Economic Inequality In Latin America

Braford E. Burns began writing The Poverty of Progress as a historical essay arguing against the “modernization” of nineteenth century Latin America. Burns argues that modernization was preformed against the will of the majority and benefited a small group of Creole Elite, while causing an exponential drop in the quality of life for folk majority. Burns supports his research through a series of dichotomies.

The neocolonial period from 1790-1890 was a turning point in latin American history; Latin America experienced rapid changes in industrialization, transportation, and technological aspects that benefited the few and privileged yet came to the expense of a diverse and culturally vibrant native population. New neocolonial principles rooted in the philosophy of progress created a latin society that condoned the exploitation of many native populations. Due to a combination of European influence and latin American political corruption, many native populations suffered politically, economically, and culturally.

After the Wars of Independence in Latin America, liberals and conservatives engaged in a continent-wide struggle for control of the nascent states. Brazil, due to its monarchy, evaded the liberal-conservative civil wars entirely, yet most other Latin American nations experienced intense military conflict between the factions for control. Liberals won in most of Latin America and created governments inspired by the liberal-leanings of their independence leaders. By the 1830s, after economic collapse and social turmoil, conservatives took over until the 1860s and 1870s, when liberals returned to power. Yet, due to the nature of the liberal takeover and the policies such governments enacted, 19th-century Latin American liberals established a constitutional foundation for future authoritarian governments, sabotaged industry and economic stability by opening trade, and expanded class and racial inequality. Thus, while liberalism enriched and benefited the elite, it failed and harmed the lower classes: the peasants and the poor.

Neoliberalism has occupied Latin America for over three decades. The neoliberalism eliminates tariffs and government subsidies of national industry and implementing national policies that favor the needs of business and investment. In this essay, I am going to discuss the issues that faced Latin America because of neoliberalism and how it brought harm to Latin America.

Spanish imperial rule defined much of Colombia’s social and economic development in the sixteenth century under the system of mercantilism. The country (then colony) was an exporter of raw materials such as metals. It was not until Colombia was granted independence that the country was able to create a modern economy. This modern economy was based on coffee and other agricultural exports. Colombia prospered during the late nineteenth century due to the exporting of tobacco and coffee. Wealth was mainly based on the country’s agriculture and commerce along with their exportations to global markets. Colombia’s economic development has not been as constant as it has been nowadays. Post-World War II, the country’s economic development has faced

Poverty is defined as the state of having little to no money or the basic need to live. These needs can be shelter, food, health care, education, clothes etc. According to the Borgen Project, there is a serious concern of poverty in Central America. Central America consists of six countries, Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and Panama; all of them are considered developing countries, a country with low standard of living. Most of these countries have a minority of rich people, and a large group of people living in poverty. In the past years, there has been a moderate economic growth in most countries. The World Bank stated that the country with the best development in Central America within 2000 to 2011 was Panama. Although some countries still have severe cases that keeps them from this kind of development. Central America’s economic level is increasing at a low rate.

Income Inequality or “wage gap” is a big topic for freedom fighters and liberals for the simple fact that it isn’t equal for everyone. Because the wage gap is so prominent it's one of the biggest “facts” that discrimination is still apart of everyday American society. The wage gap from these radical interest groups think the economy is get a dollar take a dollar instead of a free flow economy. This misguided idea of the economy is absolutely not true and isn’t at the fault of the Government, but the people.

The Spanish exploration and colonisation made both a positive and negative impact on Latin America. The arrival of the Spanish explorers to the new world made a big change and they are the reason Latin America looks the way it does today. However these people were ruthless and were the tyrants of the new world. One of Spain’s major foreign policy objectives since the advent of democracy has been to increase its influence in Latin America. Spain has had interest in this area due to historical ties and a common linguistic, cultural and religious heritage (Countrystudies.us, 2017).

Paul Krugman, an economics professor at Princeton, writes “Confronting Inequality” chapter 7 in his book. Equality in America is what makes America, what it stands for. Social and economic inequality still is a part of everyday life in America. Education is making parents struggle because they want to give them a good education; but also, health care for those who need it. Middle-class starts to scramble more every day while the high-class gets more prosperous. Inequality in America is creating trouble to the lives of Americans.

Wright continues the telling of this historical event, under the topic of Fidelismo and the radicalization of Latin American politics. The combination of Castro’s actions and Che Guevara’s calls for revolution in the western hemisphere had a direct and profound effect on Latin American politics. This powerful force came to be known as Fidelismo and broken down to its core “it was simply the attitude that revolution should be pursued immediately” (Wright p. 39). On of the most noticeable symptoms of Fidelismo was an intense growth of demands for change. Wright notes that during this time, the intensity of political activities in many other Latin American countries increased, especially after Castro’s victory. This dynamic came about as new

When thinking of the economic structure of the past, one cannot ignore how it truly started. In colonial Latin America, the African slave trade was on the rise and Africans were prized beause they were already inslaved (Module). Andean people were put into harsh working conditions that were just a step above slavery and made little to no money. The economic platform was based on cheap labor by working people in return for a higher profit by their successors, with only the economy and wealth growth in mind.

The beliefs it focus on were the Individualistic and Structuralist views. Individualistic beliefs emphasize the importance of negative personal traits such as laziness and simplemindedness as the main factors that lead to poverty. On the other hand, structuralist beliefs emphasize that the poor are “trapped” in poverty as their condition is the result of factors that they cannot control, such as social background or discrimination. Similar beliefs have been found in the case of Hispanics, although their increasing assimilation with whites has determined an increase in their tendency to explain inequality as the result of lack of motivation, or to take the individualistic approach. Simultaneously a decline has occurred in their ability to associate inequality with discrimination. This is important to take into consideration. Consider if an individualistic approach was the unanimous thought process throughout Latin America. This could cause widespread distrust in a population living in one’s country. That could in time lead to corruption and institutional discrimination. Although no Latin American country has a recent history of institutionalized discrimination against racial minorities, it is a well-known fact that discrimination exists as a deep source of social stratification in these countries. Authors have found that Brazilians are the most likely to favor structural

Throughout all of history wealth has never been distributed evenly; no monarchist kingdom, communist utopia, socialistic society, or modern free market has ever existed in a state of equilibrium. The laws of the land have always seemed to operate in a manner of some sort of prejudice. The rich generate wealth at a much higher rate than the poor. Income inequality has existed, in some form or another, since the first trade transaction. Since, we have begun record keeping, statistics show the rich controlling increasing amounts of the total income. The only two discrepancies being global catastrophes--The Bubonic Plague and World War II-- the only reason being economy-wide setbacks putting everyone on much more even playing fields. Given the

Social class correlates with inequality in the United States and Brazil, but what precisely leads to inequality is the dynamics of power people experience based on what social class they belong in. Sociologist John Gaventa discusses the three dimensions of power and how the maintain acquiescence among inequalities. These power dynamics, which correlate to people's social class, are what lead to inequality in the U.S. and Brazil. The First Dimension of Power correlates to social class in that those who are in lower social classes have fewer resources in achieving the American Dream. These resources include education, social and career connections, and money to save up. Because those in lower social classes do not have enough money to gain these

Coloniality of power is a concept/phrase originally coined by Anibal Quijano. The concept itself refers to interconnecting the practices and legacies of European colonialism in social orders and forms of knowledge. More specifically, it describes the lasting legacy of colonialism within modern society in the form of social and racial discrimination that has been incorporated into today’s social orders. Furthermore, it identifies the racial, political and social hierarchies enforced by European colonialists in Latin America that gave value to certain people while marginalizing others. Quijano’s main argument is based around the notion that the colonial structure of power created a class system, where Spaniards and other light skinned ethnicities