The countries of Latin America achieved their political independence in the early nineteenth century. The countries received the opportunity to follow their own route in setting the priorities for the independent progress.
The accents were made on the development of the agricultural sector which was significant for intensifying export trade and on the rapid industrialisation in the states. The turn of the centuries made the governments of the countries be directed toward following the democratic principles in providing new policies and reforms.
All these aspects can be discussed as contributing to the economic and political progress of the Latin American countries, but these states did not achieve the high status at the global arena during the next hundred years after achieving their independence because of the range of influential factors.
Chile, Mexico, Brazil, and Peru developed the possibilities to strengthen their world position only at the end of the twentieth century and beginning of the twenty-first century (Solimano 2006, p. 21).
The impossibility of the Latin American countries to achieve the first world status during the first hundred years after the war for independence can be based on such significant factors as the orientation to the development of the agricultural sector instead of forcing the industries, the political instability in countries, dictatorial forms of leadership, and the territorial conflicts with the neighbouring states.
The history of Chile in the nineteenth century can be discussed as the vivid example of these negative factors’ impact on the political and economic development of the country.
The Successes and Negative Consequences of Achieving the Independence in the Nineteenth Century
The independence movement in Chile against the Spaniards began to develop in 1808 when the high class of the creoles started to struggle for self-governing. The population of Chile was divided into two opposite groups of those persons who supported the Spaniards and those ones who were inclined to fight for independence.
The civil war was developing during the period of 1810-1826, and it was the time of continuous military conflicts and oppositions between the forces which resulted in reducing the physical and financial resources of the fighters for independence and royalists.
The first positive effects of this struggle were in diminishing the labour exploitation of the indigenous people. Nevertheless, the full political independence from Spain which could allow the development of Chile’s foreign relations was achieved only in 1826.
Thus, the Chilean people had to oppose the Spanish troops during the first fifteen years after proclaiming the independence in 1810. The situation was complicated with the peculiarities of the dictatorial regime of Bernardo O’Higgins who was the director general of the country during the period of 1817-1823.
His authoritarian behaviour and principles of leadership provoked the open resistance of the people in provinces, and the fact of the Spanish troops’ presence in the country made the effective development of the state during the years of the war for independence almost impossible.
In spite of the fact Chile achieved the independence from Spain, the war was too exhausting for people, especially with references to O’Higgins’s regime (Eakin 2007, p. 155).
The Period of Stability and the Impact of the World Powerful States
The achievement of the political and economic independence did not mean the achievement of the political stability (Bergoeing & Repetto 2006, p. 169). The opposition of the political powers in the country led to developing the civil conflicts in 1829-1831.
The question of the political organisation of the state was regulated only with declaring the Constitution of Chile in 1833. During the period of 1833-1860, the opposition of liberal and conservative powers in the country was minimal, and this time can be discussed as successful for Chile’s economic progress.
The country becomes the world leader in producing copper and actively develops its trade relations with the foreign countries basing on the agricultural sector and mining industries (Bulmer-Thomas 2003, p. 25). The improvement of the economy of Chile provoked the development of the territorial conflicts with Peru and Bolivia in 1836 and with Argentina in 1843.
Thus, the inner political stability of the period was closely connected with military conflicts for distributing the lands and economic impact in the region. The struggle for lands was closely associated with the countries’ economy because of the natural resources which were found at these territories.
Overcoming the civil conflicts within the country, the Chilean administration developed the military conflicts with the foreign states which resulted in Chile’s extension of territories and gaining the resources. Moreover, the accents were made on the development of industries and building railways.
All these factors could contribute to Chile’s intensive economic development and further progress, but the period of the political stability which can be discussed as one of the most influential aspects of the country’s progress was broken with the growth of the church power in 1861 and increasing the tension between the liberal and conservative political forces (Franko 2007, p. 48).
During the period, the impact of Britain and Germany’s capitals and investments in the region increased. If the middle of the century was characterised by stability in Chile’s economic and political development, the end of the nineteenth century was rather challengeable for the country.
The conflicts with the neighbouring states developed into the Pacific War of 1879-1883. In spite of the fact the war outcomes brought a lot of economic benefits for Chile, the political instability in the country resulted in the next civil war of 1891.
This war was provoked by the governments of Germany and Britain against the administration of Jose Manuel Balmaceda because he developed the anti-imperialism movement, and these countries could lose their impact in the region.
Thus, being one of the strongest naval countries in the region and having the rapidly progressive economy based on producing copper, silver, and nitrates, Chile was rather instable country according to the correlation of the political powers.
The long period of civil conflicts after achieving the independence was changed with the period of the thirty years of inner political stability, and then the end of the century was also characterised by the violent civil war (Wiarda & Kline 2006, p. 88).
The necessity of the political and economic reconstruction at the beginning of the twentieth century complicated the development of Chile as the successful and powerful state in the region.
The Issues of the Early Twentieth Century
Chile was one of the most developed countries in Latin America during the early twentieth century because of the progress of the agricultural sector, mining, copper and nitrate industries, but it did not become the leader at the world arena due to a lot of factors.
Copper and such minerals as iron ore and silver were extremely important for the growth of the country’s economy. However, the main problem was connected with the agricultural issues.
The development of industries was not intensive enough to meet the needs of the changing economic principles. One of the most important problems was the lack of lands for citizens and the dependence of the economy on the development of latifundia.
To find jobs, the majority of the rural population migrated to cities, contributing to the intensive urbanisation (Collier & Sater 2004, p. 34). The period of the 1920s is the first step in forcing the position of the military leaders within the country as a result of the conflicts with Peru and Bolivia and the development of several military coups.
The further impact of the military leaders on the politics of Chile can be discussed as destructive for realising the democratic principles within the country (Hofman 2000, p. 18).
Thus, in a hundred years after achieving the political independence, the country was not ready to become the world leader because of the peculiarities of the political development, economic progress, and features of the foreign relations.
To overcome the situation, the accents were made on implementing the new Constitution in 1925 and developing the principles of the Presidential Republic. The first results of coping with the crisis in political life of the countries stimulated the further economic rise during the period from 1927 till 1929.
It was the chance to liberalise the economic life with providing the necessary reforms, encouraging the local manufacturers, solving the unemployment issues, and attracting the foreign investments. Nevertheless, the liberal tendencies in the economy of the country were contrasting to the dictatorial principles realised in politics (Rector 2005, p. 64).
This contrast could be intensified with the further development of Chile, preventing it from following the democratic principles, but the situation was changed extremely with the impact of the world crisis’s beginning in 1929.
The possible economic progress of Chile in the future became the controversial question during the years of the crisis because of the fact the country’s export and import were lessened in 10 times, and Chile was among the Latin American countries which suffered from the crisis’s outcomes more significantly.
The economic losses in Chile provoked the increase of the opposing political movements’ impact. Thus, the period can be characterised as the time when military leaders, democratic leaders and socialists tried to win the highest position in the country and maintain their power (Rector 2005, p. 82).
All the attempts to stimulate the growth of the strong national economy were negatively influenced by the effects of the unstable political situation. That is why, it was almost impossible to speak about winning the leading world positions by Chile as well as the other Latin American country during the first part of the twentieth century.
Why Chile Failed to Achieve the First World Status
Notably, the nineteenth century was the period of unprecedented development of many countries (including such super power as the USA). Developing industries and technology, many countries managed to achieve the first world status. However, Chile was not in the row with these countries.
A number of factors prevented the country from entering the club of the winners. In the first place, the country was characterized by political instability during the nineteenth and the first part of the twentieth centuries. Admittedly political instability cannot be a favourable premise for economic growth of the country.
Investors who were ready to invest in the Chilean economy had to withdraw their funds due to changing political agendas. Liberalisation process in the country was very painful and was incomplete in the first part of the twentieth century.
Apart from instability, economic growth was impossible due to inadequate economic policies. The major focus was made on agriculture. However, the sector relied on out-dated practices based on slavery. Of course, such kind of practice could not be effective in the end of the nineteenth century.
More so, there was no technology to back up the development of the agricultural sector. In the times when all countries focused on industrialization, Chile lagged behind. Underdevelopment of industries also negatively affected development of agricultural sector which eventually became less profitable than it used to be.
Besides, the country’s economy was always influenced by foreign capital and therefore, some interest groups focused on their own profits rather than on the development of the country’s economy. It is possible to note that absence of strong leadership in Chile where all sectors of economy and all spheres of social life needed effective reforms resulted in economic, social and political degradation.
The beginning of the twentieth century can be discussed as rather progressive in relation to the sphere of economy in the Latin American countries.
However, the results of one hundred years’ development of Chile after gaining the independence emphasise the negative effects of the civil wars, dictatorial regimes, accents on the agricultural sector in economy, and conflicts with foreign countries.
All these factors cannot be discussed as advantageous for the political, economic, and social progress of the countries and as contributing to the increase of their international status.
Reference List
Bergoeing, R & Repetto, A 2006, “Micro efficiency and aggregate growth in Chile”, Latin American Journal of Economics, vol. 43 no. 127, pp. 169-192.
Bulmer-Thomas, V 2003, The economic history of Latin America since independence, Cambridge University Press, USA.
Collier, S & Sater, WF 2004, A history of Chile, 1808-2002, Cambridge University Press, USA.
Eakin, MC 2007, The history of Latin America: collision of cultures, Palgrave Macmillan, USA.
Franko, P 2007, The puzzle of Latin American economic development, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, USA.
Hofman, A 2000, The economic development of Latin America in the twentieth Century, Edward Elgar Publishing, UK.
Loayza, N & Soto, R 2002, Economic growth: sources, trends, and cycles, Central Bank of Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Rector, JL 2005, The history of Chile, Palgrave Macmillan, USA.
Solimano, A 2006, Vanishing growth in Latin America: the late twentieth century experience, Edward Elgar Publishing, UK.
Wiarda, HJ & Kline, HF 2006, A concise introduction to Latin American politics and development, Westview Press, USA.