From the time of its colonization at the hands of Spanish Conquistadors in the early 1500’s, Guatemala has suffered under the oppression of dictator after dictator. These dictators, who ruled only with the support of the military and only in their own interests, created a form of serfdom; by 1944, two percent of the people owned 70 percent of the usable land.
The Allies’ victory in WWII marked democracy’s triumph over dictatorship, and the consequences shook Latin America. Questioning why they should support the struggle for democracy in Europe and yet suffer the constraints of dictatorship at home, many Latin Americans rallied to democratize their own political structures. A group of prominent middle–class Brazilians opposed to the continuation of the Vargas dictatorship mused publicly, “If we fight against fascism at the side of the United Nations so that liberty and democracy may be restored to all people, certainly we are not asking too much in demanding for ourselves such rights and guarantees.” The times favored the democratic concepts professed by the middle class. A wave of freedom of speech, press, and assembly engulfed much of Latin America and bathed the middle class with satisfaction. New political parties emerged to represent broader segments of the population. Democracy, always a fragile plant anywhere, seemed ready to blossom throughout Latin America. Nowhere was this change more amply illustrated than in Guatemala, where Jorge Ubico ruled as dictator from 1931 until 1944. Ubico, a former minister of war, carried out unprecedented centralization of the state and repression of his opponents. Although he technically ended debt peonage, the 1934 vagrancy law required the carrying of identification cards and improved ...
... middle of paper ...
... to overthrow the democratically elected (1950) Guatemalan leader, Jacobo Arbenz Guzman. Apprehensive of Arbenz’s land reform efforts and the freedom afforded to the communist party under the current regime, President Truman authorized the shipment of weapons and money to anti-Arbenz groups. Within five weeks the operation to topple Arbenz quickly fizzled when representatives loyal to the president uncovered the plot and took steps to solidify their power.
Works Cited
Immerman, R. H. Guatemala as Cold War History. Political Science Quarterly, 629. Retrieved May 4, 2014, from https://learn.uconn.edu/bbcswebdav/pid-762624-dt-content-rid-2584240_1/courses/1143-UCONN-LAMS-1190W-SECZ81-24116/guatemala%20cold%20war%281%29.pdf
Burns, E. B., & Charlip, J. A. (2007). Latin America: an interpretive history (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Throughout the ages, there have been many dictators, all cruel and unforgiving, including Paraguay’s dictator, Jose Gaspar Rodriguez de Francia, who singlehandedly was able to isolate the country from the rest of the world. This all started with the ending of the Paraguay’s revolutionary war, where Dr. Francia manipulated the newly formed government behind the scenes. The question is, during his dictatorship, did he do more good than harm? Even if originally Dr. Francia had good intentions, did he ended up to becoming a dictator who isolated Paraguay from the rest of the world? This research paper, will explain both sides of the argument to create a strong case to prove. Dr. Francia negatively affected Paraguay and did he do more harm than
In his essay “Guatemalan Politics: The Popular Struggle for Democracy,” Garry H.
Gleijeses Piero. Shattered Hope The Guatemalan Revolution and The United States, 1944-1954. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1991.
Guatemala’s culture is a unique product of Native American ways and a strong Spanish colonial heritage. About half of Guatemala’s population is mestizo (known in Guatemala as ladino), people of mixed European and indigenous ancestry. Ladino culture is dominant in urban areas, and is heavily influenced by European and North American trends. Unlike many Latin American countries, Guatemala still has a large indigenous population, the Maya, which has retained a distinct identity. Deeply rooted in the rural highlands of Guatemala, many indigenous people speak a Mayan language, follow traditional religious and village customs, and continue a rich tradition in textiles and other crafts. The two cultures have made Guatemala a complex society that is deeply divided between rich and poor. This division has produced much of the tension and violence that have marked Guatemala’s history (Guatemalan Culture and History).
In the 1630’s Mayans living in the northern part of Guatemala organized in a secretive village-by-village basis and mounted an attack against the Spanish colonial rule. They drove the Colonizers out of the area and it took almost fifty years for the Spanish to reclaim it [i] . Over 350 years later the Mexican government woke up on January 1st 1994 to news of an indigenous guerilla uprising in the southern part of Mexico. Mayans had been secretly organizing, much in the same way as the 1630 revolt, and had formed the Zapatista National Liberation Army (EZLN). This new Zapatista movement took its name from Emilio Zapata, a famous champion of indigenous rights. On January first, the day of NAFTA’s implementation, the EZLN rose up and captured the city of San Cristbal de las Casas and several villages in the surrounding area. In the span of eleven days they were able to take hold of more land than many other guerrilla movements, such as the FMLN in El Salvador, had done in years.
Galeano, Eduardo. Open Veins of Latin America: Five Centuries of the Pillage of a Continent. Translated by Cedric Belfrage. New York: Monthly Review Press, 1997.
Though Peurifoy never clearly states that Arbenz defined himself as a communist, which he did not, Peurifoy does go one to say that “If Arbenz is not a communist, he will certainly do until one comes along.” Peurifoy substantiates this claim with the fact that Arbenz had acknowledged there were a few communists in the government, which is not unheard of for the 1950s. Peurifoy strives to validate this evidence by equating the situation in Guatemala to other unnamed observed situations through saying “many countries had thought they were dealing with honest men in the past but awakened too late to the fact that the Communists were in control.” Peurifoy can best link his meager evidence to his claim with a circumstantial connection to an vague, overarching idea of communist manipulation. Only uncovering feeble evidence, Peurifoy does nothing to warrant this evidence, yet his inconsistencies synthesize together into an argument capable of persuading a president.
Burns, Bradford E. Latin America: A Concise Interpretive History. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education, 2002.
In Stephen Schlesinger's book Bitter Fruit, the 1954 coup in Guatemala is discussed, with a particular focus on the U.S actants involved, the larger hemispheric implications of the coup, and the use of foreign policy and propaganda to circumvent Latin American nationalism in favor of American corporatism. I argue that The United States fear of communism, conflation of nationalism with communism, and loss of economic supremacy in the Western Hemisphere were the impetus to invade Guatemala under false pretenses. Through the use of propaganda, masterful (and unethical) political manuevering, economic pressure, foreign dictators, and indirect (sometimes more direct) CIA intervention, the U.S was able to oust a democratically elected leader. I,
For Guatemala, Zemurray’s propaganda led to the collapse of the land reforms which would have empowered the peasants by turning them into producers. As Huxley (76) implies, individual stability precedes social stability. Multinational businesses like Zemurray’s United Fruit Company owe their hosting societies the obligation to act in a sustainable and socially responsible manner that would empower the locals. The use of propaganda by Zemurray was not ethically justified as it destabilized the broader society and led to a strained relationship between the majority Latin American nations and their American neighbors which persists the present.
Unfortunately, in Guatemala people are not encouraged to protect the breadwinner of the family and many people are forced to halt their lives short to amend the tragedies of the unexpected. My father’s life was cut short when someone tried to steal his car from him on a normal day. I was only ten years old and to add to the misery and desolation of losing a father, he was not insured, so my mother was forced to fend for my younger sister and me. After the incident, my mother had a hard time recovering from the loss of my father since he was the sole source of income for the family. Thankfully, my mother found a way to provide us with the essentials. At that point, she no longer could think of the future, but rather how to make ends
Throughout the past 60 to 70 years there has been speculation as to the involvement of the United States in the overthrowing of Jacobo Arbenz’ regime. The United States, through the CIA, although not officially confirmed, did participate in overthrowing Arbenz and his government. It was because of Arbenz’ land reforms, including that of United Fruit Co., that the CIA decided to invade Guatemala. They intervened to prevent Guatemala from falling to Communism by invading her to overthrow Arbenz’ government, which they believed was already following Communistic ideals. The main reason the intervention has been criticized is because it makes it confusing for people to know whether the CIA’s intervention actually helped Guatemala. The CIA’s intervention
Guatemala’s wavering economy is just the first of its few major negative factors, leading it to be labeled as unlivable. Despite having one of the better economies in Latin America, Guatemala’s economy has danced on the edge of failure for an extended period of time. For quite a long time, the citizens have had unequal rights, leading to poor distribution of wealth. “The wealthiest 10% of Guatemalans account for more than 40% of all income; the poorest 10% earns about
Firstly, it is important to reflect on the events that led to the coup of Guatemala, and how their struggle to find the perfect, reliable government contributed to their history. After experiencing much distress with former leader, Forge Ubico, the country was able to experience the benefits of having a democratic government with the election of their first democratic president, Juan José Arévalo (Gonzalez, 2011, p. 136). During Arévalo’s time in office, the Guatemalan government made efforts to mend the gap between the rich and poor, as well as tend to the uneven distribution of poverty by devising a
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.