An analysis of the transition of Latin America politics in terms of continuity and changes after independence reveals that the new political power of sovereign nationhood affected the Caribbean republics. Latin American struggle for independence was a sudden and unexpected process. It was not an anticipated process as no one had forecasted an imperial collapse. The countries struggled to make a change to the colonial political structure. A new system of government was needful. After independence, some sections of Latin America now lived under the control of white people who were the social elite. They were the conservative states that included Brazil and Spanish America. Other states like Haiti had the slaves taking up control of government after independence.
Liberalism made Latin America’s independence possible. This involved liberty, popular sovereignty, and equality among the people. The massive movement inspired many and brought together alliances that promised a future with equality. They proposed that the Americans should go back to their country to rule themselves. The first governments in independent Latin America had inadequate resources leading to disappointments among liberals as their dreams faded away. Liberal governments collapsed. Their constitutions could not hold ground. Political instability had started to emerge.
In post-independence era, it was evident that liberalism was difficult to ensure. As much as the emphasis of equality was radical, the implications it had in the society needed to be hierarchical. In a case of social equality, the republics agreed that everyone except the slaves could become citizens. All citizens were equal. The few elite in leadership roles across the states could not agree with this idea. There was a serious contradiction emerging between the political theory dictated by liberals and the reality. This posed a threat to the political stability of emerging republics.
In theory, the liberals demanded a government catering for the people. The liberal leaders in government at the time constituted the white people of an elite class who considered the locals as a problem. The leaders wanted to continue with the old colonial power system while they posed as a new refreshed liberal government. This led to the emergence of conservative leaders who plainly stated that people should know their place and leave governing to their betters. Many people accepted this statement by the conservative leaders as it related to the colonial era.
The church-state conflict clearly depicts the struggle between the conservatives and liberals. The church had respect for the colonial traditions. The liberals needed separation of the church from the state in order to have the right to worship anywhere. Conservatives had a different agenda, as they needed Catholicism to remain in the new republics as the official religion. This led to divide in the Latin America along this orientation. The people of Latin America had an interest to become affiliated with a political side. This led to the emergence of party organizations with electoral campaigns that did not exist in the pre-independence era. Under the colonial rule, only forums had been organized especially for public debate. The new system of partisan politics was new to the world at that time.
In the early days after independence, presidents held office for a few months, sometimes days. This affected the governments as they were not able to implement their ideas. The conservative leaders did not want the power structure to change. The liberals as the conservatives alike saw power as a means to enrich themselves. This was similar to the political structure in the colonial period. The people in government were able to distribute power to their affiliates in reward to their loyalty. These included government jobs, public works, and pension. The amenities are referred to as patronage and led to patronage politics and leadership known as caudillo.
Patronage politics was the reason corruption existed in the post-colonial times. A leader would use the office assigned to him to benefit people of his background, as well as those he needed a favor from at times. His support in the electoral process no longer depended on his principles (conservative or liberal) but on who was going to benefit from him. A caudillo leadership system embedded on the patronage politics. A leader would get benefits from a patron of a higher rank. An example is a governor receiving favors from his party leader. The highest in the ranks as in the case of Latin America parties’ national leader was the caudillo.
Liberalism as a system failed to ensure power structure. The liberals accepted way of the conservatives. A success story is the example of Brazil in the mid-1800s with slaves, coffee, and a stable monarchy was evident. The idea of decolonizing the republics and liberal reforms came to a halt, as it emerged that a strong authority was needed more than a democracy.
Bibliography
Chasteen, John Charles. Born in blood and fire: a concise history of Latin America. 3rd. New York: W.W. Norton, 2011.
