Unitary Argentina

Is there a realistic chance for the mess of the Argentine Civil Wars to end with a Unitarist victory? And for Argentina to become a unitary state, rather than federal? Or is this too much of a long-shot considering the opportunities of the time?

I'd mainly like to know if you think this is likely or possible at all, not necessarily the specific POD itself.
 
But the Unitarians won. Bartolomé Mitre, leader of the Unitarians, defeated Urquiza at Pavón in 1861 and ended the civil wars (although there were further rebellions later). But the victory was Unitarian.
 
But the Unitarians won. Bartolomé Mitre, leader of the Unitarians, defeated Urquiza at Pavón in 1861 and ended the civil wars (although there were further rebellions later). But the victory was Unitarian.

I meant for Argentina to become a unitary state, not federal.
 
I don't think so. There was one, albeit powerful, province fighting for unitarism and thirteen which would never, ever, accept it.
 
Is unitary Arentinans similar to unitary Mexicans ie they tend to fight for God, Army, and King aka Conservatives or Centralist
 
I don't think so. There was one, albeit powerful, province fighting for unitarism and thirteen which would never, ever, accept it.
OK, but that province is much more populated than any of the others. And the next ones (second and third by a distant margin) are adjacent to it. I can see why the Unitarians thought they could make it work. Unless of course the demographic distribution proportion was much different 200 years ago...
 
Buenos Aires was still much more populated than the others, and it's understandable why the unitarians thought it would work.
However, unitarism means the local caudillos - that is, the province's large landowners - would only get political power if authorized by an unitarian president, and that's something they would never agree to.
So, a unitarian victory would require a long term military occupation and would lack local support.
Mitre's victory at Pavon can be thought as an unitarian victory and, in many ways, so can Rosas long government/dictatorship. And both Rosas and Mitre sent military forces to the other provinces to ensure their rule. But, at the end of the day, they always had to allow the provinces to choose their own governors, even if they retorted to military force to ensure the chosen governor was one of their liking. Hence, the OTL result: Federalism, but with a very strong central government. I think the economy and demographics prevent a completely unitarian victory.
Is unitary Arentinans similar to unitary Mexicans ie they tend to fight for God, Army, and King aka Conservatives or Centralist
Generally, the unitarians tended to be regarded as europhiles, seculars and liberals; while the federals tended to be protectionists and pro-catholicism. However, at the end of the day, it was a matter of money and business, so the old Grouch Marx phrase 'this are my principles, if you don't like them, I have others' apply
 
Is unitary Arentinans similar to unitary Mexicans ie they tend to fight for God, Army, and King aka Conservatives or Centralist

Generally, the unitarians tended to be regarded as europhiles, seculars and liberals; while the federals tended to be protectionists and pro-catholicism. However, at the end of the day, it was a matter of money and business, so the old Grouch Marx phrase 'this are my principles, if you don't like them, I have others' apply

As Juanml82 said, it's not exactly the same. Unitary Argentinians were much more secular than federalists. A federalist caudillo from the northwest raised a flag that read "Religion or death". And so did Rosas.

So, unitary Argentinians weren't conservative in religious terms. They also supported innovation, founded a modern university in 1821 in Buenos Aires and would have supported the introduction of railways andd steamships.

But, at the same time, even if they talked a lot about republic, truth is they had far less support than the federalists among the masses, and would have lost in any fair election. Free blacks and Mulattos in the cities, and gauchos in the fields, always voted the federalists. The unitary didn't know how to reach to the masses, which they sort of despissed as ignorant and backwards.

Also, concerning economic policy, they were pro free trade, as Juan said, while the federalists were usualy protectionists.

So it's not so clear who was conservative and who wasn't in the unitary-federalist civil war.
 
Top