More handpicked essays just for you.
Flashcards with questions and answers about latin america independence
Flashcards with questions and answers about latin america independence
Independence in latin america
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Latin American Independence Latin American Independence was the drive for independence from Spain and France by the Latin American people. There were many contributing factors that ultimately led to the uprising of Latin American colonies. Europe's strong hold on the economic and political life of Latin America, was creating friction between the Latin Colonies and the European nations. Eventually, this would become enough for the Latin American people and the drive for independence from France and Spain would begin. There were a few main points that led up to the Latin American independence movement. In, 1797 the Britain blockade of Spain took place for two years, which cut off resources and revenues for the country. In doing so, Britain had almost proved to Mexico that they could survive on their own in the New World without Spain. About 10 years later in 1808, Spain was in serious trouble with France and Napoleon Bonaparte had taken over Spain and appointed his brother King of Spain. Spain was in there own sort of disarray at this time so after proving to themselves they could survive in 1797, it was a good time for the movement for independence to begin. Early in the nineteenth century rebellion against European authority broke out in Latin America. First, slaves on the island of Haiti revolted against their French masters. Led by former slave Toussaint L'Overture the Haitians defeated France making Haiti the...
…their goal was probably not only independence from Spain but also the creation of a new society in which they would fully participate. Blacks rebelled against racism and inequality, landless peasants regardless of race stood up for land, popular cabecillas wanted political power, and orientales in general hoped to gain control of their region’s destiny. The potential for the war to become a social revolution was strong indeed. [57]
Americans wanted to project their power to the entire hemisphere and the only way to exercise it is by acquiring a republic. Citizens of three countries did not fully acquire the independence they thought they were entitled to. Cuba got nominal independence because of the Platt Amendment, Puerto Rico became a territory but was not called as citizens of America, and instead they were called Puerto Ricans, while the Philippines were denied statehood.
Many of the issues of the color line are a direct derivative of colonialism in the colonies. On one hand through the idea of the problem of the color line DuBois calls our attention to the uncultured imbalances of authority, capital, opportunity and access between whites and African Americans. It also nurtures Du Bois’ right to argue that the oppressed, of necessity, will rise up in confrontation. Certainly, he anticipated wars of emancipation like the riots in Wilmington more aggressive than the imperialist wars of conquest (which in a way is a direct imitation of the time of colonialism).
After slavery ended, many hoped for a changed America. However, this was not so easy, as slavery left an undeniable mark on the country. One problem ended, but new problems arose as blacks and whites put up “color lines” which led to interior identity struggles. These struggles perpetuated inequality further and led W. E. B. Du Bois to believe that the only way to lift “the Veil” would be through continuing to fight not only for freedom, but for liberty - for all. Others offered different proposals on societal race roles, but all recognized that “double consciousness” of both the individual and the nation was a problem that desperately needed to be solved.
Until the early 1800’s, Spain created an empire that lasted around three hundred years and was considered “the most powerful country in Europe” (Mini Q). During the late 18th century, the Spanish colonies had an uncompromising social structure to which people were placed in different classes based on their heritage. The Creoles, people born in the colonies but of pure Spanish blood, lead the fight in the struggle for independence because of the economic and social conditions as well as the attempt to gain political power.
The conquest of Latin America was a fairly quick process in which the theme of hegemony was vastly prominent. The cultures of colonialism and competitive nature to obtain wealth through exploitation were the main driving force of hegemony. It is natural to exploit the people of lower class or societal rank for one's own advantage, and that is what happened. As the pressure of power and control became overbearing toward the people, resistance was sure to follow.
For this essay, I chose to look at Immanuel Kant’s and John Stuart Mill’s views on the human treatment of non-human animals, specifically in the case of animal testing. I will look at Kant’s and Mill’s views separately, then the issue of the testing of animals, and finally, the philosophers’ views on the issue. I believe that both philosophers would come to the same conclusion, that animal testing is unethical in most cases.
The Meaning of Discipleship In this piece of coursework I will be writing about the meaning of
From 1806 to 1826 most of the Latin countries under Spanish rule fought for their independence. The reason that caused these countries to have courage to fight for independence was because in 1808 Napoleon was able to invade and conquer Spain. Examples of those countries are Venezuela and Chile. There are similarities in the ways in which these two countries fought for their independence but there are also some differences in how they fought. Some of the leaders who were involved in the Venezuela’s fight for independence were Simon Bolivar, Francisco de Miranda and Antonio José de Sucre. The Venezuelan fight for independence against the Spanish empire began in 1811 and finally ended in 1823. The Venezuelan war was done in different phases, which began with Francisco de Miranda.
During the 1800s there were many revolutions that caused fighting and disagreement in Europe and Latin America. Many brave countries stood up to the mother country to fight the vicious battle for independence. One of the many countries fighting for independence was Haiti. Haiti was trying to get independence from France. In 1804 Saint Domingue declared their independence and named the new nation. Another country fighting for the battle of independence was Mexico. Mexico fought hard with Spain to gain their independence. There was a dispute between the mexicans because some did not want to fight against Spain and just stay a part of their nation and government. Miguel Hidalgo made the first public call for Mexican Independence in 1821. In document 5 there is a painting and all the people of Mexico are taking part in the movement for independence no matter what color they are. The people are taking pride in their country and beliefs by holding up signs and following Father Miguel Hidalgo.
Enlightenment ideas in Latin America took place during the 1700's to the early 1800's. These ideas were appealed to the people because they taught that man was free and that all were equal. These ideas were important especially in countries were slavery existed and countries under the control of foreign powers. The Spark that ignited wide spread revolt was napoleon's invasion of Spain. He ousted the Spanish king and placed his brother Joseph on the Spanish throne. Latin American leaders saw Spain's opportunity to reject foreign domination and demand independence from colonial rule. Two places that were influenced by the enlightenment were Haiti and South America. Toussaint L'Ouverture was also influenced by the enlightenment.
Mills outlines his principles in the book he authored Utilitarianism. I think that Mills would disagree with Singer on his theory that all species should be considered equal and partially agree with Steinbock. Mills believes that the correct action is the one that brings about the most overall human happiness. By this logic using animals for food and experimenting would be ethical. Humans have a basic need for sustenance and protein that comes from animal meat is essential for a healthy diet. Mills would believe that using animals as a source of food increases overall human happiness therefore making it moral to kill animals for food. I do not believe that Mills would have a problem with animal experimentation if the sole reason was for research that improves the well being of humans, again creating the most overall happiness for humans.
In other words, Kant’s deontological ethics acknowledges that actions and their outcomes are independent things (Shakil). The primary focus of deontologists is that the moral intentions or the moral duties are more important than the consequences. As humans have an ability to make rational decisions, deontologists argue that people have to perform duties that are morally correct and must not be influenced to perform them based on what we gain from its consequences. Kant, further theorizes, that the moral worth of an action is determined by the human will and that people have to perform moral duties that encourage good will. Although there are several well-known deontologists, Kant is generally considered as the father of deontology as he further developed this ideology with his concept of categorical
Scholars have debated not only the nature of Iberian colonialism, but also the impact that independence had on the people of Latin America. Historian Jaime E. Rodriguez said that, “The emancipation of [Latin America] did not merely consist of separation from the mother country, as in the case of the United States. It also destroyed a vast and responsive social, political, and economic system that functioned well despite many imperfections.” I believe that when independence emerged in Latin America, it was a positive force. However, as time progressed, it indeed does cause conflict.
Moral duty and moral law can be expressed as categorical imperative. We must look at categorical imperatives in order to determine what we ought to do regardless of what we want to happen. It concerns not the matter of the action, or its intended result, but its form and the principle that results. What is essentially good consists in the mental disposition of consequences that result without it being interfered. Kant’s great moral principle, categorical imperative, has to be a priori.