BOLÍVAR, 200 YEARS LATER (original) (raw)

BONAPARTE, BOLIVAR, AND BEYOND: STRUCTURING LATIN AMERICA

The region of Latin America has played a profound role in modern history, including the development of the capitalist world-system and inter-imperial rivalries therein. Yet, what, or where, Latin America is, lacks a rigid definition. Clear conceptual boundaries between what is Latin American and what is not, are both frustratingly elusive and simultaneously intuitive. The subject of this paper is How Latin America came to be composed of this assemblage, and how this assemblage is articulated. The movement from the imperialist European conception of Latinidad (“Latinaity”) to explicitly anti-imperialist and anti-colonial iterations of Latin American integration such as Bolivarianismo is of special interest to this work and whether this shift has “decolonized” Latin America as a category or not.

Simon Bolivar's Republican Imperialism: Another Ideology of American Independence

History of Political Thought

This article treats the political thought of Simón Bolívar, a leading figure in South America's struggle for independence. It describes Bolívar's ideas by reference to both their broadly Atlantic origins and their specifically American concerns, arguing that they comprise a theory of 'republican imperialism', paradoxically proposing an essentially imperial project as a means of winning and consolidating independence from European rule. This basic tension is traced through Bolívar's discussions of revolution, constitutions, and territorial unification, and then used to frame a comparison with the founders of the United States. It suggests, in closing, that contextual similarities amongst the American revolutions make them particularly apt subjects for comparative study of the history of political thought.

Institutionalising a Radical Region? The Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America

This paper explores the diplomatic potential of the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America – People’s Trade Treaty (ALBA-TCP). It does so by refusing to take the region as a fixed, given actor and, instead, suggests that regional organisation is better understood as a process of construction that involves diverse actors and a plurality of interests. Rather than assuming commonality – be it a shared series of beliefs, or, in a more practical sense, a collective policy position – the paper examines the process in which certain beliefs and expectations come to be shared (or resisted). Far from forestalling collective action, however, in acknowledging this instability the paper also reveals how ALBA-TCP has the capacity to affect inter-American relations. It highlights how the potential re-admission of Cuba into diplomatic institutions within the Americas, combined with the regional response to the 2009 Honduran golpe, demonstrates both the limits and possibilities of ALBA-TCP as a diplomatic actor in the Americas.

Bolivar Princely Republican article.pdf

blancos, pardos, Venezuelans, Cundinamarquis, federalists, centralists, republicans, aristocrats, the good, and the bad." 5 Bolívar proffered a modern republican theory intended to address the political problems associated with societies characterized by a pervasive admixture of races. 6 Neither a classical liberal 7 nor a classical republican, Bolívar was a modern thinker who borrowed from a variety of sources in order to provide a realistic solution to the problems at hand. Montesquieu and Rousseau 8 are common points of reference for Bolívar's political prescriptions, and most commentators interpret his republican ideas as related to the French tradition. But in fact a more illuminating comparison is one with Niccolò

THE ANTI-IMPERIALIST STRUGGLES: EXPERIENCE IN LATIN AMERICA, CUBA, AND VIETNAM

Ryan Andrei Bassig, 2022

I'd like to portray Simon Bolivar's demand for change in Latin America through this effort. My goal is to demonstrate how Bolivar spent days of his life fighting for these countries to gain political power. Despite the fact that his cry for change was treacherous, he was able to effect many political reforms in the countries he invaded. Bolivar influenced the countries of South America for the better, and they today benefit socially, politically, and economically as a result of his efforts. He was able to unite the countries of Spain as a result of his efforts. To gain a thorough grasp of my project, I'd like to discuss Simon Bolivar's perspective on human nature. Next, I'd want to talk about how Simon Bolivar's political ideals affect Venezuela and other conquered countries. Finally, I'd want to discuss the impact of Simon Bolivar on Venezuela's political, economic, and social landscape. Bolivar's perspective on human nature. Bolivar had a reputation for opposing certain parts of human nature. "But a Spanish colonist was hardly a free man," says the text, and this assertion might be used to justify Bolivar's battle for Latin American freedom. According to other reports, he had a "romantic revolutionary" phase during his time as a leader. He also had a close relationship with a number of women who had betrayed him, and he didn't have many friends. In his history, it has been noted that Bolivar ignored his father figures in favor of entertaining women, which resulted in the loss of some of his fights. Bolivar's human character was found to have given him a "brittle background." Simon Bolivar's political ideas. Bolivar believed that Spain was responsible for South America's political stability. He founded the "Bolivian Revolution," a political movement. To free the South American countries from Spanish tyranny, Bolivar planned to free the African American slaves. Bolivar was a politician who believed that African Americans were the key to regaining control of the country from the Spanish. Spain. The African American played an important role in the union that conquered Spain. The freedom of African Americans was utilized as a defense in the fight to reclaim the country's lost power. "Simon bolivar was an enthusiastic visionary and a skilled speaker," according to prior sources, which explains how he boosted Venezuela's social status. During this time, Venezuela's social interactions with other countries were a collaborative effort to reclaim their independence from Spain. Bolivar worked for social reform and had several options for establishing a powerful

Rejecting Bolivarianism: Political Power in South America

2020

By the time he was 36, Simon Bolivar had freed six countries from Spanish rule, often fighting armies of thousands with a couple hundred militia rebels. Bolivar was an incredible military strategist with a liberal approach, and went on to govern both Peru, and then-Gran Colombia, which was made up of modern-day Colombia and Venezuela. After his death in 1830, each of the countries he liberated mourned his loss, and in the almost two centuries since then, leaders have constantly used his name in order to revive his spirit and bolster their own political agendas. One such example is the former Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez, who governed as a dictator of a socialist federation from 1999 to 2013. During that time, he transformed Venezuela from a democratic country to a democratic-socialist one. In this transformation, Chavez utilized a new subset of socialism called Bolivarianism, made up of militarism (expanding military to protect state interests) and democratic-socialism (political democracy with a state-owned economy). By diving deeper into this unique form of socialism, we can further explore if Simon Bolivar would have agreed with, or even recognized Bolivarianism. Based on the extreme limitation of freedom and vastly different economic policies under Chavez, I argue that Bolivar would have rejected this form of socialism. Many events in Simon Bolivar's early life shaped the way he governed and how his political ideology developed. He was born in 1783 to a wealthy aristocratic family in Caracas, Venezuela. By the time he was nine, both of his parents had died from tuberculosis, so he was McMillan 2 sent to live with various uncles across Venezuela. 1 Each of his uncles would assign him a tutor to teach the young Bolivar about the world around him, however, while he was living with his uncle Carlos Palacio, he learned from Simon Rodriguez, a philosopher who introduced him to the works of Rousseau and other Enlightenment thinkers. 2 It was at this time Bolivar ran away from home, however, it would not be the last time he met with Rodriguez. 3 When his uncle found him a week later, he was promptly enrolled in an elite Venezuelan school, no longer free to roam around as he pleased. It was this experience that pushed him to enroll as a cadet in the White Volunteers of the Valley of Aragua, an elite militia corps. He joined when he was only 14, and only spent a year in its service, but it was a deeply formative experience and influenced his later military strategy. When he was 17, he was sent to live with another uncle, Esteban Palacios, in Spain. Here, his social skills and political identity truly began to take form. During his time in many after his death in 1830, so what was so special about Hugo Chavez's admiration? Chavez reconstructed an entire country which he claimed was in honor of Bolivar, however, how could this be true when their ideals were so different, even conflicting at times? The simple conclusion is that while Chavez appreciated the work Bolivar did to liberate South America from Spain's control, he did not emulate it in the same sense by creating Bolivarianism. It is ultimately clear that Simon Bolivar would have rejected Bolivariansim. McMillan 10 Bibliography Bolivar, Simon. The Jamaica Letter. Originally published 1815, https://library.brown.edu/create/modernlatinamerica/chapters/chapter-2-the-colonialfoundations/primary-documents-with-accompanying-discussion-questions/document-2-simonbolivar-letter-from-jamaica-september-6-1815/.