IV. Constitutional Development in Latin America: A Synthesis

1945 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 511-522 ◽  
Author(s):  
Russell H. Fitzgibbon

“Do not give to a people institutions for which it is unripe in the simple faith that the tool will give skill to the workman's hand. Respect Facts. Man is in each country not what we may wish him to be, but what Nature and History have made him.” Bryce, Modern Democracies, I, 206.With minor exceptions, the panorama of constitutional growth in the Western Hemisphere reveals two main streams. The United States Constitution, the British North America Act of 1867 (which is the Canadian fundamental law), and the organic laws of the various New World British possessions of today all stem, obviously, from English constitutional and institutional ancestry. The constitutions of the twenty Latin American states, on the other hand, all reflect in varying degree the experience and institutions of their three mother countries. These modern constitutions are, it is true, influenced by alien examples at one point or another, but the core is undubitably Latin. More narrowly, the inspiration is Hispanic; and still more narrowly, Spanish.It is not easy to explain in detail the degree of similarity between French political institutions and those of the Iberian peninsula in the centuries between the emergence of the several national states and the political revolutions in Latin America. At least, the French belonged to a not unrelated family. A much closer relationship is easily discernible among the political institutions of the three main Iberian entities that ultimately became the national states of Spain and Portugal, viz., Castile, Aragon, and Portugal. It is often forgotten that for many generations no political or constitutional “Spain” existed, that Aragon and Castile were as distinct from each other in most ways as either of them was from Portugal, that an easily possible union of the ruling houses of Castile and Portugal—supplanting the marriage of Isabella and Ferdinand—might have changed the whole subsequent course of history.

2011 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 340-365 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabiana Machado ◽  
Carlos Scartascini ◽  
Mariano Tommasi

In this article, the authors argue that where institutions are strong, actors are more likely to participate in the political process through institutionalized arenas, while where they are weak, protests and other unconventional means of participation become more appealing. The authors explore this relationship empirically by combining country-level measures of institutional strength with individual-level information on protest participation in seventeen Latin American countries. The authors find evidence that weaker political institutions are associated with a higher propensity to use alternative means for expressing preferences, that is, to protest.


Author(s):  
Thomas C. Field Jr.

The Cold War in Latin America had marked consequences for the region’s political and economic evolution. From the origins of US fears of Latin American Communism in the early 20th century to the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s, regional actors played central roles in the drama. Seeking to maximize economic benefit while maintaining independence with regard to foreign policy, Latin Americans employed an eclectic combination of liberal and anti-imperialist discourses, balancing frequent calls for anti-Communist hemispheric unity with periodic diplomatic entreaties to the Soviet bloc and the nonaligned Third World. Meanwhile, US Cold War policies toward the region ranged from progressive developmentalism to outright military invasions, and from psychological warfare to covert paramilitary action. Above all, the United States sought to shore up its allies and maintain the Western Hemisphere as a united front against extra-hemispheric ideologies and influence. The Cold War was a bloody, violent period for Latin America, but it was also one marked by heady idealism, courageous political action, and fresh narratives about Latin America’s role in the world, all of which continue to inform regional politics to this day.


2014 ◽  
Vol 56 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Doyle

AbstractWhy are some Latin American states plagued by persistent policy volatility while the policies of others remain relatively stable? This article explores the political economy of natural resource rents and policy volatility across Latin America. It argues that, all else equal, resource rents will create incentives for political leaders, which will result in repeated episodes of policy volatility. This effect, however, will depend on the structure of political institutions. Where political institutions fail to provide a forum for intertemporal exchange among political actors, natural resource rents will result in increased levels of policy volatility. Alternatively, where political institutions facilitate agreement among actors, resource rents will be conducive to policy stability. This argument is tested on a measure of policy volatility for 18 Latin American economies between 1993 and 2008. The statistical tests provide support for the argument.


2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 119-140
Author(s):  
N. Yu. Kudeyarova

Latin America is one of the high level migration activity regions. The mass migration flows are the part of the Western Hemisphere South nations history for more than a century and a half. Both the structure and direction of that flows have been significantly transformed during that period. While being the transatlantic flows recipients at the end of the XIX – beginning of the XX centuries, the Latin American States turned into donors of human resources in the second half of the XX century due to the profound demographic transformation. The aim of this paper is to analyse the demographic transformations impact on the emigration mobility models development in Latin America and the Caribbean countries. Demographic changes were manifested in different ways in countries with a large share of European migrants and those that were not affected by mass migrations flows at the turn of the XIX – XX centuries. The Central America countries and Mexico have experienced the most profound population explosion that subsequently affected the intensity of the migration movement to the United States. The paper examines the main migration directions of Latin America and the Caribbean residents, identifies two basic mobility source areas that demonstrate different strategies via different destination countries choice. While the United States has become the leading destination country for Latin American migrants, accounting for 93% of migrants from Central America and Mexico, the South American migration is mostly intraregional. The largest regional integration associations migration policies implementation reflects this difference. Spain has become a significant extra-regional migration destination for South America. At the end of the second decade of the XXI century, global economic transformations affect the migration dynamics of Latin American subregions, producing powerful migration crises and local tensions.


2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 202-222
Author(s):  
Marcos Pires ◽  
◽  
Lucas Gualberto Nascimento ◽  

The election of Donald Trump caused a change in the direction of U.S. foreign policy for Latin America with the imposition of new sanctions on the Cuban government (starting a new cold war with the island) and the attempted regime changes in Venezuela and Nicaragua, whose governments are seen as a threat by Washington’s elite. In September 2018, during a speech at the opening session of the United Nations General Assembly in New York, Donald Trump took up the principles of the Monroe Doctrine as formal a U.S. policy and rejected the alleged interference of foreign states in the western hemisphere and in the internal affairs of the United States — a direct allusion to China and Russia. This change in U.S. policy toward Latin America has had a great impact on Sino-Latin American relations in the context of political pressures and aggressive rhetoric seeking to curb the Chinese presence there. This article explores the motivation behind the new attitude of the United States in its relations with Latin America and how it impacts Sino-Latin American relations.


1985 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-25
Author(s):  
Gabriel Marcella

What should the strategic relationship between the United States and Latin America be in the next 10 years? This paper will try to provide an agenda for answering this question by trying to clarify some of the issues involved. It seeks to promote responsible dialogue on regional security matters based on realistic assessment of the national interests involved and the impact they have on one another.United States defense relations with Latin America over the last 40 years have revolved around two strategy frameworks: one East- West and the other North-South. During this time the United States has attempted to integrate Latin America into its East-West global strategy, subordinating Latin American interests to the overall requirement of containing Soviet power.


2021 ◽  

Independence is foundational to national histories in Latin America, defined for this article as former colonies of Spain and Portugal in the Western Hemisphere. Throughout the 19th and most of the 20th centuries, however, attention to women’s experiences during that period was limited to patriotic biographies of those considered heroines. With the growth of women’s history beginning in the 1970s, a few dissertations in the United States focused on women’s roles during independence, resulting in one monograph and a few articles. The field was more linked to social than political history, however, and most studies of women in Latin America focused either on the colonial period or on the 20th century. A few historians did analyze women’s status, particularly in family law, over a longer transitional period, from the late 18th century into the 19th century, that encompassed independence. Similarly, literary scholars undertook gender analysis of texts in the same timeframe. By the 1990s, feminist scholars within Latin America were overcoming institutional barriers, leading to a rise in works published in Spanish and Portuguese. Indeed, scholars within the region have undertaken most of the studies that focus on women specifically during the movements for independence in Spanish America between 1810 and 1825, and these publications have grown significantly with the bicentennial commemorations. Scholars in North America and Europe have also increased their attention to gender and politics, especially during the aftermath of independence, and they have added masculinity as a subject of analysis. The increase in scholarship was sufficient for some to undertake article-length overviews in the 2000s, and the time is ripe to reconsider larger debates over the extent and timing of changes in gender roles and dynamics. Most scholars argue that despite women’s contributions to the independence movements, their status remained little changed or even worsened within the new nations. While without doubt a rising ideology of domesticity for women occurred in the 19th century, the particular spaces for women’s agency merit closer investigation. Despite the considerable growth in the field, moreover, much research remains to be done. Brazil and especially Central America are underrepresented. Although studies of Indigenous women who participated in late colonial Andean rebellions have been done, much less work is available focused on Indigenous or on women of African descent during or after the wars of independence. For additional information on related themes, see the separate Oxford Bibliographies in Latin American Studies articles “Latin American Independence” and “Women in Modern Latin American History.”


Tempo ◽  
1958 ◽  
pp. 28-34
Author(s):  
Gilbert Chase

Any survey of music in the area that we are accustomed to call Latin America should begin with certain basic distinctions intended to dissipate the superficial notion of cultural homogeneity. Let us agree at the outset to regard the term “Latin America” as a loose geographical designation for those portions of the Western Hemisphere that lie outside of Canada and the United States. It is better to resort to such circumlocution than to risk the misleading assumption of a fundamental similarity in the twenty countries with which we are concerned.


2020 ◽  
pp. 247-277
Author(s):  
Elaheh Nourigholamizadeh

Desde la Doctrina Monroe (1823) hasta el final de la Segunda Guerra Mundial, los Estados Unidos tomó gradualmente el lugar de las potencias colonialistas europeas en América Latina y empleó una amplia gama de los compromisos políticos en los países de región que le brindaron una potencia dominante en el hemisferio occidental. Durante la Guerra Fría, las políticas intervencionistas de los EE.UU. en los asuntos domésticos de los países latinoamericanos establecieron la “hegemonía estadounidense en América Latina”. Una investigación histórica sobre las relaciones de los países americanos muestra que según la perspectiva neo-Gramsciana, la hegemonía liberal de los EE.UU. en América Latina es preservada y promovida por tres pilares: cultura liberal; organizaciones interamericanas; y capacidades militares y económicas. Estos tres pilares también se han extendido a otras partes del mundo. From the Monroe Doctrine (1823) to the end of World War II, the United States gradually took the place of the European colonial powers in Latin America and employed a wide range of political engagements in the countries of the region that gave it a dominant power in the Western Hemisphere. During the Cold War, US interventionist policies in the domestic affairs of the Latin American countries established the “American hegemony in Latin America”. A historical research on the U.S-Latin America relations shows that according to the neo-Gramscian perspective, US liberal hegemony in Latin America is preserved and promoted by three pillars: liberal culture; inter-American organizations; and US military and economic capabilities. These three pillars have also spread to other parts of the world.


1944 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 521-530
Author(s):  
Dana G. Munro

Any discussion of postwar problems in our relations with Latin America must begin with a consideration of the great changes which have taken place in hemisphere relations during the war period. Since 1939, the American Republics have achieved a degree of coöperation in international matters which would hardly have seemed possible a few years earlier, and today all but one of the nations of the Continent are helping the United States either as belligerents or as non-belligerents in the prosecution of the war.On the military side, our neighbors have given us bases for our Naval and Air Forces and have strengthened their own armed forces, in most cases with the aid of missions from our Army and Navy. Some of them have taken an active part in anti-submarine operations, and Brazil is preparing to send forces abroad. On the political side, they have set up machinery for coöperation in dealing with fifth column and other hostile activities. The importance of their coöperation in these matters is inestimable. Of still more significance, perhaps, has been their economic aid.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document