Study Notes on the New Nations of Latin America

By the end of the first quarter of the nineteenth century, most of Latin America gained independence from colonial powers, becoming new nations.
A small, privileged elite emerged, gaining disproportionately from the previous colonial systems and the initial state of nationhood.

The independence of these new nations was largely nominal, with elites becoming economically subservient to Great Britain.
The movement for nation-state building was primarily driven by the elite. José Martí described the elites as creating "theoretical republics" which confused their desires with that of the broader population, representing fewer than 5% of the total populace.
Fundamental questions arose post-independence:
- How do people create new governments?
- What forms of government should they adopt?
- How would economic poverty affect sovereignty?
- Should historical social patterns be maintained or abandoned?

A central question was who would govern and how they would do so, foreshadowing a novel political vacuum following independence declarations.
Brazil had an easier resolution primarily due to King John VI and Prince Pedro's presence, leading to a peaceful transition from a viceroyalty to an empire.
The presence of a royal Braganza gave legitimacy to the new Brazilian Empire, avoiding the bitter debates rampant in Spanish America between monarchists and republicans.
The initial consensus on monarchy led to debates about governance, resulting in the 1824 constitution providing a centralized government with a vigorous executive.
Power was distributed among four branches: executive, legislative, judiciary, and moderative, with the emperor holding the bulk of authority and needing to ensure harmony throughout vast and diverse provinces.
- The General Assembly included a life-appointed Senate, reflecting continuity from the past.
The issued constitution lasted sixty-five years until 1889, proven to be Brazil’s most durable constitutional framework.

Spanish America experienced a tumultuous transition with power transferred to independence heroes, struggling to find successors.
The preference for federalism emerged due to local rivalries and resistance to centralism, prompted by the effective model of North American federalism.
Political ideologies of liberalism and conservatism dominated with nuanced differences:
- Liberals: Generally younger, sought broader democracy, looked towards the U.S. as an example.
- Conservatives: Often older and affluent, preferred limited participation to maintain order and economic stability.
Both factions contended for the role of the Catholic Church, with the Church maintaining a significant influence post-independence due to continuity of its operations and economic power, accounting for substantial landholdings.

Elections became notable aspects of legitimacy in the new nations, although voter participation was often exceedingly low.
For instance, turnout dropped below 5%.
Faced with frequent violence and general distrust in governments, many citizens preferred localism over national identity.
- Initial enthusiasm for elections waned, and by the mid-19th century, many constitutions leaned towards restricting suffrage, reflecting elite concerns.
Countries drafted numerous constitutions, with Venezuela recording up to twenty-two since 1811, which aimed at restoring traditional power balances.

Local turmoil and economic instability led to the rise of caudillos. These authoritarian leaders maintained control often through charismatic authority rather than institutional legitimacy.
- Many caudillos initially hailed from the military, utilizing force to govern, benefitting both the elites and preserving socio-economic structures from colonial times.
- A significant number of caudillos earned public support, establishing benefits and development projects like infrastructure and education while suppressing liberal movements.

Some caudillos connected with the masses and articulated the needs and rights of the lower classes, distinguishing them as "folk" caudillos.
- These leaders utilized their understanding of local cultural values and dynamics to legitimatize their rule, contrasting with elite-driven governance.

Many new nations faced profound economic struggles, resulting in overreliance on British markets and capital.
- Forced into unfavorable treaties that limited competitive growth as British merchants monopolized imports and market dynamics with Latin America.
Furthermore, the looming threats of European and American military interventions led to a fragile existence for these fledgling republics, evidenced by repeated attempts to leverage power over Latin American affairs.

Suppressed initially, indigenous groups and labor movements gradually began working through local systems, asserting rights in opposition to elite interests.
Overall, struggles in the early republics illustrate a complex socio-political landscape, where the aspirations of elites were often countered by the needs and perspectives of the broader populace, leading to varying degrees of success and turmoil across the region.