Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Comparison of leadership models
Different models of leadership
Simon bolivar and jose de san martin
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Comparison of leadership models
Simón Bolívar and Antonio López de Santa Anna were both potent, authoritative, and dedicated leaders. Simón Bolívar was the liberator of northern South America. Antonio López de Santa Anna was the President of Mexico. These two men both have similar and different ideas when it comes to political ideas. They both have extensive military accomplishments and they also valued military. Simón Bolívar sought perfection for his country’s government and Santa Anna just wanted to stay in power, they view themselves as strong political leaders and they both gave up the personal lives for the greater good of the people.
Simón Bolívar, “The Jamaica Letter” was written in a time where he was in exile in British Jamaica after declaring an independent Venezuela
…show more content…
He believed that to have a good government, He needed to pick not the best government but the one which is most likely to succeed. This shows that he thought out his ideas and he knew that the best form government was the one that actually works and fits the people of the nation. Santa Anna was a strong and mighty being the president of Mexico for 11 times it was clear the people loved him but the revolution did not. The reason he left Mexico was because of the revolt at the capital which the majority of the Congress favour the revolution and it ruined Santa Anna political career. He dreaded the threat of revolution and he actively tried to stop it. Santa Anna did have an idea to please the public it was called “The principles of Political Organization”. This was a new constitution and each one the states accepted it. Simón Bolívarconceive his role as the person who wanted the best for his nation, he wanted his nation to succeed and move forward in development by adapting enlightenment ideas. Santa Anna was more focused on his role by making the people happy and stopping the revolution, he did not really want the best for them he just wanted to stay in power because he thought that was what they needed.Simón Bolívar and
Thomas Jefferson and John Adams were both strong presidents who kept a stabile nation, but they differed in their methods of doing so. Adams was a federalist so he helped establish a stable government by focusing on forming a strong central government. Jefferson being a democrat-republican worked to establish stability in the US government by promoting state’s rights. They both worked for stability in different but successful ways. John Adams and Thomas Jefferson brought many different viewpoints and strengths after the establishment of the Constitution but they both put the nation’s stability first and wanted to preserve the wellbeing of the people first by Adams ending the Quazi war and Jefferson making the Louisiana Purchase.
Creoles struggle loyalty to their motherland and birth country. In Document A Simon Bolivar stated that creoles are in a complicated situation. They are trying to decide which side they should support. In Document B it showed how unfair creoles were treated even though by blood, peninsulares and creoles are the same. The creoles had a lot less power and worst jobs. The
Santa Anna was a marvelous war hero and even addressed himself as “the Napoleon of the West.” With this confidence and his experience as a leader and war hero, it was a surprise to everyone when he lost the Battle of San Jacinto against the Texicans. There were many factors at play leading to this loss. Had Santa Anna been smarter and more careful with his leadership and his war strategies, his loss could have been avoided; the battle all together could have even been avoided.
The nineteenth century introduced several great leaders into this world, many recognized by historians today. These men, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, and others, have all been honored and commemorated for their contributions. One such leader, José Martí, continues to remain anonymous outside the Hispanic community, and hidden in the shadows cast by these men. His name does not appear in the history books or on the tongues of many proud Americans, for he was neither a citizen of America nor an American hero.
On August 23, 1927, Nicola Sacco and Barolomeo Vanzetti were executed in one of the most controversial legal cases in American history. Two men were shot and robbed in Braintree, MA, and two poor Italian immigrants were arrested for the crime. Although neither Sacco nor Vanzetti had criminal records, they both had pistols on them at the time, and followed a violent anarchist leader. Following their arrest, the seven-year case on the crime would drive national and international protests demanding their exoneration. There were numerous elements in the trial that influenced the guilty verdicts for the men including, but not limited to, weak evidence. The Sacco Vanzetti trial displays the social injustices and prejudice in American society during the time. It is evident that even though they are innocent, the court used Sacco and Vanzetti as scapegoats in this crime because of their beliefs and background.
Around the time of 1821, with Texas still attained by Mexico, land was extremely cheap attracting American settlers. Mexico was full on against their new comers due to slavery. These Americans would bring their slaves to live with them, but the act of slavery was against Mexican law. The new settlers sought out the idea of cessation from Mexico and its president, Santa Ana. Texas would now fight for its independence if necessary. Of Course, Santa Ana was against the idea of Texas breaking free; he prepared an army that would follow him to San Antonio where...
Crassweller, Robert D. Trujillo: The life and times of a Caribbean dictator. New York: Macmillan.1966.
The Russian and Mexican revolution’s differed in the ideas they adopted but they were similar in the way they met their goals and started their uprisings. The Russian revolution was made with the goal to create an egalitarian government that was based off of Karl Marx’s socialism principles. In short, t...
Even though their message was incredibly similar, their writing style was vastly different. for example, Chavez talked in a especially concrete sense. he gave specific examples and statistics to support his opinion wihle mlk spoke on a very idealistic level with no real support in his speech. this difference might be because of there different backgrounds.
Chavez was greatly supported the idea of equality the he “gained national stature as a labor union spokesman” with all the action he would take not only in his community but others as well. He was such an influential person that the people of the US Senate offered him to” have a testimony during an US Senate subcommittee hearing” . While he is there he lets the people know how these migrant farm workers are being treated and what people are able to do to help. His actions that he took changed US History by letting the people know what and how the migrant workers are treated.
Captivation or being restrained due to certain circumstances that prevents free choice is usually one of many great reasons to form revolutionary ideas. To get from captivation to liberation, one must consider change, a major component needed in order to gain freedom after enslavement. Latin America, in the eighteen hundreds, sought the need for change due to the resentment of the Spanish rule. Simon Bolivar, the revolutionary leader of Latin America, will seek independence from Spain. It was in Jamaica where Bolivar wrote a letter known as the “Jamaican Letter”, one of Bolivar’s greatest proposals. The letter emphasizes his thoughts and meanings of the revolution while envisioning a variety of governmental structures, of the New World, that could one day be recognized.
In the early 1900’s, one man bested the rival troops and used his intelligence to defeat the oppressive Mexican regime. Doroteo Arango Arámbula, also known as Pancho Villa, was born into a poor family and worked in the fields. Pancho Villa escalated from a peasant outlaw into a well-known revolutionary war strategist and folk hero. Pancho Villa could easily outsmart troops and use his popularity to help his cause for equality. His actions could not atone for any previous transgressions in his life of crime, but his tactics as a revolutionary war commander made him almost unstoppable when it came to fighting for equality. Pancho Villa was an important factor in the Mexican Revolution and its beginnings. He was one of the first revolutionaries to fight against the Mexican government, and successfully evaded and won fights against the United States government. His greatest achievement was the amount of influence he delivered the poor, and empowered them to fight for their rights.
Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson were two very influential figures in American political history. Even though they both were in two different eras, they shaped the American government and the way people think about it. They both have similarities, but they do have differences as well that includes political rights, religious rights and even economic rights.
Simón Bolívar had become an iconic leader for the independence of countries throughout South America. He made his way throughout
In South America, Native Americans had rebelled against Spanish rule as early as the 1700s. These rebellions had limited results, however it was not until 1800s that discontent among the Creoles sparked a widespread drive for independence. Educated Creoles like Simo¢n Bolivar applauded the French and American Revolutions. He dreamed of winning independence for his country. When Napoleon occupied Spain, Simo¢n returned to his South America and led an uprising that established a republic in his native Venezuela. But his newly found republic quickly toppled by conservative forces. Bolivar then got a daring idea; he would march his forces across the Andes and attack the Spanish at Bogotá. He managed to free Caracas then moved into Ecuador, Bolivia and Peru to do the same.