Neo-Liberalism in Latin America (Term Paper Sample)

Author:
Course Title:
Institution:
Date:
Neo-liberalism in Latin America
Introduction
If at all the actions of Pinochet present a picture of how Latin America came to be viewed as a U.S dominated laboratory or the imposition of neo-liberal policies from the very beginning of the neo-liberal period, the impact of neo-liberalism in Latin America came to take a whole new direction three decades later. The immense wave of democratization that spread across Latin America through 1980’s and 1990’s makes the region the precise arena for analyzing how the political impacts of the predominantly liberal political thread that is closely intertwined with neo-liberal ideologies interacts with the present socio-economic and political dimensions across the region. The wave also illustrates the interaction between this liberal political thread interacts with the economic policy paradigms that have since been legitimated by the evolution of the current neo-liberal economic theories. It is plausible that Latin America, more than any other region in the world, has benefited to a great extent from the neo-liberalism’s rhetorical insistence on democracy and freedom. A majority of Latin America’s democratic and freedom movements in the 1990’s and 1980’s drew on the world’s neo-liberal tropes both to attract allies in the North and to achieve local legitimacy. The success of the movements in unseating the authoritarian governments altered the tenor of Latin American politics. This paper attempts to discern the conditions that transformed the Latin American region into the weakest link along the neo-liberal chain. The emphasis will be on understanding the revolutionary struggle in Cuba as a way of understanding how the whole Latin America region came to precipitate a fundamental shift to the leftist culture that was previously unheard of in this small but strategic Latin American country.
The whole framework of the ideological and political struggle in Latin America has therefore been re-modeled under the neo-liberal hegemony. The radical reversal of power balance that had been imposed by the dictatorships of the previous administrations was further exacerbated by the new global order. The abandonment of popular movements by the former socio-democratic or political allies, along with the harsh social repercussions of the free-market economies, has catapulted the social movements into the forefront of the emerging resistance to neo-liberalism (Hart 83). One may wonder about the precise meaning of this radical reversal that has occurred faster than any other that the continent has witnessed before. It is a radical reversal that has presented the greatest number of progressive regimes, whether right, left or center-left, that the region has observed in its entire history. It is in no doubt that the region portrays the highest levels of inequality across the global level characterized by an income gap that has been aggravated by the neo-liberal decade. Yet, the difficult blows that wrecked the previous popular movements, coupled with the solidity of the neo-liberal culture made such a rapid alteration very much unexpected. It is notable that one can trace the upswings, downswings cycles, setbacks and triumphs in the politics of Latin America from the victory of the Cuban revolution in the year 1959. The rise and fall of regimes that have all along played to these murky politics have come in quick succession when compared with the time-spans of the European left. The end result has been the emergence of series of recalibrations within the balances of power, which itself has remained nothing more than a reflection of the prolonged hegemonic crisis that overtook the region at a time when the import-substitution model ran out of steam.
There is a feeling among some left groups that the Cuban revolution was carried out by a few hundred guerilla fighters, with the working class offering no meaningful contribution. Similar sentiments have been expressed by members of the popular International Socialist Organization, with one scholar claiming that whoever believes that the Cuba is in any way socialist, then they harbor a belief that socialism can be brought about by just a few hundred guerilla men, emerging from the hills at exactly the right moment and taking over power. Such a person must be having a firm belief that socialism can be achieved without the much-needed contribution by the working class. In reality, it is important to note that the working group played a critical role in the revolution. The peasants, workers, farmers and students played very active roles in the periods before, during, and after the uprising which crumbled the dictatorship under Batista in 1959. As the paper will demonstrate below, the overthrow of Batista’s administration was not merely a matter of guerilla fighters matching menacingly into the cities and towns. Indeed, Fidel Castro organized a general strike that metamorphosed into a mass popular uprising during the initial days of the year 1959. The subsequent transformation was the direct result of the sustained mass struggles under the umbrella organization of workers, students and peasants (Hart 93).
Popular struggle in Cuba started as way as back as 1840’s when slave revolts were organized in several plantations and worksites across the country against the brutality that was meted upon the slaves who had been chipped in from Africa. The struggles were eventually crushed but some plantation owners started considering the possibility of substituting forced labor with wage labor. This led to wide spread discontent within the Spanish rule, and even among the upper classes of people in the Cuban society. Eventually, a war broke out in 1868 with an aim of fighting for total internal independence. However, this movement for independence was not united under the policy of ending slave labor. Some conservatives within the society did not want the war to be spread across the whole country. Nevertheless, the Spanish government gave in and abolished slave labor in 1888. In 1895, a new war to push for independence broke out under the leadership of Jose Marti who was later exiled from Cuba by the Spanish authorities. He started organizing movements for independence among Cubans living in the Diaspora, especially the United States. While marshalling support for the independence struggle, Marti foresaw the effects of the emerging U.S imperialism, which was bent on dominating the Latin American region. He decided to seek unification of the entire Latin America region in order to be able to counter the anticipated wave of dominance which was about to be introduced by the U.S. His plans succeeded and the veterans waged the first Cuban war of independence. Neither the rebel movement nor the Spanish administration won a decisive victory but Marti and several comrades were killed in the struggle. In 1898, the United States intervened in the Cuban situation, with a supposed intent of supporting the Cuban independence fighters. However, after the defeat of the Spanish regime, the U.S did the unexpected by ordering the immediate disarmament of the independence fighters. Consequently, a military regime was established in 1899 under the authority of a U.S general. The U.S ruled Cuba until 1902 when the country was granted official independence. As part of the independence pacts, the U.S reserved the permission to intervene in Cuba in any way that it may feel necessary whether politically, economically or militarily (Hart 72).
The U.S continued to play a supposedly oversight role over Cuba, overseeing the numerous interchanges of power and influencing the assumption of power by its preferred rulers. When Geraldo Machado was elected president in 1024, his regime became extremely corrupt and people hoped that the U.S would intervene and force a regime change. A group of people comprising mainly of students initiated deadly attacks against government facilities with an aim of attracting the attention of the United States. Eventually, their efforts bore fruits and the U.S got provoked and decided to quell the violent revolts. Meanwhile, The Communist Party which had been formed earlier on was now gaining strength after suffering heavily from the repression of the regime. In 1930, more than 200,000 workers took part in a nationwide strike to oust the administration of Machado. The strikes continued until Machado fled the country in 1932. The U.S once again saw an opportunity of installing a pro-U.S leader, Carlos Manuel, to take over the government. After a few weeks of Manuel’s reign, a coup was organized by a group of sergeants from the Cuban army in collaboration with students from the University of Havana. Fulgencio Batista became the de facto leader of the sergeants. After the successful coup, he formed a provisional government to be headed by a university professor named Ramon Martin. Batista preferred to remain a colonel but he made himself the head of the army. The government under Martin introduced several reforms such as introducing a minimum wage for the workers in bid to curb exploitation and empower the workers movements. However, the armed forces under Batista remain a largely repressive force, even attacking the headquarters of the National Labor Confederation. The United States withheld its recognition for Martin’s administration and instead encouraged Batista to organize a coup and seize power. He eventually did as expected in 1934 and became the effective leader of the country while still heading the army, although there were still several people who held the title of the president simultaneously. Even though the actions by Battista marked a significant turn to the right, the results did not mean that the gains of the revolution had been totally reversed. In fact, Batista still claimed to be a revolutionary himself. Whi...