Latin America

Under One Name 

Latin America is a complex term. It both unifies the many stories of struggle that make up the continent, while posing the threat of glossing over the country's individual narratives. Smaller countries, and subset regions within, have vastly different accounts of history that yield tremendous insight to modern state of affairs. When Latin America shows up in texts, not the individual country’s name, those individual narratives are often consigned to oblivion in regards to the larger arcs of world history. Simultaneously however, the term Latin America connects the struggles of inequality to create a powerful and unified voice on the global stage. I argue that despite each country's intricacies, it is more sensible to consider Latin America a coherent whole as the term amalgamates the region's shared interest into a critical mass necessary for its development. Flying under the banner of a united continent, Latin America is a developing region that needs unification. I argue a system like the United States’ Republic system is necessary for these developing countries to be able to proclaim the US as its opponent, and stand a chance economically competing.  This idea is similar to the colonies' unification in early American history, which garnered our freedom from the British. Pioneering the vision of the United States, was a strong nationalistic tone, and a development of American labor. I argue these are critical catalysts and enunciate the examples in Latin American history.  

The US is not perfect. However, I am not entirely sure we can ever say what a perfect government looks like, let alone would function like in reality. Seemingly, the only law confining social and economic order is change. Government systems need to adapt to change and the vote imbued by the United States’ Republic-Democracy allows acclimatization to its citizens' needs. We can also say with a certainty derived from history, that autocratic and oligarchic systems are far worse. Contextually, a republic, in concert with a democracy, is ultimately what has improved the life of the citizens of the United States. If the United States was truly an abhorrent country to live in, why does it have the highest immigration rate and a low emigrant rate? (International Organization for Migration, World Migration Report 2024).  In a similar manner to the United States and BRIC economies (Brazil, Russia, India, and China), Latin American countries can develop- they can create economies centered around manufactured goods rather than primary goods, creating a more skilled labor pool which brings about upward social mobility and in turn a better quality of life (Collins, 2009).

We must first define the overarching fight that is Spanish colonialism, which deeply affected nearly every country in Latin America. When considered individually, each country establishes a stronger sense of nationalism which directly opposes colonial dominion, in turn benefitting the country’s interests and knowledge. The result of this, in a manner akin to the California Effect, is the ability of other countries to draw inspiration from, and in turn, revolutionize for their demands- each individual revolution contributes to a larger revolution (PEN America, The California Effect).

Take for example, the imposed practice of latifúndios or haciendas. Haciendas stripped away indigenous rights to property all across Latin American countries. The new owners, called hacendados, were now almost exclusively of Spanish descent. Captured indigenous labourers who worked for hacendados were bound by debt peonage and their ability to pass down generational wealth was extinguished. This hacienda system brutally enslaved farmers all across Latin America including countries such as Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay, and  Mexico (Library of Congress, Mexico During the Porfiriato). Brazil's Revolutionary Fransisco Juliao, was among the Peasant Leagues, an organization with the objective of fighting for better distribution of land for peasants. Juliao’s Letter of Manumission to the Brazilian Peasant was an important document championing subsequent agrarian reforms and improved rural peasant living conditions, not only in Brazil but across Latin American countries. Through its provocative and dramatic counter reforms, Brazil set an example to follow.

Contributing to my argument of a developing nationalistic tone, Juliao creates a rhetoric inciting the power of the individual and the greater power of the collective stating,  “...you [peasants, victims of the haciendas] will only change if fear is killed. And there is only one way to kill fear, in unity” (Green, Langland, and Schwarcz, 2019). Supplanting Juliao’s logic, with each Spanish colony putting a foot down against Spain, Latin America as a whole, each country as an independent, made their way to liberty. 

Latin America’s fight for liberty is not contained to the era of Spanish Colonialism, it must currently view countries like the United States as an opponent. Looking at the historical and present economy of Latin America reveals widespread US infiltration and imperialization, which is arguably deterring the region's ability to develop its own sustainable economy. One only needs to look so far as the US’s attempt to take over Cuban markets during the Spanish-American War of 1898. The US interjected Platt Amendment of 1903 which gave the US the right to meddle in Cuba’s internal affairs, control its foreign policy, and the right to maintain a military base at Guantánamo Bay, which was weaponized by US President George W. Bush 2002 (U.S. National Archives, 1903; Söder, 2009).

The Platt Amendment was also a major blow to hopes of social advancement for Afro-Cubans, who hoped that their participation in the Spanish-American War would mean equality within Cuba. Afro-Cubans had spent generations fighting for their country's independence and would launch the Partido Independiente de Colo in 1908 in protest, uprising in a rebellion against the racial inequality of the Platt Amendment among other discontempt (Dawson, 2010). Fidel Castro, who would emerge as a vehement critic of US presence in Cuba, serves as the revolutionary pushing back on US imperialism through a call to prioritize  national interests. 

 Similar policy-backed imperialization occured in Nicaragua just years prior with the Bryan–Chamorro Treaty, signed between Nicaragua and the US on August 5, 1914 (United States, 1911). With similar language to that of the Platt Amendment, the B-C treaty authorized US military intervention in Nicaragua. Instead of a military base like Cuba, the US bargained to build a Canal to “help” the Nicaraguan people. However, this was all for self-interest and greed- the building of the canals allowing the US to meddle in domestic affairs, while Nicaraguans were indebted and enslaved. 

Like in the previous examples, discontempt would arise to a critical mass, and action would be taken. In his political manifesto, Augusto Sandino, a Nicaraguan revolutionary, warned against support of the US, who he argued would invade or slowly impose their culture in Nicaragua. While establishing a similar strong nationalistic syntax, Sandino claimed, “...his sword will defend the national honor and will be the redemption of the oppressed” to stand against those, specifically the US, with greedy ambitions ("Sandino's Manifesto," 1927).

Further proving the longevity of US imperialism in Latin America, and interlinking the fight within generations and across nations, is the declaration of war on the Mexican government by the Zapatista Army of National Liberation. The implementation of NAFTA on January 1, 1994, brought the immediate elimination of tariffs on more than one-half of Mexico's exports to the U.S. and more than one-third of U.S. exports to Mexico (Chatzky, McBride, and Sergie, 2019). Exacerbating the loss was the cancellation of Article 27 of Mexico's constitution which protected indigenous lands from sale or privatization. The Zapatistas labelled NAFTA a "death sentence" to indigenous communities all over Mexico, comparing it to the hacienda system from Spanish rule mentioned previously (Cleaver, 1998). In its declaration of war, The Zapatistas called for solutions to problems such as “hunger, misery…lack of land…”  among a call for democracy, financial and humanitarian rights for indigenous peoples, and basic-needs rights for women and children (Ejército Zapatista de Liberación Nacional, 1994). These exact demands are commiserated by many other Latin American countries today (Reco, 2023). In the end, US attempts to dominate Latin America considering only its economic interest, can best be seen collectively; each instance of intrusion, creating a louder and more powerful fight for justice. 

If several Latin American countries have a strong self-interested voice and their respective revolutionaries, why haven't they achieved economic and humanitarian development? I argue that at the turn of World War II, certain events took place inextricably tying Latin American economies to the United States Economic agenda.

While the humanitarian crises caused by World War II across the globe cannot be understated, it is also important to acknowledge instances of economic malpractice by the Allied countries during and after the war. Having a pervading economic influence in Argentina, all Argentine companies suspected of having ties with the Axis powers were blacklisted and boycotted, and the supply of newsprint was limited to pro-Allied newspapers. American exports of electronic appliances, chemical substances, and oil production infrastructure were halted to force Argentina out of neutrality and into war, taking the side of the allied powers. War undoubtedly has unforeseen exorbitant economic costs, and forcing a developing country into war surely had both economic and humanitarian consequences. 

The forcing to join the allied forces by the US is not solely contained to Argentina nor was it the worst consequence. Stories emerge all across Latin America narrating petulant behavior of US soliders, racism towards Latin American soliders, and rampant sex work (Waggaman and Herman, 2022). Post-war, the lesser known Latin American internment program was the result of U.S. interference. The Latin American internment program oversaw the detainment of thousands of German, Italian, Japanese civilians living across Latin America, both legal and illegal residents, into detention centers where they were unjustly held without hearings or legal recourse ("The World War II Latin American Internment Program").

Perhaps most devastating to Latin American countries' ability to develop. As previously mentioned, I define developing as creating economies that produce manufactured goods rather than primary goods, creating a more skilled labor pool which ushers in upward social mobility. Denying that model of development, was the deepening of trade dependency. US policies and reforms that emerged from World War II created opportunities for growth but also entrenched patterns of dependency and inequality. These relationships often prioritized U.S. strategic and economic interests, leaving many Latin American nations struggling to diversify their economies and reduce reliance on the U.S. for trade and labor opportunities (Rock, 1994; Prados de la Escosura, 2007). Similar patterns of trade and labor integration are evident across the region, still shaping a modern challenge.  

When considering the term Latin America, there's inherently the issue of washing over individual narratives of struggle. Stories of hardship vary from city to city and country to country. However, the term Latin America interlinks each country's struggle against historical Spanish-induced land discrepancies and modern United States pervasion, to create a powerful voice of opposition. Protesting against interventionism, Latin American countries alike rose in their own battles to establish a strong, national voice catering to its peoples. In tandem, Latin America must continue to pursue its own economic interests and growth to fend off US economic exploitative agendas. I’ve argued Latin America means uniting to fight a shared battle not only for self-preservation, but also for humanitarian and economic development. Interlinking the struggle for independence between countries makes this message several voices stronger, and sets the stage for geolocalized mutual growth, just as the early American colonies identified with a united vision.  

Works Cited

Chatzky, Andrew, James McBride, and Mohammed Aly Sergie. "NAFTA and the USMCA: Weighing the Impact of North American Trade." Council on Foreign Relations, 19 July 2019, https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/nafta-and-usmca-weighing-impact-north-american-trade.

Cleaver, Harry. "The Zapatistas and the Electronic Fabric of Struggle." Zapatista! Reinventing Revolution in Mexico, edited by John Holloway and Eloína Peláez, Pluto Press, 1998, https://la.utexas.edu/users/hcleaver/zaps.html.

Dawson, Alexander. Latin America Since Independence: A History with Primary Sources. Routledge, 2010.

Ejército Zapatista de Liberación Nacional. "EZLN Demands at the Dialogue Table." The Anarchist Library, 1 Mar. 1994, https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/ejercito-zapatista-de-liberacion-nacional-ezln-demands-at-the-dialogue-table.

Harrison, Robert. "Cooperating with the Colossus: A Transcript of Berkeley Talks." University of California, Berkeley, 9 Oct. 2022, https://news.berkeley.edu/2022/10/09/berkeley-talks-transcript-cooperating-with-the-colossus/.

"Latin American Politics 2023: Democracy, Authoritarianism, and Hope for Change – An Interview with David Reco." Sciences Po, 2023, https://www.sciencespo.fr/ceri/en/content/latin-american-politics-2023-democracy-authoritarianism-and-hope-change-interview-david-reco.

Library of Congress. Mexico During the Porfiriato. Library of Congress, https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/mexican-revolution-and-the-united-states/mexico-during-the-porfiriato.html. Accessed 18 Jan. 2025.

"Sandino's Manifesto: The Nicaraguan Revolution." Latin American Studies, 27 July 1927, https://www.latinamericanstudies.org/sandino/sandino7-1-27.htm.

Rock, David, editor. Latin America in the 1940s: War and Postwar Transitions. University of California Press, 1994, http://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/ft567nb3f6/.

Söder, Kirsten. The Supreme Court, The Bush Administration, and Guantánamo Bay. SIPRI, Jan. 2009, https://www.sipri.org.

"The World War II Latin American Internment Program." GAIC, https://gaic.info/history/the-world-war-ii-latin-american-internment-program/.

U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. The Platt Amendment. National Archives, 22 May 1903, https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/platt-amendment#:~:text=Approved%20on%20May%2022%2C%201903,the%20enforcement%20of%20Cuban%20independence.

Waggaman, Janet, and Rebecca Herman. "U.S. Military Bases in World War II Latin America." Berkeley Talks Transcript, University of California, Berkeley, 9 Oct. 2022, https://news.berkeley.edu/2022/10/09/berkeley-talks-transcript-u-s-military-bases-in-world-war-ii-latin-america.

Prados de la Escosura, Leandro. Inequality and Poverty in Latin America: A Long-Run Exploration. Cambridge University Press, 2007.