Larger nations of South America

[Jaded_Railman]

I'm actually in the very beginning, brain-storming stages of trying to figure out how to do something similar. A surviving (and prosperous, expanding) Gran Colombia type state being the main goal. I'm just starting to look into Spanish history in an attempt to find a way for Spanish colonial policy to liberalize. The best I can think of at the moment is some sort of disastrous war/civil war in the homeland which leaves the colonial governments mostly on their own ruling things. A few revolutions later, the vice-royalties have been kicked out. When things settle down in Europe after a decade or two, Spain mounts an expedition to reclaim her colonies, which is only half-way successful; ie. the Spanish army is capable of defeating any actual force the former colonies can muster but it can't occupy the whole former empire. A compromise peace is reached in which New Spain and Peru are upgraded to full, sovereign kingdoms in Personal Union with Spain itself, along with significant autonomy in local matters. A significant tribute in gold is still required, but much reduced from the previous absolutist exploitation of local metal sources. Just as much gold flows to Spain, but much of it is now in exchange for finished goods from Europe rather than direct tribute.

When the American Revolution rolls around and Spain moves in to support the revolutionaries, many in the American kingdoms see this as blatant hypocrisy and, upon successful detachment of the 13 colonies from Britain, revolutionary fervor and desire for independence rises. Either soon after the Treaty of Paris (or equivalent) or by the time of outbreak of general European War (not necessarily the Napoleonic War) the tide of revolution crests. Spanish royal governors are thrown out and imperial bureaucracy is destroyed. The new states of Peru and Gran Colombia emerge.

I don't really know where to go from there, and this is very preliminary because I haven't done that much research yet. I've mostly been concentrating on looking at 18th century Spain, trying (so far in vain) to find a way to increase liberalization.

 

[Admiral Brown]

I don't really know where to go from there, and this is very preliminary because I haven't done that much research yet. I've mostly been concentrating on looking at 18th century Spain, trying (so far in vain) to find a way to increase liberalization.

I wish you good luck. The problem is that the Bourbons were centralizers. They tried to incorporate new ideas (such as controling the power of religious orders, like the Jesuits; reducing censorship affecting scientific works; encouraging the instalment of foreign inventors and artisans, even if they weren't Catholic; eliminating some of the obstacles to commerce in the Americas), but they did this with ONE thing in mind: to increase the power of the Monarchy.

In order to do so, they weakened the power some survivng Middle-Aged institutions still in place, like the Cabildos (autonomus muncipalities), which, even if they weren't "democratic", they were the only places in which locals (high-ranked locals, of course) could play some roll of the administration of daily affairs (at least in the Americas).

In fact, by early XVIII century, the Criollo elite in Spanish America had managed to controll directly or indirectly important segments of the administrations of the colonnies. But the Bourbonic reforms changed all that. The Borbouns replaced Criollo functionaries with Peninsular ones, in order to make sure the King orders were obeid. They hadn't bad intentions: they wanted to have efficient and honest administrators, and one way to do this was to have functionaries who weren't locals, so they wouldn't have conflicting intrests when they had to decide on local matters (functionaries had executive, legislative and judicial powers). But this reforms caused a lot of resentment among the Criollos, and are one of the causes that would lead to the revolutions in Spanish America.

So, the problem is that the Bourbons were inspired by the French model. They wanted efficiency and modernisation, but following the model of the "dépotism illustré", at the very best: a strong centralised government that would reduce the inmense power nobles and clerics still had, and thus make progress viable. But, you know, that's not a model that get's along very well with democracy or self-gornment.

in any case, the Borbouns weren't very sucsesfull, and didn't achieve the level of absolutism that was in place in France under Louis XIV.

 

[Admiral Brown]

Kind of wondering about the development of Latin America. Could South America have ended up like North America (which has merely three large states), or rather like the SA of the Draka books? A large Colombia, or maybe a large Peruvian state matching the Spanish colonial department, plus a greater Brazilian Empire that swallowed up its Spanish neighbors, and finally Argentina and Chile to the south. Could that have happened?

One could reduce the number of nations, but even if the Spanish unities hadn't fallen appart after the independence, you would still have SIX nations:

1) Brazil- Portuguese colonies

2) United provinces of River Plate (Argentina+Uruguay+Paraguay+Bolivia)- Former Vicerroyalty of River Plate

3) Chile- former Capitanía General de Chile

4) Nueva Granada (Colombia and Ecuador)- Former Vicerroyalty of Nueva Granada

5) Peru - Former Vicerroyalty of Perú

6) Venezuela- former Capitanía General de Venezuela

And I'm not counting the Guayanas.

So, if you want to reduce the number of nations to three, you'd need not only to keep the Spanish entities toghether after the indepence (very difficult, considering the difference, between, let's say, Buenos Aires, Asunción andPotosí), but you'll need to have this entities merge into even larger entities.

I'm not saying it's impossible, but it's a bit difficult. Maybe if Brazil, the US, an uber-Mexico or great Britain are seen as an inmediat expansionist threat, the Bolivarian union might have survived, and a Southern union between Paraguay, "Argentina" and Chile might have been formed. (the second union is ASB unless the process that would lead to it is carefully explained)

 

[Chris S]

Their identities come from two things.
1. Amerindian heritage (especially in the highlands)
2. Revolution. Gran Colombia and Bolivia share a common bond sorta like the 13 original American states do because of their revolution against Spain led by Bolivar while Argentina, Paraguay, and Chile share that same bond with Martin at the center. Peru shares a little of both as Bolivar and Martin did their thing there together and it was the most Spanish of the South American colonies due to Lima being the capital.

Uruguays national identity comes from being the redheaded stepchild of Argentina, Paraguay, Bolivia, and Brazil.

as for the Guyana's it all sort of stems from their former (and in French Guiana's case, current) colonial masters. French Guiana is basically a tropical extension of France itself, Guyana is a latin version of England, and Suriname is a wierd combo of Dutch and Hindi heritage.

Now as for which identity is strongest, I'm not sure. I guess in the north it would be the shared Bolivarist Revolutionary heritage identity while in the south it would be the same but with Martin playing the role of George Washington.

did that make any sense?

You've obviously never been to Guyana itself. Guyana is a combo of English, African and Indian ("Hindi") heritage with a bit of Dutch heritage thrown in. Latin heritage doesn't figure since Spain considered the Guianas useless and never really attempted to set up anything strong there.

 

[Wolf]

I'd say along the lines of the Draka SA. Brazil takes over Uruguay. Ecuador, Peru, Venezuela, Bolivia, and Columbia for Grand Columbia (or it doesn't collapse.)

Paraguay is split between Imperial Brazil and Argentina. Guyana, Guinea, Suriname are taken over by Brazil at some point. (Perhaps during WWI?)

I don't see Chile's border changing unless they take over more of Bolivia and Peru than they did IOTL

 

[Faeelin]

Does the geography really support uniting Argentina and Chile? ISTM they're on opposite sides of the Andes...