Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Cultural analysis of brazil
Cultural analysis of brazil
Cultural analysis of brazil
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Cultural analysis of brazil
Evolution of Populism and La Moral from Modernization
Populism refers to the political philosophy that pits the downtrodden masses against the apathetic ruling elite. La Moral refers to the conformity to the code of conduct set by employers. Modernization is the transformation from a traditional, rural society that primarily relies on agriculture to an urban, industrialized society. The emergence and flourishing of modern society has been inextricably linked with the development of industries, infrastructure and cities. Sociologists and political analysts agree that “urbanization and industrialization were the main causes of populism in Latin America.” (Conniff and Roberts 6)
Populism flourished in Latin America for a few years of the twentieth century due to the changes in the socio-economic structure that discriminated workers based on class and gender. The social, economic, and political conditions that existed in Brazil and Colombia in the early years of the 20th Century created an environment that incubated and ultimately gave birth to populist politics.
The opening and expansion of the North American and European export market caused market and labor reforms to satisfy demand. The huge demand created incentive for the industrial and infrastructure development. Cities such as Rio de Janeiro and Lima in Peru, and Bogota in Colombia benefited from this economic expansion and soon became big industrial towns. The industrial expansion went hand in hand with population growth as workers were needed to work in these industries.
Many citizens migrated into the cities together with their families to find work in the factories. Some of the migrants found life in the city very liberating. The reality, however, was quite grim for most...
... middle of paper ...
...sions such as devolution of wealth and power. Very few advocated for a radical overhaul of the government structure. Rather, they believed in the principle of free will.
Upon the examination of the brazilian populist movement, the transformation of a society from an agrarian to an industrialized society presented a lot of challenges to the people. The citizens faced a hard time in the transition stages and poverty was rampant. Populist leaders, by empathizing and identifying with the common citizens, gained an almost cultic following among the poor and the middle class. The demise of populist politics in Brazil came through the hands of the military, after the 1964 takeover. Ten years later, the military relaxed its reins and allowed for more public participation. Nevertheless, Populism and La Moral have left their mark in politics, history, economy and social life.
Models for post-revolutionary Latin American government are born of the complex economic and social realities of 17th and 18th century Europe. From the momentum of the Enlightenment came major political rebellions of the elite class against entrenched national monarchies and systems of power. Within this time period of elitist revolt and intensive political restructuring, the fundamental basis for both liberal and conservative ideology was driven deep into Latin American soil. However, as neither ideology sought to fulfill or even recognize the needs or rights of mestizo people under government rule, the initial liberal doctrine pervading Latin American nations perpetuated racism and economic exploitation, and paved the way for all-consuming, cultural wars in the centuries to come.
The populist movement occurred in the late 19th century, formed from the Grangers movement where its goal was ta movement for people, to change the economic system where it would benefit farmers. The grange movement rapidly declined in the 1870s and was replaced by the farmer alliances. The farmer alliances were more political rather then social. The farmer’s alliance later formed the populist. The populist movement is considered to be an agrarian revolt by farmers and those concerned with agriculture, because in the gilded age many people were moving to rural areas where banks and industrial systems were superior over agriculture. The high tariffs, decentralization of currency, and decreasing crop prices were hurting the farmers. Founded by James B Weaver and Tom Watson, they wanted the government to have a stronger control over banking and industries. Populism pursued limited coinage of silver and adjusted income tax so the wealthy would be paying more than the poor. They wanted free coinage of silver because this would eventually help the farmers pay off their debts. Parallel, they wanted the government to have control over railroads, telephone and telegraph systems. They wanted to government to be more in control and involved in the economy and most of all, wanted to stop laissez faire. They aimed for a secret ballot and direct election where the president would only hold office for 1 term. Although they won several seats in congress, the Populist Party never won any presidential elections. The Democrats supported much of the Populists goals. Nevertheless, they voted Democrat William Jennings Bryan for the presidency. His goal of unlimited coinage of silver gained the support of the Populist Party uncovered injustice...
Time and rules have been transforming countries in many ways; especially, in the 1850’s and the 1920’s, when liberals were firmly in control across Latin American region. Liberalism can be defined as a dominant political philosophy in which almost every Latin American country was affected. A sense of progress over tradition, reason over faith, and free market over government control. Although each country was different, all liberals pursued similar policies. They emphasize on legal equality for all citizens, progress, free trade, anti-slavery, and removing power from church. Liberals declared promising changes for Latin American’s future. But Latin America had a stronger hierarchical society with more labor systems, nothing compare to the United States societies. Liberals weren’t good for Latin America. What I mean by “good” is the creation of a turning point or some type of contribution towards success. I define “good” as beneficial or helpful. The Latin American economy was stagnant between 1820 and 1850 because of independence wars, transportation and the recreation of facilities. I describe this era as, “the era when Latin America when off road”.
Philosophers that shaped and influenced the Federalist include Thomas Hobbes, Jean Jacques Rousseau, Montesquieu and John Locke. These philosophers believed in natural rights and built branches of government that would protect these natural rights. They believed that all men are instinctively selfish individuals and strive for self-preservation. From their viewpoint, balancing mans selfish desires and the desire to safeguard the community would be the ideal form of government for man. These philosophers built their ideas around the theory that too much liberty is bad for society. In order to avoid creating a strong central government comparable to Great B...
In all the history of America one thing has been made clear, historians can’t agree on much. It is valid seeing as none of them can travel back in time to actually experience the important events and even distinguish what has value and what doesn’t. Therefore all historians must make a leap and interpret the facts as best they can. The populist movement does not escape this paradox. Two views are widely accepted yet vastly different, the views of Richard Hofstadter and Lawrence Goodwyn. They disagree on whether populists were “isolated and paranoid bigots” or “sophisticated, empathetic egalitarians”; whether their leaders were “opportunists who victimized them” or “visionary economic theorists who liberated them”; whether their beliefs were rooted in the free silver campaign of the 1890s or the cooperative movement of the 1880s; and finally whether their ideal society was in the “agrarian past” or “the promise of a cooperative future”. They could not agree on anything, over all Richard Hofstadter seems to have a better idea of the truth of populism.
The farmers feared that Eastern industrialists and bankers were gaining too much influence, power and control over the government. During the “bust” cycle, and times of difficulties, farmers got together, talked about their problems and formed the Populist Party. The Populists were formed because of challenges and difficulties in which they were forced to deal with every day. These challenges included crop failures, falling prices, and the inability to pay loans. The Populists party called for reform by wanting the government to intervene and lessen the impact of economic depressions, regu...
... a great contrast to the most apparent feature of the Western Society. The Westerners created new political ideologies never seen before, resulting in neither an absolute or dictatorial structure. The Catholic Church still remained an intricate part of the Latin American life and continued to provide a key cultural adhesive throughout the Latin civilization, as the Western Societies role of religion lost popularity. The loss of interest in the church was partly because of the rising popularity nationalism and socialism provided as competition for the church. Lastly, The Latin American economy depended mainly on their agriculture and consisted of each country developing a cash crop or mineral specialty, while industrialization left an immense imprint on the shape of society in Western nations, by creating new specialty professions which required extensive training.
Nevertheless, this social injustice was the reason that leads to the farmers’ Revolt, seeking to remedy their condition. In the late 1870s, an alliance has been founded in forty-three states that afterwards developed into a political party the populists. The party’s goal was to replace the democrats (capitalists) as the nation’s second party and being able to return the stolen privileges and rights of the poor producing class. By 1892 the party issued a document called the platform. It addressed the farmers’ nation and their conditions. Also, it “put forth a long list of proposals to restore democracy and economic opportunity”(Foner, 2013,p.642) and to create the social conditions of freedom.
De Lourdes Rollemberg Mollo, Maria and Alfredo Saad-Filho. "Neoliberal Economic Policies in Brazil (1994 – 2005): Cardoso, Lula and the Need for a Democratic Alternative." New Political Economy March 2006: 99-123.
Populism- The belief in the regular people’s power and that they had the right to control their government rather than a small group of the elite. In Russian it was formed by students who wanted a social revolution based on the communal life of the Russian Peasants.
The United States and Latin America have had a long history of relations in regards to populist movements. Many times these populist movements have been anti- United States. We have intervened many times and in many different ways, however I do not believe there is one course of action for Latin America as a whole as it is made up of many different countries with different needs and different leaders. Two examples of when the United States government responded to populist politics, revolutions, or revolts in the 20th century was in Argentina against Juan Peron and his populist movement as well as in Cuba against Fidel Castro. In order to come up with a response for the rise of the Populist Party today, we need to understand what we have done
In 1892, the Populist Platform created by Grangers, voiced their opinion about the corruption in Congress and the government, causing the people to become demoralized. Some of the corruption is through subsidized newspapers, no public opinion, huge home mortgages, poverty, and capitalists controlling industry for their own wealth. They believe that wealth should come from a person who earns it and the capitalists who
...interrelated through sociological concepts. The capitalists (US) wanted to maintain their power over the proletariat (South America) because of its resources (petroleum, natural gas). In this struggle for power, social institutions (government, media) looked for ways to influence people to serve their interests. Being aware of the inequality among them, the South Americans were prompted to form a social movement towards change through reforms and the exercise of democracy.
Much G. L., 2004, Democratic Politics in Latin America: New Debates and Research Frontiers, Annual Reviews
Modern day society is engrossed in a battle for protection of individual rights and freedoms from infringement by any person, be it the government or fellow citizens. Liberalism offers a solution to this by advocating for the protection of personal freedom. As a concept and ideology in political science, liberalism is a doctrine that defines the motivation and efforts made towards the protection of the aforementioned individual freedom. In the current society, the greatest feature of liberalism is the protection of individual liberty from intrusion or violation by a government. The activities of the government have, therefore, become the core point of focus. In liberalism, advocacy for personal freedom may translate to three ideal situations, based on the role that a government plays in a person’s life. These are no role, a limited role or a relatively large role. The three make up liberalism’s rule of thumb. (Van de Haar 1). Political theorists have