Services
Ideas and Corrections
Something you wish to say about this page?
|
The Break Up of America and Nationality
(Reads: 51, 13-Ago-2010)After independence had been achieved it was necessary to organise the continent, however, before a government could be formed it was necessary to decide if one sole nation - or various nations - should be formed.
Due to the localised nature of the political movement right from its very early days, sovereignty had only been carried out at a regional level by city councils and provincial governments. After the collective dream of independence had been achieved the longing for freedom took on a more localised focus - the union favoured by San Martín, Bolivar, Hidalgo and others was rejected, perhaps because it resembled monarchy and empire.
For political reasons Bolivar saw the necessity to unite the people of America, namely to defend the continent but above all because of their shared interests and cultural affinity. In 1824 he invited Peru, Colombia, Mexico, Guatemala, Rio de la Plata and Chile to form a federation. Representatives of these 1st four countries met in Panama's Congress in June 1825 but failed to come to an agreement.
What actually occurred was the opposite, nations which had united together during the War of Independence separated, for example Gran Colombia broke up in 1830 to form various different nations - Venezuela, Colombia and Ecuador. Regions which had been united for administrative purposes broke up, as in the case of The Captaincy General of Guatemala (which in 1823 had become the United Provinces of Central America) which separated to become five sovereign states: Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua and Costa Rica.
Geographic and historic factors explain the break up of America. The complexity of the territory aided the separation and led to the formation of different groups with local interests. The native tribes did not constitute one formal group but various and due to racial diversity and different economic structures it took time and unity was difficult to achieve.
The result was the formation of nations almost identical to those under the colonial regime. International conflicts and changes in the territories during the 20th Century meant that the borders remained as inexact and vague as in they had been in the past. Once the continent had achieved its independence, feelings of regionalisation and nationalistic principles led the newly independent nations to close their borders and forget their continental commitment.
Bibliography:
CHILE y AMERICA, ayer y hoy
Autores: LORENZO S., Santiago y ZAMORANO G., Manuel
Ed. Sociedad Ediciones Pedagógicas Chilenas Ltda., Stgo. 1971
Due to the localised nature of the political movement right from its very early days, sovereignty had only been carried out at a regional level by city councils and provincial governments. After the collective dream of independence had been achieved the longing for freedom took on a more localised focus - the union favoured by San Martín, Bolivar, Hidalgo and others was rejected, perhaps because it resembled monarchy and empire.
For political reasons Bolivar saw the necessity to unite the people of America, namely to defend the continent but above all because of their shared interests and cultural affinity. In 1824 he invited Peru, Colombia, Mexico, Guatemala, Rio de la Plata and Chile to form a federation. Representatives of these 1st four countries met in Panama's Congress in June 1825 but failed to come to an agreement.
What actually occurred was the opposite, nations which had united together during the War of Independence separated, for example Gran Colombia broke up in 1830 to form various different nations - Venezuela, Colombia and Ecuador. Regions which had been united for administrative purposes broke up, as in the case of The Captaincy General of Guatemala (which in 1823 had become the United Provinces of Central America) which separated to become five sovereign states: Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua and Costa Rica.
Geographic and historic factors explain the break up of America. The complexity of the territory aided the separation and led to the formation of different groups with local interests. The native tribes did not constitute one formal group but various and due to racial diversity and different economic structures it took time and unity was difficult to achieve.
The result was the formation of nations almost identical to those under the colonial regime. International conflicts and changes in the territories during the 20th Century meant that the borders remained as inexact and vague as in they had been in the past. Once the continent had achieved its independence, feelings of regionalisation and nationalistic principles led the newly independent nations to close their borders and forget their continental commitment.
Bibliography:
CHILE y AMERICA, ayer y hoy
Autores: LORENZO S., Santiago y ZAMORANO G., Manuel
Ed. Sociedad Ediciones Pedagógicas Chilenas Ltda., Stgo. 1971
Share this Article
More articles in History of Chile
The Break Up of America and NationalityThe Independence of America
Chilean Independence, "La Patria Vieja"
The Spanish Reconquest or Restoration (1814 - 1817)
The "Patria Nueva"
The Law which named us Chileans
The History of Chile
History of Easter Island
Gabriela Mistral and the Elqui Valley
Pablo Neruda, Chile's Nobel Prize Winner
Rate this Article!
40% Liked this Article (30 votes)
Thematic Guide
Promote your Business |
About the Portal |
Terms and Conditions |
Privacy Policies |
Contact Us
Santiago: Los Militares 4344, of. 22, Las Condes Fono: +56-2-5837070
Temuco: Arturo Prat 955, Of. 207, Fono: +56-45-24 8000
Temuco: Arturo Prat 955, Of. 207, Fono: +56-45-24 8000
©2010 Tourismchile.com® - All rights reserved. A Anacondaweb.com Product
Visits since August 2003:
audited by TheCounter.com