Revolutionary Waves In Latin America 20

Revolutionary waves in Latin America 20

Introduction

Latin America in the twentieth century saw different interpretations of social, economic and political reality. Various societies and countries have adopted different ideas about what constitutes their reason for being, their origins, their present and their future. Nationalism, developmentalism, socialism and communism have been permanent allusive in socio -political action, who have defended them have not only been those intellectual elites, but also extensive social groups that have mobilized in favor of the realization of idealspromised. 

Each ideological model was at its effective time orienting the socio -political practice of notable social groups. However, they also had their crisis moments which presented their most substantive weaknesses. These ideas have in common the fact that apart from having been part of more or less systematic intellectual elaborations, also the fact of use as an instrument of political mobilization. Latin America enjoyed renowned intellectuals who not only made great efforts to structure the aforementioned concepts, by way of forming a coherent and well -founded world vision of the social reality of Latin American and what was required to force modifications to it, but also, much of these would become active participants in the front that would contribute to the intention of returning them reality.

Latin America had been marked by revolutions since the remote times of Simón Bolívar.

By 1791, the shouts of revolution are unleashed in Haiti, which would lead to their own independence, thus opening the cycle of emancipatory struggles in Latin America. So, although historical evolution cannot be reduced to revolutions, these were undoubtedly these processes, triumphant, failed or incomplete, which constituted in crucial and decisive moments that have greatly determined Latin American history.

Although this essay will talk about the history of Latin America, it is also necessaryIn Latin America it will be largely developed as a consequence of the actions of the American giant.

From the end of the 19th century, until the beginning of World War I imperialism will see its golden stage. Initially based on the famous Monroe doctrine (whose essence could be summarized in the phrase "America for the Americans"), and, later becoming much more aggressive after its modification through the Roosevelt Corollario;The United States will maintain an expansionist position in relation to Latin America. This, since his idea, in principle, consisted of displacing the European influence of the continent (and by the end of the century, particularly the British) because of the dissonant interests between both continents and the American ambitions themselves.

Consequently, the United States will now be the one who puts the norm in the subcontinent, and, especially after the modification of the Monroe doctrine through the Roosevelt corollary that, as explained by Sáenz E: “Justifies the intervention of the United States in matters in mattersinternal from the countries of Latin America if they, according to the US government, did not know how to "behave", especially in the payment of their debts ";It will mean the emergence of a new scheme of ideas, ideological matrices and contradictions, which will define the dynamics of the entire century. 

Revolutionary waves in Latin America 20th century

To help clarify a little and synthesize the various evolutions that took place in this century, we will use the same system used by the Mendible Professor in his presentation on “the revolutionary waves of Latin America”.

The Mendible Professor explains the possibility of compiling the revolutions that occurred during the twentieth century through 3 significantly different periods, which express the differences with respect to historical context and progressive changes that the continent was experiencing. As begable, there is talk of a period of "antilatifundistas" revolutions between 1900 and 1930. This, given the conditions lived by the subcontinent for the time. The capitalist system, characterized by an international labor division, configured Latin America as a raw material producing center. In this way, it would establish the industrialized centers as dominant thanks to their ability to control the form of capital introduction in the region.

That is why the Mexican case highlights as one of the most representative of this period. Porfirio Díaz Since he assumed the presidency in 1876 he was progressively tilting to the right, he became an autocrat supported by the landowner oligarchy, the conservative clergy and, above all, by the American imperialist interests. Antilatifundista feeling in the country is seen very clearly even before starting the conflict. The Lerdo law would sit down on the latter, and serve as a division axis between the two factions that see genesis along the scaling of conflicts: the group of landowners who were increasingly wealthy and the group of landless pawnsprogressively impoverished

Now, Mendible also speaks of a second period, the "Developist" period that covers from 1931 to 1960. This stage can be explained first that development is conceived as a change of structures.  Reference to the words of begable, we understand that, when talking about developmentalism it is necessary.

Since the beginning of the fifties the relative backwardness of Latin America is increasing. Cuba was probably in the fifties the most organically linked Latin American state. Given the possibility that poverty, social inequality and the prolongation of corrupt dictatorships favored the revolutionary triumph, the governments of the United States often intervened to prevent it. Past grudges scattered in the town that would be controlled by armed organizations, and then by the revolutionaries, would be expressed through a coldly organized “Accounts Adjustment” after the taking of power, and would deepen through the displacement of the classdominant and the taking of foreign capital. Without good the United States did not invade the island militarily, its indirect intervention came much further and its consequences were deeper, lacerating and constant, to the degree that have not yet ended. In addition, the conflict with Cuba led the world to the edge of a nuclear conflagration.

Then, a third stage, the stage of the "democratizing" revolutions will take place in the period between 1960 and 1999;When Latin America begins to see the collapse of military dictatorships throughout its extension (Argentina, Brazil Chile and Peru are an example of this).

Another fairly significant example is made up of Nicaragua, where after the overthrow of the Somoza government on the Sandinista National Liberation Front (FSLN), it begins to make reflex to the internal of the dynamics that existed internationally. The contradictions between communists and capitalists are integrated into the Nicaraguan reality when, the United States, before the emergence of this new party (FSLN), but of left-wing trend (social democrats, socialists, Marxist-Leninists and other trends were seen in the party)and of broad popular support. From the interference policies of the so -called Reagan doctrine, the “cons” (counterrevolutionary groups) will be one of the ways that the United States will use to ensure that the Soviet Union, an antithesis of that nation for the moment, had no influence on thesubcontinent, as a measure to maintain national security.

conclusion

Revolutions constantly seek to transform something in force that is considered unfair, from laws to the entire established social order. Therefore, it can also be explained as an abrupt break or change of the current social, legal or political order, mostly by violent means. Hence the resistance against an order contrary to the legal conscience of the majority and sustained only by coercion.

Normally, revolutions are dramatic because they are born from terrible situations. In the processes that were analyzed, the popular masses decidedly supported revolutionary violence in the name of the fair transformation of the social regime, although it is more difficult to specify to what degree all the tragedy generated was justified in the eyes of the people, especially taking into account theexcesses to which it was reached in Mexico, above all, during the armed phase of the revolution.

In this parallel, it emphasizes that American politics has constantat your reach. This could be explained based on the world’s historical context of the latter, arising in the period of the ‘Cold War’, when the obsession of the American rulers was at preventing the extension of the opposing field. However, after the disappearance of the Soviet Union, it has not led to a substantial improvement of United States relations with Cuba.