 1810-1815

One of the causes that started with the Spanish American rebellions was the conflicts between the social classes in Spanish America. The native born whites, the creoles and their “enemies” the Peninsulars, Spaniard born in Europe, their conflict was because the Peninsular had better positions and opportunities within the societies, they had privileged access to key positions, while the Creoles were left with less desirable positions. This social clash was only between Creoles and Peninsulars, because the bottom of the Hierarchy were the indigenous and Africans which really did not have much problem with the Peninsulars. In fact, the less privileged classes of native and Africans had more issues with the Creoles, since they were the land owners and really annoyed them in a daily basis.

· Father Miguel Hidalgo, Mexico: He rebelled against Europeans, as a Creole himself, he asked for the entire population to rebel against Europeans, including Peninsulars, Creole and natives. For that he used he use his priest skills, and constructed his rhetoric as a simple American vs. Europeans battle, appealing to the Virgin of Guadalupe and the death of the Spaniards. He was captured and killed.

· After the death of Hidalgo another mestizo priest continues with the rebellions, Father Jose Maria Morelos, he wanted to end slavery, the caste system and the tribute paid by indigenous people.

· Nativism, Spanish Americans and Brazilians are “Americanos” against Spanish and Portuguese. The liberal ideology that the people should govern, the Americans. After all, all the rebellions happened just because the Creole wanted to rule it themselves, not because they were trying to make society more egalitarian or help the masses.

· In Brazil things were a little different, since Napoleon’s defeat Portugal wanted its king back in Lisbon. The Portuguese assembly was very unhappy because King Joao declared Brazil a kingdom, giving it the same status as Portugal itself. Portugal and Brazil were both “equal” and King Joao was king of both. The Portuguese colony wanted to reduce Brazil back to the colony status, so in 1821 Joao returned to Portugal and left his son Pedro in charge. The independence of Brazil was expected by Joao, and in 1822 Pedro declared Brazil independent.

· Bolivar, The Liberator was probably the most famous name in South America independence history. He also used of nativism to gather local t fight with him. He took the Spanish forces by surprise and Bogota fell to Bolivar, he also captured Caracas, Quito and by 1824 Bolivar was the liberator of two countries. Eventually all the wars for independence were over, expect for Cuba and Porto Rico which remained under Spanish control for the rest of the 1800s.

In Brazil people tend to pretty much blame the Portuguese for everything that goes wrong, and even the idea of the Independence is sometimes seem as a joke, because of the circumstances and the rumors about the Portuguese court, the forbidden romances, corruptions etc. Ten years ago a TV series about the Independence and the court was produced in Brazil, with the suggestive name of "Quinto dos Infernos".

Here is an intro from wikipedia: " Tudo começa em 1785, com a chegada da pequena espanhola Carlota Joaquina a Portugal para casar-se com D. João VI. Já em 1808, após muita indecisão, D. João VI resolve transferir a corte para o Brasil, para fugir dos ataques e do poderio bélico de Napoleão Bonaparte. Em paralelo à história dos monarcas, se desenvolve o romance da donzela Manoela com Francisco Gomes, o Chalaça. No Brasil, o rei D. João VI e sua mulher, a esquentada Carlota Joaquina criam os filhos Pedro, Miguel e Maria Teresa que convivem com as loucuras da avó, Dona Maria I, "A Louca", e tentam se adaptar às diferenças de hábitos da colônia. O tempo passa e Pedro terá muitas mulheres, mas somente duas oficiais: D. Leopoldina, e após sua morte, a bela Amélia. Passarão pela sua vida turbulentas paixões, como a artista Naomi e amante mais famosa do Brasil, Domitila de Castro Canto e Melo, a Marquesa de Santos. O dom de Pedro para a paixão deve ser hereditário, já que sua mãe Carlota Joaquina, preza o sangue espanhol que tem e também mantém vários amantes, não se importando em humilhar o marido sempre que pode. As histórias de Chalaça e D. Pedro se cruzarão no Brasil. Uma forte amizade nasce entre os dois, o que dará a Chalaça o posto de primeiro secretário e braço direito do príncipe. Frequentando a corte, Chalaça conhecerá a ardilosa Branca Camargo, que aplica trambiques com o pai, Camargo, e se apaixona por ela. Desencontros irão marcar a vida do rapaz, que vai ficar dividido entre dois amores: Manoela e Branca."

It is a comedy, but i figure you would at least laugh on this vision of history that we have in Brazil, and this is a quick video with the most important moment in the history of Brazil.

4. Post-Colonial Blues

· Liberalism: The idea of liberalism quickly spread all over Latin America, even Brazil which was still a Monarchy had Dom Pedro a Liberal himself. The Liberals dreamt about a prosperous and progressive future, but mostly ended up disappointed and in economic failure. Interesting enough the Liberals were mostly the whites, which ostracized the indigenous from their society, and consider them a problem and not an benefit. The Liberals also wanted freedom to worship, and separation of state and church, going against the catholic conservatives. The church issue was probably the most interesting example of how Latin America slowly divided between conservatives and liberals. Another important factor was the economy. After the independence wars most countries were short on money and desperately needed a capital input to invest on infrastructure.