ITT: We discuss what could've been the best nation in all history, why it failed, and what could've changed if it actually succeded
>>591786
You can fuck off and go kill yourself, Narcolombia.
>>591801
>Narcolombia
>Not realizing this was Bolivar's dream, the greatest man from this continent
Jokes on you
>best nation in all history
>run by the most backwards people in Western Europe
No
>>591786
That looks pretty neato, but it might've placed a check on the USA's power early on.
Or we might've double teamed Mexico together and made the western hemisphere a better place for everyone.
>>591842
The Spanish Empire was one of least backwards states in Europe at the time.
>inb4 WE and t. Alberto Barbosa
>>591815
>Bolivar
>the greatest man from this continent
Negro, por favor
>>591815
>greatest man from this continent
>actually believed that South America could be a single country with the Andes in the way
>goes full on Terror during and after the war
>countries "fred" by him ended up with over 30-50% of their population wiped out and indebted to Britain for over a century
>dies in poverty
>>591939
>some crusty old literally who monarch
>greater than the Alexander of the Americas
>>591926
In the early 19th century?
Fuck no.
Christ on a crutch, where would you even get that kind of misconception from. The Italians could probably do a better job.
>>591786
i'd rather not discuss it
Bolivar, Miranda and everyone were all selfish and that's why it got split so fast
it was doomed to that or to become a one-man tyranny in order to hold together
Colombian here
>>591842
More precisely, run by the half-blood descendants of the most backwards European nation of the time (XIX century), who were very isolated, selfish, stingy and only wanted to perpetuate a semi-feudalist system with them on top as >>592901 said.
With worthwhile people Gran Colombia could be one of the richest countries on Earth today. The problem is people, even more so than the crazy geography. Fuck us.
A more organized breakup from Spain later could have worked better than what we got with Bolivar et. al. Thanks Napoleon I guess
>>591786
It could not be while Bolivar and his fanboys existed. Every noble person who opposed that tyrant ended up dead or exiled.
Therefore, blame oligarchs.
We should have been a federation of some sort but what city at the time could have been the capital? Maybe Colombia+Venezuela+Panama could have worked with the capital in Cartagena if it weren't for the eternal Anglo.
>>593118
>who were very isolated, selfish, stingy and only wanted to perpetuate a semi-feudalist system with them on top
this. Also, have you seen the geography of that region? It's all goddamn mountains, the few valleys are where the cities are and either that or jungle separates the pockets of civilization. It splitted pretty much on a geographical basis.
Even Brazil, that has a pretty much retarded geography and haven't fragmented on colonial times for some miracle, is less stupid than that.
>>593164
federalism is the only answer... no capitals because atlantic, pacific and andean trade was needed
>>593172
I should know about the geography, I live here lol. The first commercial airline was founded here because of that
>>591786
>>591815
Go away Maduro.
>>593118
>>593172
Add that we were lazy and indifferent as fuck and we still are.
>>593164
>>593184
Camilo Torres did nothing wrong. A capital is indeed needed but, you can see that for example, both capital cities of US and Brazil are pretty irrelevant compared to other bigger cities of their respective countries. US has cities like Austin, Los Angeles, New York. Hueland has Sao Paulo, Belo Horizonte, Rio de Janeiro.
>>593489
Barranquilla masterrace reporting in,
>Colombia's Golden Gate
>Everything everyone loves in the countrygot here from our ports
>Literally river mouth into the atlantic, connected to the main trading river
>Literally only main city in the country without mountains
>Industrial focus
>Not being capital
>>593531
Sure, le good ol' town of Lebanon, Kansas should be undoubtably US capital
>>593531
The problem isn't defining the capital. In fact, it's the most stupid of all problems.
The biggest issue is that Bogota has too much political and economical power because centralistas, so all money from different regions of the country eventually ends here instead of giving each department to do whatever they want with their own tax money (within certain limits of course). Ironically, Bogota is still one of the most underdeveloped of all top cities in the country.
Even worse, our country is almost a monarchy disguised as democracy because presidential orders are treated as a holy mandate from god itself. For example, this piece of shit president Uribe could've been impeached in the middle of his second presidential period if our executive branch wasn't as overpowered as it is right now. Same thing applies to the crypto-jew we have nowadays.
I get that if we became feds. corruption will rise a lot in certain departments, even more that it does nowadays and it will eventually hinder their development, so a better justice system or even a new constitution will be needed. At the end it's a risk us colombians we have to take in order to get our shit straight as well as stop relying so much on this almost nanny state. Federalism can give importance to citizens from different parts of the country instead of giving priorities to the ones living in the capital city.
t. Bogotan.
>>593556
Kansas doesn't have a pre independence metropolitan center and is not comparably relevant you pedestrian.
>>593605
>corruption will rise
You are understating.
>if it's too centralized it gets tyrannical and unrepresentative
>if it's too decentralized corruption and ignorance is rampant
seriously this is THE Latin American dilemma. We will not leave the gutter before that is sorted out. And it never will.
>>593630
Hey, corruption will always exists. Anyone with a drop of power will eventually seek their own benefit. The difference lies in either letting one fag rule all the place, or a bunch of lesser fags do shit in their own, smaller territories.
>>592798
Was Bolívar able to keep gran Colômbia as a single nation?
Did Pedro the Second reign saw Brazil desintegrate in various small republics?
I rest my case!
>>593995
>I resto my case!
>>593654
I can see certain regions becoming narcohavens within a couple decades of becoming states, desu.
>>594903
Actually if Ecuador and Panama hand't split off they probably would be as poor as the Colombian periphery in the south and Pacific, and therefore narcoheavens (Ecuador and Venezuela aren't)
Let's just disappear all the people living in these lands and populate them with Brits, Germans, Italians and French populations
>>594971
But then Brits, Germans and French would fail to reproduce and fill them with Muslims and Nigs instead.
Bolivar himself said that the South Americans were ungovernable fucks
>>594971
So replace us with cucks who love africans? Lmao.
>>595206
Every single region in south america that was part of an viceroyalty or captaincies wanted to mind their own business. Bolivar wanted us all to form a gigantic country like US did.
>>594903
See >>594921
Our government can't govern anything. Inept as fuck.
>>595041
Not in the XIX and XX centuries, it would be more like Argentina or the south of Brazil
>>595768
but those countries are "white" because of recent euro displacement, not because of early colonization
(also applies to the american Northeast)
>>594032
>small republics appart from meme grande do sul and the nigger coasts
that's what happened
>>595824
Truly, Empire>Republic no question.
>>595869
>meme grande do sul
God, can they be even more pathetic?
>>595768
Or like Haiti. Where Euros killed Native Americans, and then imported nigs until they were overrun and kicked out. Or like the Guyanas, where Euros found almost no Native Americans, and then imported Pakis and Nigs until they got bored and left.
>>591786
If we kept together, could we have successfully waged war against the britbongs and reclaimed all of Guyana which is rightful Venezuelan clay?
>>596320
Civil war when?
>>592798
now alexander of the americas was a racist traitor fuck that renegated from his country just to hold the power for himself.
Kek look how was the virreinato of new granada
and the shilthole that it is today
>>596046
>Lumping Paraná with them
Fucking hell no.
>>596320
I don't think Venezuela needs anyone's help to do that
>>596081
This could have happened more probably, yeah
All hope was lost when starting in the XVI century the Spaniards decided not to bring their women to the Americas
Well, taking in count that Venezuela was the only worthwile country of the whole union, it couldn't survive anything. There was a crisis like 10 years later with the price of coffee going down and shit. Also, Paez is the best human being of the whole XIX century.
>>597431
>Also, Paez is the best human being of the whole XIX century.
Amen
>>596320
>war against the britbongs
Not in the XIX century mate, it was their golden age. Perhaps during WW2.
>>597539
The United States wouldn't allow a South American country to start a war against the Bongs in WWII, because it would mean spreading the war to the continent.
>>597539
>Perhaps during WW2.
>siding with the axis during a time where every axis oriented country got btfo'd out of land and prestige
Latino ingenuity everyone
Is mostly the gringos's fault that we lost Guyana, they were supposed to mediate our negotiations with the bongs but eventually favored them and in the end forced us to agree with them to give most of the territory comprising Guyana.
Monroe Doctrine my ass.
>>597623
There is Also the fact that neither Maduro nor Chavez cared until it was discovered that it had oil. On a side note, Venezuela has one of the most interesting hidtories in the whole World but /his/ doesn't seem to care
>>597623
>US siding with Britain rather than with new worlders
No fucking shit. Remember when Germans and Brits wanted to collect their debt moneys and the US stepped in to help? What did they do again?
Americans are NOT our friends. Why people still think they are is beyond me.
>>598060
>getting mad over having to pay debts
>falklands pic titled "malvinas"
Samba pls.
>>597623
>>598060
The Monroe Doctrine was designed to prevent foreign powers from using Latin America as a springboard to harm US interests.
If you think about things like the Cuban Missile Crisis, or the various CIA backed coups, you'll start to see what that means.
US policy makers mostly seem to see the Latin American republics as a bunch of fuckups that should be managed to avoid them causing any trouble.
History has proven them correct.
>>598142
>history has proven them correct
According to the US yes. Most of the fuck ups have their meddling, and all of the big ones.
>>597809
>Venezuela
>interesting history
I'm skeptical
>>598156
All of the losers blame external factors.
You never see Japan, South Korea, or Taiwan complaining about US meddling. Because those societies were capable of capitalizing on opportunity.
From the very outset, Latin America has been crippled by corruption and constant class warfare.
American policy has always been to mitigate the effect of these instabilities on US interests. When the primary threat to the US was Western Europe, this meant keeping the empires from playing their power games on this side of the Atlantic.
When it was communism, the US understandably took dramatic measures to prevent the massive number of disenfranchised peasants in the region from becoming an effective tool of Soviet policy.
You'd have to be a windowlicker to expect the US to side against its mother country and most important ally, simply to avoid hurting the feelings of some fascist paste-eater.
PS: Backing Thatcher against Videla was the best thing that could have happened to Argentina.
>>598170
It is interesting because it's LATINA AMERICA BANANA REPUBLIC MEETS OIL.
But most places history is interesting after you start digging into it.
>>591877
>thoroughly westernized both North and South America
Now that would have been interesting
>>598176
>You never see Japan, South Korea, or Taiwan complaining about US meddling.
Yes, you see plenty of that. Maybe not all that much from Taiwan.
>You'd have to be a windowlicker to expect the US to side against its mother country and most important ally
The argentine had American support pretty much in everythjing else they did, so they felt confident. But indeed, it was stupid from their part.
>best thing that could have happened to Argentina
HAH yes.
>Keeping the euros out, then keeping the commies out
That is obvious enough, but it is not less infuriating.
You mistake me though. Latin America has, at any point in history, two options: accept American dominance and act accordingly or pursue autonomy. It is somewhat related to what Euros understood back in the 1950s, but we aren't France, we aren't Japan. America has no interest in helping because we aren't in direct opposition to the Moscow-Shanghai axis.
Any Autonomy movement is swiftly put down - because that's not in your interests - and acceptance of foreign intervention, when said foreigner does not see our society as an "indispensable ally" meets predictable results.
So, yes, we have a heap of problems from various sources, one of them is the US. But do not get me wrong, it isn't the only one.
The biggest problem is we don't have any sort of self-determination or long term planning so as a result the world powers just use us for economic gain and we never create something by ourselves
>>598227
I guess the point I'm trying to make is that the US will respect your countries sovereignty more the more your country is competent at self governing.
The origin of US interference in Latin America is the ineptitude of Latin American governments, which stems from the political culture created by Spanish settlement.
I'm not saying this because I want to improve Americas e-peen, I just think that a lot of people in Latin America use US intervention as a scapegoat for the problems that caused US intervention in the first place.
PS: Guatemala was stupid, and people should have been hanged over Nicaragua, but Salvador Allende deserved it.
>>592804
Gib proofs
