Latin America and The Cold War: The Political Impact

The Cold War took place from 1941, after the end of World War II, until 1991 when the fall of the Berlin Wall. This War was called the Cold war because there was no real combat and it was largely a war over political territory between America and the Soviet Union. This war caused impacts all over the world and saw the beginning of many dictatorial leaderships, including in Latin America.

Latin America had struggled with political powers for many years because of them trying to find their political identity. Eventually, many countries turned to democracy and were doing okay. Other countries, such as Chile and Argentina struggled through internal crises and regimes that committed atrocities that continue to be felt in those countries.

Chile experienced so much grief and death during the period of the cold war at the hands of a regime that used violence for control. They killed thousands and so many went missing in the process, many children. The Chilean government and military tried to cover up these human rights violations for decades, until January 2001 when they finally admitted to unthinkable war crimes and human rights violations. Throughout the cold war, the United States did point the finger at Chile and called out their human rights violations, however the Chilean government adamantly denied any wrongdoing. On September 11, 1973 the military in Chile began a coup. Planes of the air force destroyed government buildings, arrests were made, over 1,500 people died. Dead were floating in the river that ran through Santiago, President Allende committed suicide, instead of being captured and likely executed. A new regime took over and created new laws of repression in an attempt to stop those that were a political threat to them. The years following the new regime saw a high number of disappearances and the hiding of hundreds of bodies of political enemies. It was later revealed that these bodies were either buried or thrown into rivers and the sea. As a result, there were funerals held for many and the grief was felt for many.

World War II in Latin America

The Latin American involvement in World World II was fairly limited and was more geared to hemispherical unity. The reading did not specify any physical involvement with the war, however, it did discuss the propaganda and politics that occurred during the war and how it send a ripple effect in the eras to follow.

Pablo Gonzalez Casanova became a driving voice for the argument of the accuracy of the success of the post-revolutionary era. He felt that Mexico was an underdeveloped nation and did not correct inequalities on both the national and international level. Gonzalez was one of the first intellectuals to question revolutionary rhetoric pushed by the government. The myth that began in the 1940’s during a prolonged period of economic growth that was given the term, “The Mexican Miracle.” The government used this period to justify the way the country was ruled. The economic development shift in the country of Mexico was greatly because of the countries involvement in the second World War.

Mexico was drawn to the allied coalition and began putting out propaganda to support this. It brought about a sense of national identity and the question of democracy. During the Great Depression, Latin Americans believed that their good economy that connected them to the rest of the world should no longer be a thing. With the onset of the second World War, there was a tug-of-war between nationalism and international cooperation. However, even with the global disaster happening, national interest took precedence over foreign policy. There were pressures from Europe and the United States to act. So, with the emerging disaster, both the United States and Mexico saw this as an opportunity to unite and open the door for post-war unity in trade. Mexico put this unity as a way to deflect the pro-revolutionary past with a new pro-democracy future. The new administration used this to also to push an industrialization and modernization agenda. With the propaganda in Mexico the subtle tones of theirs showed a push of nationalism. In the United States, the propaganda showed international unity as well as hopes of leaving open a door for a good trade partner in Mexico.

The populism within the propaganda aimed to unite politicians, elites, poor all alike as one with the idea of nationalism. This was common before, during and after the war in the propaganda as well as national policy. It was not, however, just in Mexico that populism took place. All over Latin America, nationalism and populism happened in waves. In Argentina, Juan Peron did not tolerate opposition from left or right wing people. He sought to unite the country and eliminate poverty in Argentina. His rule, though, had overwhelming tones of dictatorial behavior and he supported organized violence. He was also criticized for his protection of Nazi War Criminals, many of whom fled to Argentina. He was overthrown from October 1973 through his death in 1974.

Race Change in Latin America: 19th Century

Racism is something of past, present, and future. Racism is something that exists all over the world. Latin America in the 1800’s was no exception. Rulers and citizens alike had a sense of hatred to other groups of all backgrounds. The rulers of Argentina and other countries saw a dislike of natives and people living in the rural regions of the countries.

In Argentina in 1845, a future president of the country, Domingo Faustino Sarmiento, released a number essays expressed the future he envisioned for Argentina. This man had a sort of envy for the European luxuries and culture and wanted that to be expressed in his culture. He discussed a southern region of Scottish settlers that he saw as ideal. He talked about how their lawns looked great with flowers and shrubs and how they did honest work until enjoyed the luxuries of life after work with fortunes. He saw the people living in the rural areas as enjoying “idleness” and saw them as “savages.” He felt that their lifestyle was grotesque and less that worthy in Argentina. He wanted to impose the European lifestyle on them, like it was in the city. The Elites in the cities wanted this as well. They were willing to use investments, loans, and the money produced by exports to do so.

In other regions, slavery was still a big issue. Brazil had began to impose a sort of emancipation. Though, the children born to slaves had to wait until they were twenty-one to enjoy the freedom. Before that, the owners had a choice to make them stay until that age, or let them free and be reimbursed for their loss. This caused a number of slave rebellions across the country. This caused a large amount of racism toward Afro-Americas. There was also a large amount of dislike toward the mestizo and natives. They believed that they were part of all problems. As wars began all over South America and an incredible loss in Paraguay, in which over three-fourths of the Paraguayan men were killed. Brazil wanted to create a strong army, but did not have many men to make it happen. They created an army made up of primarily slaves was created. The owners that gave up their slaves to fight in the wars, were reimbursed and others were recruited. They were successful. The people in the army came back and began to rein in being known as “the saviors.” However, they opposed to fulfilling the duty of what the army was originally created for: capturing runaway slaves.

Economic status also had a lot to do with how people felt about race. Economically advantaged people saw the people in small villages and in tribes as lazy savages and believed they were less. Like the future Argentina president, they wanted the country to be centered more toward European culture. They believed the Europeans to be more classy. Many essentially wanted to eradicate the way of life for the indigenous people. They were willing to dish out money for this.

Religion also played a sense in the situation of race. People of a variety of races, particularly of Afro-American, Mestizo, and Natives, were tired of the church and the republic controlling the government having say with anything with race. The people who wanted the European life style saw lavish churches as the pinnacle of luxury.

Changes in Latin America Through Time and Settlement

Throughout Pre-Colombian period and the early twentieth century, a significant amount of settlement occurred all over the Latin American region. This caused a significant change in the people, the environment, technology. These changes while mainly negative when thinking of the people and the environment; there were positive effects in the technological side.

One of the biggest changes that came with colonization of Latin America was something that was a significant problem in any colonization: disease. When a region is isolated for a long period of time, their bodies grow an immunity to diseases in that specific regions. When people carrying new diseases from other regions come to colonize, the immune systems of the indigenous people are compromised significantly. Diseases such as the small pox, killed off thousands of indigenous people because their bodies were grievously impacted as their immune systems did not know what the disease was and the antibodies to destroy the disease were not there. And as a result, they died. Fortunately, the few that did survive, had a new immunity to these diseases and could adapt to those situations.

The second negative effect was on the environment. Not many people think about the impact of colonization on the environment, especially when the people colonizing bring new livestock. As an animal science major, I know the impact that over-grazing and new animals can have on the soil and the livelihood of a village. When these new animals came: swine, cattle, horse, the effect on the environment was serious. Swine like to root with their snout, this can cause serious soil erosion if they aren’t confined to a specific area; in addition to rooting, swine are cannibalistic and will eat absolutely anything. Cattle and Horse are both grazing animals. Because this was so many years ago, they did not have nutritionists or silage or hay laying around to tell the owners what to feed the animals. This meant that the cattle and horse relied solely on grazing. Areas of land can easily be overgrazed if they aren’t confined and on a pasture rotation to prevent over grazing. As a result of the over grazing. The grasses no longer grew in certain areas and the animals turned to the food supply of the villages and that caused problems with hunger and contamination of zoonotic diseases. Zoonotic diseases are diseases that are transmittable from animal to human. Soil erosion causes an inability or difficulty to grow food on those areas, this meant that the indigenous people had even less room to grow their food, causing hunger.

The main positive thing that came out of colonization was the technological advances. Ancient Maya saw the division of Venus and inscribed it. The maya were also famous for the calendars, particularly the infamous one in which the end of the world was predicted in 2012. In addition to conventional technology is agricultural technology. The early farmers on the Guianas coast used raised fields to grow various crops. They also worked on breeding corn to change the genetics for a better yield and better quality.

In conclusion, there were a lot of negatives for the indigenous people because of the colonization of Latin America. The diseases wiped out entire villages and caused a lot of horror among the indigenous people. The lucky ones that survived developed antibodies to fight these diseases and went on to live. The environmental concerns brought on by the people colonizing the Latin American region were serious, but not completely detrimental. The indigenous people suffer from hunger due to the new livestock over grazing and beginning to eat their food crop. Finally, there were technological advances, especially in agriculture that can still be used today in some regions. And they saw the beginning of genetically modifying crops to get better yields.

What is Latin America?

Latin America is used to describe a large number of countries south of the United States border. But, What exactly makes this region Latin American or not? Should that term even be used to generalize such a broad region? In my opinion, there are the typical pros and cons scenario. In some ways, this term, “Latin America,” generalizes a multitude of groups of people and puts them in one slot. Tribes that have been unknown for centuries with their own dialects and cultures are thrown into the same category as the people of Mexico or Chile, when they could not be more different from each other. According to “Space, Power, and Locality: the Contemporary Use of Territorio in Latin American Geography”, the term may be used to politicize a region for space or power. This article also suggests that control could be embedded in the term. Another article, “Critical Geographies in Latin America ,” also suggests the use of the term in some sense of politics but believes it is in part because the region is heavily contested. It says, “This political-physical-cultural regional definition of Latin America has long functioned as an Othering mechanism.” I feel that this quote solidifies the theory that the term is used to divide these nations as others from the rest of the world. Typically, we hear people from Europe described as the country they are from. (i.e. French, Dutch, Irish) When people from Latin America are discussed, they are typically referred to as Latin Americans and not the actual country they are from. (i.e. Chilean, Peruvian, Bolivian).

The Idea of division based on where one is born is a hard concept to conceive because it sounds inherently wrong. However, this is something that takes place all over the world. The people of Latin America are put into a different category from the rest of the world. I think the alternative to saying Latin America or Latin American is to just use the name of the country. Specificity of the country can also give someone a deeper understanding of the diverse collection of cultures that are in the geographic region of Latin America. In defining who a Latin American is, if someone is born in Latin America that term can be used; Or the name of a particular country’s people could be used. There is never a reason to generalize the people of more than 33 countries that have undiscovered tribes and hundreds of languages and dialects that we do not know about. The ability of humans to do so readily and without hesitation is ridiculous. “Space, Power, and Locality: the Contemporary Use of Territorio in Latin American Geography” sees Latin America as a kind of undefined area with no real boundaries as to what defines it. Whereas, “Critical Geographies in Latin America” is looking at it from a view of division of one group from other groups. There is a sort of taxonomy to this. The groups get smaller and smaller as we go from Earth to Latin America to South America to Chile to Santiago to the Mestizo to an individual. A person within a group within a city within a country within a continent within a vast geographic region should not be grouped together with someone that lives a thousand miles away because individuality is important. The recognition of an individual culture and language is important. Every single culture is beautiful and should be celebrated individually, not as one giant group.

Introduce Yourself (Example Post)

This is an example post, originally published as part of Blogging University. Enroll in one of our ten programs, and start your blog right.

You’re going to publish a post today. Don’t worry about how your blog looks. Don’t worry if you haven’t given it a name yet, or you’re feeling overwhelmed. Just click the “New Post” button, and tell us why you’re here.

Why do this?

  • Because it gives new readers context. What are you about? Why should they read your blog?
  • Because it will help you focus you own ideas about your blog and what you’d like to do with it.

The post can be short or long, a personal intro to your life or a bloggy mission statement, a manifesto for the future or a simple outline of your the types of things you hope to publish.

To help you get started, here are a few questions:

  • Why are you blogging publicly, rather than keeping a personal journal?
  • What topics do you think you’ll write about?
  • Who would you love to connect with via your blog?
  • If you blog successfully throughout the next year, what would you hope to have accomplished?

You’re not locked into any of this; one of the wonderful things about blogs is how they constantly evolve as we learn, grow, and interact with one another — but it’s good to know where and why you started, and articulating your goals may just give you a few other post ideas.

Can’t think how to get started? Just write the first thing that pops into your head. Anne Lamott, author of a book on writing we love, says that you need to give yourself permission to write a “crappy first draft”. Anne makes a great point — just start writing, and worry about editing it later.

When you’re ready to publish, give your post three to five tags that describe your blog’s focus — writing, photography, fiction, parenting, food, cars, movies, sports, whatever. These tags will help others who care about your topics find you in the Reader. Make sure one of the tags is “zerotohero,” so other new bloggers can find you, too.

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started