Neoliberalism In Latin America

20192960 In a time when America was ending time of imperialism and beginning the Progressive Era, While World War I was ending and America was thriving through the roaring 20s. Suddenly, the stock market crash put the United States in a great depression that led the people through the end of World War II. It is in this context that the New Deal gave the federal government more control in America. The New Deal had a great impact on the federal government by setting a stronger appearance in business practices and the overall economy along with direct involvement in personal lives.

As america began its venture toward the new millennium and a change would come. Before nixon would reach office two democratic politicians preceded him and after years of our country 's involvement in Vietnam and the constant fear the American people lived through during the cold war they wanted change. This would spark neoconservativism as people would fall out of sync of the democrats policy of foreign affairs and begin to tread to the other parties policies or points of views.but tges n conservatives would still uphold some of their democratic interest while still in the republican party which basically puts the neo in the neo conservative.but how would this become into fortune and effect the america of the time.

FDR’s new deal changed the expectation the american people had of their government. More specifically when things go wrong the people look to government for help and support. Primarily because the meaning of liberalism was flipped and changed under FDR’s time in office. During the 19th century liberalism was interpreted to mean limited government and free-market economics, however Roosevelt used the term to refer to a large active state that saw liberty as, "greater security for the average man”. The idea that liberty is more closely linked to security as compared to freedom from government intervention.

This led to social class divisions which further contributed to strengthening

The leadership of Latin America 's Revolution had four social classes. First was the peninsulares, below them were the mestizo, next was mulattos, and the Indians were at the bottom of the social class. The leadership of Mexico 's Revolution national groups blended openly.

Liberalism changed the first organization of South American countries by breaking the hierarchical social structure system. Since it believed in a federal form of government, human’s right, lay control of education, and an end to legal status. Their party was consist of creole and mestizo middle class people.

In the more developed regions of the world such as the United States, the United Nations and some of the Asian Countries, the form of economy there is Capitalism. Capitalism allows business owners to expand as much as they like since businesses are privately owned and the government have little to no influence on them. To the rich, capitalism is great, it allows them to be as rich as they want, but to the poor, capitalism only makes them poorer, it creates a disparity in social class system, and the varying changes in employment rate as a result of monopolization. Capitalism, due to monopolization makes the poor stay poor. To elaborate: a monopoly is when a person or a group owns the majority of the supply for the public.

Creoles and poorer classes began to get frustrated with the restrictions that the government had created on the economy. Merchants were forced to sell “products at artificially low prices and buy...at artificially high prices”. (Doc C)Latin Americans were also stripped of basic trading and property rights. When this started to occur, the Creoles began to try to convince the people of America that by gaining independence, they could be ruled by a class that was born in their country. This was one of the main reasons why the Creoles began to help lead the fight for independence.

But still it lingers in the depths our society. Flint Michigan, a predominantly Black community, is a prevalent example of Neoliberalism putting property over the lives of others. The ongoing water crisis, and the events that led to it are prime examples of neoliberalism to an extreme degree. Due to the Flint economic crisis, emergency managers were put in place to ensure the safety of the people. Individuals who were not voted for by the people of Flint took control and focused far more on their personal interests of making money than helping the people of Flint.

Many citizens in democratic Latin American countries live under oppression and poverty. Like many other countries in the world, these countries have had revolutions, economic depressions and bad governments. Yet in countries like in Mexico things have not change. Its citizens are aware of the current economic depression, the government’s corruption and violence. Since Mexico mostly all Latin American countries are free or partly free, with the exception of Cuba, people elect their government officials.

The poor classes, or the laborers on the other hand, wanted more rights as citizens and were treated poorly by the government, which made them angry and fought for independence. The more the United States imperialized, the more the Latin Americans wanted freedom from them and disliked when America considered themselves “more superior” and more successful than the Latin American territories. (World) Without the increase in technology, the Panama Canal never would’ve been built properly and the United States wouldn’t have been as successful because they never would’ve finished the canal route in Panama, which would’ve ended up being demolished and been a complete waste of time.

Neoliberalism has ultimately had a negative impact on the ways in which the U.S. has experienced the current pandemic. To begin, neoliberalism has factored into the COVID-19 pandemic due

Among our closest counterparts are Russia with its oligarchs and Iran. While many of the old centers of inequality in Latin America, such as Brazil, have been striving in recent years, rather successfully, to improve the plight of the poor and reduce gaps in income, America has allowed inequality to grow.” (Stiglitz 2011) Inequality doesn’t give anyone an equal

This work operates as a protest, not solely against the abuse and avarice of the North American companies in Latin America, but also against the consumeristic advertising utilized by companies. The writer commences his criticism by mentioning icons of consumerism that took over the planet, such as “Coca Cola Inc., Anaconda, […] and other entities” (Schmitt 179). Such companies are depictions of the American industry, which “[reserves] the juiciest for itself” (Schmitt 179) and benefits from the resources Latin American countries offer. The nations filled with “greatness, liberty and flags” (Schmitt 179) become submissive to external dominance and, once powerhouses suck out their richest supplies, they are relinquished and forgotten, for they deliver no more efficient use. Neruda undertakes to bring attentiveness to these discriminations brought upon local Central and South American populations, who were dominated by dictators and American companies.

3. Dominant Ideologies. It is clear from these texts that this world at that time was embedded in neoliberal frameworks a framework which honours the individual and constant self-improvement. I do not hesitate to call the individual who owned these item a neoliberal subject, whether they were knowingly so remains up for debate. It appears neoliberalism in some cases was an unavoidable, dominant ideology because of the way it took form both socially and politically.