why did none of the latin countries in America succeed like the english ones?
In: Economics
As others have said unlike the US and Canada the South American countries were populated mainly by natives, slaves, and a very small number of natives from the colonising country who were either wealthy land owners or soldiers and poor workers. There were also mixed people born out of natives and colonisers, mainly soldiers or poor workers. As you can imagine this demographic difference came with very different treatment towards the colonies. On one side you had colonies populated mostly by colonists and on the other you have colonies mostly populated by natives who were considered subhuman by the colonists. All colonies were ultimately bled dry for everything they had but this fundamental difference of respect towards the populations played a huge role in how they were governed.
Starting out as a country from a colony whose resources are all shipped away and you don’t get to see the wealth produced from your labor is bad enough. However even after South America had gained independence in the late 19th century that didn’t mean their troubles were over. There was a lot of political unrest in these regions and a lot of outside interference, from their former colonists and the US, especially in order to combat “communism” or whatever.
Every different country have their own separate story and context of how they came to be this way but the short answer is that US backed induced instability is the cause for a lot of their problems, but also corruption and infighting.
Latest Answers