Why this man's vision of a united and free South America ultimately fail?
It hasn't been long enough for that to fail
Because everyone was busy staring at his engorged wang?
Local oligarchies didn't want to share their power
>>482604
This, essentially.
What is the purpose of a united South America? Oligarchs only really had power to lose and nothing to gain.
>>482641
>how did Washington overcome it
ha ha ha
aaaaahahahhaaahahh
>>482641
Washington didn't overcome it, he got voted into power because he was a nice figurehead.
Americans don't look up to him except in a literal sense, when we see him in paintings and monuments in Washington.
>>482702
They incorporated it into the system and this blew up in their faces 90 years later with the Civil War
>>482702
They didn't have a constituency consisting of all Americans. A few aristocrats set up a government that overpowered all the lesser governments under it. After the Articles of Confederation didn't give the federal government enough power to run its own affairs, they drafted a new constitution that gave it the power it needed to become what it is today. They were also merchants and property owners who only cared about the interests of these groups and catered the state to their needs, going so far as to permit Southern aristocrats to keep slaves just to keep the (smallish) country together.
Later we bought a lot of land and conquered most of Mexico and did other things.
>>482575
The settlements were mostly lots of little islands separated from each other by jungle, sand and water, filled with people of different races and ethnic groups that weren't exactly friends with each other. There was little motivation to share power with a central government that got in contact with you ony once every couple of years. Even if the Great Colombia split into only three countries, those three remained mostly ungovernable for the next century.
South America was considerably more populated than the american British colonies during their independence. Granada (Colombia) alone had almost two million people before the independence wars started and killed a third of the population, which is about the same as the 13 colonies. Then you have Quito (Ecuador) , La Plata (Argentina) and Venezuela that hanged around slightly lower numbers, and Peru which had over three million people. So, even after splitting up, these countries had a starting population that could be reasonably compared to that of the United States upon formation. And since the 13 colonies had still not stolen any land from Spain, the sizes were also reasonably similar.
Communication between cities was considerably more difficult than in North America due to the Andes and the Jungle standing in the way of settlements, and due to having population centers on both oceans, the travels were arduous to say the least. A single government among the whole continent would have probably been deemed unrealistic even by Washington at the time.
Due to the nature of the South American independence wars, the economy of the region was devastated, and obviously nobody was quite content with the results or the new government. Especially the regions that used to be mostly loyalist, like Southern Colombia, Ecuador and Peru. Bolivar's right hand man was killed when traveling from Colombia to Ecuador, precisely because the population of Southern Colombia still held a grudge on him. And that made traveling even more difficult.
Bolivar also tried to pull off a little bit of "Terror" and ordered the execution of all Loyalist prisoners in the Gran Colombia, as well as Spanish Peninsulares (including children and men who had remained neutral during the war). He wasn't exactly a peaceful, diplomatic guy. Most of his rivals probably were scared of the guy and took any chance they could get to undermine him. And then his abilities as an administrator were less than competent
>>482833
pretty much this
>>482833
Thanks for this post. I didnt know much about these affairs before and now I know I need to study it more; it's been a gap for too long in my knowledgr
>>482575
Because the whiter Man was out to get him.
>>482833
This reminds me of the same dilemma that faced Central America after forming the Federal Republic of Central America. Sending communication between the then capital of Guatemala City down to the isolated city of San Jose in Costa Rica took about a month.
The political situations was fragile and difficult to manage as it was always a tilting scale between the "Liberal" elite who attempted to maintain/dominate the government and the "Conservative" elite. That liberal/conservative divide was most visible between Guatemala and El Salvador and would be a major targets during the wars that followed.
Of course Francisco Morazon, the Simon Bolivar of Central America didn't help the situation when he came to power. His ideas didn't really fit the reality of the situation. He wanted a modern judicial jury based system in a country of largely illiterate rural peasantry and indigenous communities. He also believed in the usual colonial schemes, preferably of British origin, despite the obvious hegemony and domination of British control of the only deep water port at the time in Belize and ongoing embrace of the Mosquito Republic (A great meme country for anyone who's interested).
Of course, it took a bunch of disgruntled Conservative Oligarchs, a plague, the Church, and an illiterate pig farmer by the name of Rafael Carrera to eventually overthrow and destroy the Republic. Carerra, becoming the first leader of Guatemala, managed to maintain a disunited Central America while maintaining Conservative hegemony across the region until his death and the rise of coffee.
>>482921
The problem with this statement is that while Liberals in Central America had to "struggle" to get any kind of power in their respective countries, is that in Costa Rica the Liberals controlled the country since its independence and the beginning of the 20th century. Then again, this is just another of the many differences between Costa Rica and Central America, while both Liberals and Conservatives hated the idea of being united with Central America and only did for a time to get military protection (that never came when needed), Liberals in Central America supported the Union. Morazan is a good example of this, the "Liberal knight" who had to ally himself with 5 conservatives of Costa Rica, and the only ones who agreed to, when he invaded the country because the local Liberals didn’t want to unite with Central America and even less go to a war for such cause.
I know that bringing Costa Rica as an example is not fair, being them so different from the region in terms of politics, history and culture, but it shows that the narrative of "Liberals vs Conservatives" is very week. Then again, they didn't even have representation on the Federal congress and they didn't want to break relations with Colombia the historic common "enemy" of Central America, but then again, not them.
About Morazan, I don't see why you called him the SImon Bolivar of Central America, there are no parallels between them.
> managed to maintain a disunited Central America while maintaining Conservative hegemony
This again shows the difference between Costa Rica and the rest of the region, while Costa Rica concentrated on its relation with the South and basically ended communication with the North, in Central America they had the Carrera thing going. Its interesting how Conservatives were never capable of rise in Costa Rica even once.
Tell me about Chile. Why is it just a coastline?
>Hey guys, lets form a single country out of Venezuela, Colombia, Panama and Ecuador and then conquer Peru and Bolivia as well just to make a point
Its actually pretty amazing that he succeeded, but there was no way in hell that this would work in any reasonable fashion
>>484375
It has but one function.
>>484375
Because the Andes made it unfeasible to cross from Valparaiso to la Plata in a reasonable time frame.
Also, it was originally the least populated South American country, and basically just an outpost to protect the more valuable colonies from raids of the nomadic Mapuches, who were never quite conquered until after the independence and had adapted to steppe shepherd, horse raider life-style within a few decades of having the horse and sheep introduced to them.
>>484451
Also, note that almost nobody in South America lives in the jungle, because jungle is worth shit for agriculture. So, if you look at the population centers of the continent, Chile's shape is the norm. It is just that it doesn't have attached jungle to give extra land mass.
>>484462
>>484462
>nobody in South America lives in the jungle, because jungle is worth shit for agriculture
Thats really a misconception, familia, tropical soil is just worth shit for European crops and the such, then again, Latin American retards of tropical regions have the problem of using European crops or animals (I include my country on the retards category). They could use local crops or even crops from the Asian South East and India, but they are indoctrinated in using stuff that came from Europe.
>>484474
Why is every latin american country except those in the southern cone, irredeemable fuck ups with no vision or future?
Mestizos
Everything you do for your land is doomed to failure if the people inhabitanting it are less than human.
The only problem latin american has are its people,the land is plentyful and rich,the people are rotten to the genetical level.
Regards,latin american.
>>484507
Actually Peru and Colombia are doing fine and have a future
>>484507
Im just talking about agriculture and the like, and yes, the Southern Cone had the luck of having a climate similar to Europe to be able for their crops to explode there. While my country suffers slightly of the "European = best" mentality, is a problem easy to understand, you know, because of colonialism.
Because of climate change and the increase of population, people is looking at agriculture with other eyes and looking for alternatives, in this case, tropical products from America (idiots), Africa, India and South East Asia, instead of European products. People is realizing that raising water buffalos for their milk and meat in a tropical rainy region may be more productive than raising cows of European origin that need a lot of supplements and medicine to be alive here. Apparently local dairy companies are trying to resist this because of the difference of their milk that would force them to change their production methods but whatever.
My country suffers of having a way too much "globalized" diet, I think we are even the ones who consume less corn, for example. There is this anecdote of our governor back in colonial times who tried to grow wheat here, and ended with this fucked up plants not useful for the production of flour (too humid climate), and because of that we ended growing rice but thats another history.
>>484531
Well said, gentleman.
*tips fedora with the tip of a katana*
>>484474
But even then, you would probably have to deal with the same issues that the coastal regions face, like mosquitoes and floods, while also having a much harder time exporting your crops, and since as you say, Latin Americans culturally prefer European crops, you don't have much local consumption for your products either. There is really no economic incentive to live go to the jungle at all.
>>484550
Except to chop rare woods, sell them to China / Europe, and then buy expensive Chinese / European furniture with the money you made from your trees.
Now that is Latin American economic vision.
>>484531
>>484546
Hes right though. It's like a double edged sword. In South America and Carribean you'll find both the most loving, and the most evil people. Some will give you their nicest set of clothes just because you complimented them, others will slit your throat for less than pesos....
Courtesy from Cuba
>>484546
>, the Southern Cone had the luck of having a climate similar to Europe
Argentina is the most developed country in latin america and its climate is mostly arid or subtropical.
Stop looking at guns,germs and steel style bullshit excuses and admit its the natives and the offspring the ones who ruin everything.
>>484550
It is just a matter of perspective, and you are right, preferences would have to change on the local markets, people need to understand about the situation of their countries and the global economy. I do believe people is changing their mind in terms of food.
>>484559
Wood of tropical regions is shit, nigga, at least for construction. Good wood grows on dry regions, sure, you can find those all over America but they are not the cloudy, humid or rainy forest people care about. If the place is too humid the trees will grow fast, there is going to be very few wood and its going to be of very low quality. You need a dry and stable climate so the tree grows slow but steady and the wood to be hard and most of the tree.
>>484565
>Argentina is the most developed country in latin america and its climate is mostly arid or subtropical.
Argentina is not the most developed country in Latin America and its climate is not mostly arid nor subtropical.
>>484573
>Argentina is not the most developed country in Latin America
Wrong
>and its climate is not mostly arid nor subtropical.
Wrong
STOP POSTING
>>484559
>who was david ricardo
>what was import substitution industrialisation in Latin America
>>484575
>Climate
ignore the Falklands
>developed
In terms of what?
They are behind Chile, Uruguay and fucking Costa Rica in terms of social development, and in terms of "technology" infrastructure and the such, Brazil, Chile, México, Perú, Colombia and Panamá are way ahead of them. Hell, even México has better education than them.
>>484565
You can at least grow wheat in Argentina. In my country, Ecuador, people pretty much consumes only wheat-made bread, but all the flour has to be imported.
It is not exactly, economy collapsing, but it is one of the MANY retarded things that are kept around because of culture.
>>484583
> Argentina_climate_zones_m(...).png
Are you fucking retarded? you just proved me right.
>In terms of what?
HDI,IHDI,every single fucking metric.
>They are behind Chile, Uruguay and fucking Costa Rica in terms of social development,
Why are you lying? this is obviously false and can be disproved by google in a second.
>>484589
The problem of Ecuador is that most of the population consists on backwards low IQ injuns and heavily indigenous mestizos.
>>484591
>>he thinks people in Latin America tries to grow wheat instead of sugar cane, bananas, among others
You are right, people here grows sugar, pineapples, bananas, and the such, but ironically, they dont consume it. Literally everything ends up in Europe.
Then again, Im not implying this is something wrong, if Europe buys it is alright, but people here could consume it too, and is not that is not allowed and that "everything gets exported", people here prefers to eat grapes and apples, not produced here because of the climate, than pineapples, bananas and the such.
Sugar, sure, but thats different.
>>484589
>In my country, Ecuador, people pretty much consumes only wheat-made bread, but all the flour has to be imported
Same thing here in Brazil, we import a lot of wheat from the US and I think Argentina too.
>>484593
Not him, but nobody lives in fucking Patagonia. Most Argies indeed live near River Plate, and a good deal of them near the La Plata basin
>>484593
>HDI,IHDI,every single fucking metric.
>Health and life expectancy
Behind Costa Rica, Chile, Cuba, Colombia, Uruguay, Perú
http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/
>Education
Behind Chile, Costa Rica, Uruguay, México, Brasil
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-32608772
http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/topics/education/
>Poverty
Behing Uruguay, Chile and Costa Rica
http://www.cepal.org/es/publicaciones/37626-panorama-social-america-latina-2014
>>484612
That's moving the goalposts,argentina is still a mostly arid and subtropical country.
>>484619
You're nitpicking.
Life expectancy is a shit metric for development unless you think Greece is more developed than the USA.
>Education
Top education index : argentina
>Poverty
TOP KEK every country defines poverty differently.
Meanwhile https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_average_wage
There is an index made to compare the development of countries its called the fucking human development index,you're delusional if you ignore it and try to come up with a system that works in favor of your bias.
>>482575
Why his dick so big?
>>484646
>You're nitpicking.
>proceeds to ignore everything he doesn’t like
The reason why I posted the CEPAL one is because it used a same method for every country, but anyway, you are a little bit jumpy and edgy for some reason.
Is interesting how you discard one of the studies I posted but then proceed to post the same study but another section of it.
Also, yes, Argentina is great an all, but is obviously not better than Chile, for example, or even Uruguay, sure, it is better than Venezuela or Nicaragua.
>>484663
>Also, yes, Argentina is great an all, but is obviously not better than Chile, for example, or even Uruguay,
Its your opinion vs the united nations.
That's called being delusional.
>>484675
>the united nations
You mean, the ones who said a country like Saudi Arabia is a paragon of human rights and that every oil producer country is most developed than half of Europe? Truly, Im the delusional one.
>>484691
See how full of shit you are? they don't even count gulf arab countries in IHDI and the richest gulf arab country has an HDI below fucking cyprus.
>>484691
>You mean, the ones who said a country like Saudi Arabia is a paragon of human rights
I swear to God, the details of this story changes whenever some redditor/polfag brings it up. It's just a shorthand for DAE AGREE THE UN IS BAD at this point.
>>484646
>That's moving the goalposts,
How? Patagonia and most of these provinces don't ontribute much to argentinean economy, it's always been an agricultural country
>>484715
>le reddit/pol meme
Come on now, they have money and influence, simple as that, put them on some war council or whatever, put not on the human rights commission.
>>484719
>the Southern Cone had the luck of having a climate similar to Europe
That's the original statement,it has been proven wrong,you're moving the goal posts by saying "oh yeah but a lot of people live in a non arid area"
>>482921
>the Mosquito Republic
The name itself already hints it's meme potential.
>>484746
The name is Miskito, not Mosquito, judging by his post he has to be Guatemalan and probably butthurt as fuck because of Belize and the Anglo Caribbean of Central America.
>The name "Miskito" derives from the Miskito-language ethnonym Mískitu, their name for themselves. It is not related to the Spanish word mosquito, which derives from the word mosca, meaning "fly", also used in Spanish for the insect.
Central Americans seem to be very racist against Blacks (ironically if you ask me), they usually "insult" Panamanians, Belizeans, Colombians and Costa Ricans because of their Black population, even if they are countries way ahead of them. Guatemalans have an inferiority complex against Belize (they claim it as their own as Argentina with the Falklands), so I guess it extends to other regions with Black majorities or Blackish people like the Miskito.
>>484768
Well, the area is still called Mosquito Coast (Costa de Mosquitos in spanish) so it's still a pretty fun name.
Feel free to tell me about that republic and correct the other anon though, meme or not it seems interesting.
>>484799
tl;dr
To be Slaves who escaped by killing their masters or taking control of the slave boats end up in the Caribbean of Central America and mix with the Natives. Fuck Spanish settlement, later join the Brits to get their "protection" and make their territory British and not Spanish. End up later, some of it, in control of the Spaniards. The current Miskitos are probably like 99% Black but claim to be Native because of the past mix and are proud of never being Slaves and stuff.
>>484578
Some Jew?
Something that doesn't exist?
>>485398
Comparative advantages, later refined by neoclassicals to fit their worldview.
Import substitution did exist, have you ever heard of Cepal and Julio Prebisch?
>>485426
Raul*, don't know where I got Julio from
>>484768
Actually I am from the United States. Yes, it's "more correct" to spell it as "Miskito". The best part are the "Monarchs", who were basically Miskito people dubbed with British names and died at an early age from alcohol poisoning. When I discuss Belize, initially just after independence, it was the only deep water port for Central America to export products, giving the British considerable economic influence.
I am not an expert of race relations in Central America per say, although I had the awesome opportunity of checking our the beaches at Tela in Honduras, where a large Garifuna community resides, who are a mix of former slaves and indigenous persons.
If you want to talk about Guatemalan butthurt, the new President (Jimmy Morales), who'll be inaugurated in January, had made statements about how Belize is rightful Guatemalan clay so it'll be interesting to see where that goes, probably nowhere.
>>484653
It's Latin America. To be a top leader, you need to have a trophy wife, a lot of mistresses, and some illegitimate children and lots of Machismo.
Such is the Path of the Caudillo.
>>485883
Here is a lazy list of "Kings" I look off of Wikipedia:
Miskito Kings:
c 1650–c 1687 Oldman
c 1687–1718 Jeremy I
1718–1729 H.M. Jeremy II
1729–1739 H.M. Peter I
1739–1755 H.M. Edward I
1755–1776 H.M. George I
1776–1801 H.M. George II Frederic
1801–1824 H.M. George Frederic Augustus I
1824–1842 H.M. Robert Charles Frederic
1842–1865 H.M. George Augustus Frederic II
1865–1879 H.E. William Henry Clarence, Hereditary Chief of Miskito
1879–1888 H.E. George William Albert Hendy, Hereditary Chief of Miskito
1888–1889 H.E. Andrew Hendy, Hereditary Chief of Miskito
1889–1890 H.E. Jonathan Charles Frederick, Hereditary Chief of Miskito
1890–1908 H.E. Robert Henry Clarence, Hereditary Chief of Miskito
Fun fact: Since the Mosquito Kingdom was a British protectorate, English continues to be used by much of the population. So if you're lazy and don't really want to speak Spanish, just go towards the Caribbean side of Nicaragua, Honduras, and Costa Rica (which has a large Jamaican community because Bananas)
Why didn't Argentina absorb Paraguay and Uruguay?
>>482575
Because of Imperialist counter-revolutionaries.
>>485917
You watch too many movies / tv
>>485883
>"It would be a great dishonour to loss Belize"
>loss
>mfw
Delusional/10, at least Argentinians say they are going to "recover" the Falklands.
>>487735
They tried many many times.
Basically with both argentina and brazil wanting them both, they kinda cancelled each other out.
Uruguay/Banda Oriental/Cisplatina especially had been a battlefield between the two for a long time.
>>487735
>uruguay
Brazil was in the way, the eternal anglo made it an independent non-country because the Cisplatine War was hurting their trading in the region
>paraguay
As far as I know, Argentina wanted to split Paraguay with Brazil after the Paraguayan War, but D. Pedro II didn't want to touch Argentina that way, so it was kept as a buffer state
