Philosophy
10-02-2005, 07:23 PM
Both the Spanish and British colonies were physically and emotionally separated from their mother countries because of the effect of distance and of patriotism/nationalism. Also, the Enlightenment writings of Locke, Voltaire, Montesquieu, and other philosophers nurtured the colonists' desire for independence and self-rule. Hence, in the late 18th and early 19th century, struggles for independence raged through the Continental America.
The American revolution and Latin American wars of independence were different in strategies and social structures but similar in term of cause-and-effect. For example, it was much easier for the Americans to gain independence than the Latin Americans because of the former's unity in contrast to the latter's disunity. The former could advance in the colonial society whilst the latter, especially the Creoles, could not because of their social structures. In term of cause-and-effect, both of them were fighting for independence from the Old World because they could not stand the strict mercantilist systems, applied on them by their mother countries, that were hindering the development of the rapidly growing colonial economy.
The Americans could quickly gained their independence because they were unified. For instance, when the British empire posed the Stamp Act on the colonists, they stood up and unified the thirteen colonies; in 1765, they called for the Stamp Act Congress in order to move towards intercolonial unity. Furthermore, they even founded a secret society called "Sons of Liberty" to stop the enforcement of the Stamp Act laws by any means, including violence. Above all, it was the Continental Congress that would be running the revolution, showing the holistic strength of the American union. The Creoles, on the contrary, lacked a unfied strategy, or rather direcction, in which to follow. For example, there were many juntas that were fighting against Spain across the continental South America without one single leader and a single force (not until San Martin resgined and let Simon Bolivar take the lead in the struggle for independence). Furthermore, the Creoles' failure to quickly achieve independence was due to vast distances and geographical obstacles between regions and cultural isolation of the Latin American provinces.
Social structure was one of the factors that caused dissatisfaction amongst the Creoles. The arrival of more European-born Spaniards meant that the animosity between the Peninsulares and Creoles was worsened; the Creoles were unhappy with the discrimination they had to endure even though the law stated that both of them were equally privileged. The colonial society was almost fixed with the Penisulares at the very top, then Creoles, Mestizos, native Americans, and at the very bottom there were Mulattos, Zambos, free blacks and slaves. Even though the Creoles could become richer than the peninsulares, they would never be able to climb up the social ladder because of this fixed structure. On the other hand, the American colonial society was in nature meritocratic; the colonists, if they worked hard enough, could become wealthy and powerful. A good example to illustrate this meritocracy is the indentured servants; although they started as servants, after a long while they could become land owners. Hard work was the most important requirement for wealth and social prestige in this meritocratic colonial society.
In term of cause-and-effect, both the Americans and Creoles could not stand the mother countries' systems of mercantilism because they were hindering the growing economy. For instance, in the mid-eighteenth century the British Empire posed on her colonists the Navigation Acts which strictly regulated trade. The acts dictated that all goods must be carried on English vessels, all ships from American must stop at English ports first, certain goods must be sent from England to the America for sales and consumption, and certain other goods, such as woolen cloth, were forbidden from manufacture. Similarly, in Latin America, trades were dominated by the peninsulares because of the discrimination discussed earlier. José Abalos, an intendant of Caracas, admonished that "if His Majesty does not grant the Creoles freedom of trade then he should not count on their loyalty". Furthermore, the Bourbon reform policies failed to provide Latin Americans, especially the Creoles and Mestizos, any adequate protection against crippling European competition from England, France, Netherlands, etc.
In conclusion, the American revolution and Spanish wars of independence were strategically and socially different but similar in term of cause-and-effect. The Americans quickly achieved independence from mother England whilst the Creoles had to spend a longer time to get rid of Spain's rule because their different strategic directions. The inability to advance in Latin American colonial society caused discontent amongst the Creoles but on the contrary the American meritocratic colonists could work hard to gain wealth and power. Harsh and unfair mercantilist systems in both British and Spanish Empires were the major cause of the American Revolution and Latin American Wars of Independence.
The American revolution and Latin American wars of independence were different in strategies and social structures but similar in term of cause-and-effect. For example, it was much easier for the Americans to gain independence than the Latin Americans because of the former's unity in contrast to the latter's disunity. The former could advance in the colonial society whilst the latter, especially the Creoles, could not because of their social structures. In term of cause-and-effect, both of them were fighting for independence from the Old World because they could not stand the strict mercantilist systems, applied on them by their mother countries, that were hindering the development of the rapidly growing colonial economy.
The Americans could quickly gained their independence because they were unified. For instance, when the British empire posed the Stamp Act on the colonists, they stood up and unified the thirteen colonies; in 1765, they called for the Stamp Act Congress in order to move towards intercolonial unity. Furthermore, they even founded a secret society called "Sons of Liberty" to stop the enforcement of the Stamp Act laws by any means, including violence. Above all, it was the Continental Congress that would be running the revolution, showing the holistic strength of the American union. The Creoles, on the contrary, lacked a unfied strategy, or rather direcction, in which to follow. For example, there were many juntas that were fighting against Spain across the continental South America without one single leader and a single force (not until San Martin resgined and let Simon Bolivar take the lead in the struggle for independence). Furthermore, the Creoles' failure to quickly achieve independence was due to vast distances and geographical obstacles between regions and cultural isolation of the Latin American provinces.
Social structure was one of the factors that caused dissatisfaction amongst the Creoles. The arrival of more European-born Spaniards meant that the animosity between the Peninsulares and Creoles was worsened; the Creoles were unhappy with the discrimination they had to endure even though the law stated that both of them were equally privileged. The colonial society was almost fixed with the Penisulares at the very top, then Creoles, Mestizos, native Americans, and at the very bottom there were Mulattos, Zambos, free blacks and slaves. Even though the Creoles could become richer than the peninsulares, they would never be able to climb up the social ladder because of this fixed structure. On the other hand, the American colonial society was in nature meritocratic; the colonists, if they worked hard enough, could become wealthy and powerful. A good example to illustrate this meritocracy is the indentured servants; although they started as servants, after a long while they could become land owners. Hard work was the most important requirement for wealth and social prestige in this meritocratic colonial society.
In term of cause-and-effect, both the Americans and Creoles could not stand the mother countries' systems of mercantilism because they were hindering the growing economy. For instance, in the mid-eighteenth century the British Empire posed on her colonists the Navigation Acts which strictly regulated trade. The acts dictated that all goods must be carried on English vessels, all ships from American must stop at English ports first, certain goods must be sent from England to the America for sales and consumption, and certain other goods, such as woolen cloth, were forbidden from manufacture. Similarly, in Latin America, trades were dominated by the peninsulares because of the discrimination discussed earlier. José Abalos, an intendant of Caracas, admonished that "if His Majesty does not grant the Creoles freedom of trade then he should not count on their loyalty". Furthermore, the Bourbon reform policies failed to provide Latin Americans, especially the Creoles and Mestizos, any adequate protection against crippling European competition from England, France, Netherlands, etc.
In conclusion, the American revolution and Spanish wars of independence were strategically and socially different but similar in term of cause-and-effect. The Americans quickly achieved independence from mother England whilst the Creoles had to spend a longer time to get rid of Spain's rule because their different strategic directions. The inability to advance in Latin American colonial society caused discontent amongst the Creoles but on the contrary the American meritocratic colonists could work hard to gain wealth and power. Harsh and unfair mercantilist systems in both British and Spanish Empires were the major cause of the American Revolution and Latin American Wars of Independence.