What one change would have make Bolivar's dream of a strong, independent Spanish America realizable?



As I was walking through Toronto's Trinity Bellwoods Park this evening, I passed by a bust of Simon Bolivar, the one by Dundas and Shaw that had been given to Toronto in the early 1980s. As I passed it, as is my wont, I considered how Bolivar's dreams—of a strong Colombia, of a strong independent Spanish America—could have come to be.

A relatively peaceful transition to independence, something much more like Brazil's emergence from the Portuguese and less like the destructive wars of independence of OTL could do it. Maybe Britain during the Napoleonic Wars might think encouraging the separation of the Spanish viceroyalties from Spain, interdicting Spanish naval traffic and making the resulting states dependent on Britain, a workable strategy. Being relatively intact might well make many things, like reform and federalism, more plausible.

Thoughts?
 
One thing that would help, ironically enough, is a dead Bolivar.

The guy was pretty solid as a military commander but an horrifically incompetent administrator. He didn't think the newly independent territories were "ready" for democracy, and installed himself pretty much as dictator in large swaths of Latin America. With him dead, perhaps before the June 1822 Guayaquil Conference - such as him dying heroically at the Battle of Pichincha - the divide between centralizers and federalists wouldn't really be there since Bolivar was really the head of the former.

This also means that Jose de San Martin's philosophies may take better hold in people's minds, since he would stand alone as the Great Liberator. San Martin was a big proponent of strong institutions and rule of law, though not necessarily democracy. He was Argentinian to the bone and I don't think he'd become president of all of South America or anything, but these ideas would have much greater influence.

I can see a united, more stable Gran Colombia in this scenario, perhaps including Peru or even Bolivia (though the inclusion of the latter two is unlikely, it's not impossible). The butterfly effect may lead to San Martin accepting power in this scenario, which will probably lead to a much more prosperous Argentina without most of the caudillismo that defined much of the Argentinian 19th century (though they still have problems like the rural-urban divide and the conquest of the Pampas to worry about). This means we have two relatively stable, relatively strong Latin American countries, either or both of which may prove a rival to the US dominance in the Western hemisphere.
 
Not sure why they would be rivals...

Gran Colombia in particular would be a major challenger for American influence in the Caribbean and Central America. Argentina is a bit more isolated, but given their pro-German trend, assuming we still see a roughly similar WWI in this timeline I can see Argentina joining the Central Powers (provided they're powerful enough for it to be worth it) and an American front of WWI that doesn't involve an OP CSA.
 
Gran Colombia in particular would be a major challenger for American influence in the Caribbean and Central America. Argentina is a bit more isolated, but given their pro-German trend, assuming we still see a roughly similar WWI in this timeline I can see Argentina joining the Central Powers (provided they're powerful enough for it to be worth it) and an American front of WWI that doesn't involve an OP CSA.

Wasn't Argentina tied to the Sterlng Bloc?
 
A strong. independent Spanish America does not go well with making Spanish America dependent on Britain. Britain pretty much did wield large influence in OTL Spanish America after all.

I think a Britain-Canada/Australia sort of evolution would probably be best. If that doesn't count, then it might be interesting to see Ferdinand successfully fleeing to Mexico City. The Portuguese fleeing to Brazil did great things for that colony.
 
The Portuguese fleeing to Brazil did great things for that colony.
Kind of a mixed bag, seems to me? It could be argued that having the monarchy in Brazil just delayed much-needed political evolution and directly resulted in the procession of oligarchies and dictatorships that lasted well into the 20th century.
 
Kind of a mixed bag, seems to me? It could be argued that having the monarchy in Brazil just delayed much-needed political evolution and directly resulted in the procession of oligarchies and dictatorships that lasted well into the 20th century.

Can you expand on that?
 
Make Spain colonize brazil is a start, as language barriers were historically a problem for multi-ethnic states. Now OTL Latin America shows that language unity isn't enough, but I think Austria-Hungary blowing up shows that 200 years of stable rule doesn't eliminate ethnic strife, just push it to another generation
 
Gran Colombia in particular would be a major challenger for American influence in the Caribbean and Central America. Argentina is a bit more isolated, but given their pro-German trend, assuming we still see a roughly similar WWI in this timeline I can see Argentina joining the Central Powers (provided they're powerful enough for it to be worth it) and an American front of WWI that doesn't involve an OP CSA.

Through WWI Argentina was pro-British. What pro-German trend are you talking about?
 
Can you expand on that?
My understanding is that the monarchy basically held together a sort of patchwork society of landed oligarch, smallholder, urban and military interests but appeared to defer by decades the need for any of those interests to have a really serious debate about what a post-monarchical order might look like. There still weren't even the beginnings of consensus on a whole range of very basic constitutional questions when the Lei Aurea passed and the oligarchs and the military revolted and established the First Republic. The chaotic and undemocratic nature of Brazilian politics for some time thereafter stemmed directly from that, I think, and a case could probably be made that if Brazil hadn't had the monarchy, those conflicts could have played themselves out far sooner and quite possibly left the country better-positioned coming out of the 19th century.

I guess there's a timeline in that if someone wanted to tackle it. Sorry the minor threadjack, OP.
 
Last edited:

Lusitania

Donor
Brazil was able to stay together after independence in part due to Portuguese court moving to Rio in 1807 and unifying the various captainacies. Many Brazilians have written that minus this fact Brazil would of followed Spanish colonial example.


I read that Ferdinand also attempted to flee Napoleon like Portuguese court but was stopped and spent rest of war as Napoleon guest. So what if he had escaped to New Spain and was able unify all Spanish colonies what would of happened. Could the colonies now used to being united once Spanish court returns to Spain stay united as single country?
 
Brazil was able to stay together after independence in part due to Portuguese court moving to Rio in 1807 and unifying the various captainacies. Many Brazilians have written that minus this fact Brazil would of followed Spanish colonial example.
So in other words, Brazil minus the monarchy would have split into a grouping of regional interests, basically a cluster of Lusophone nations? That also does seem plausible.
 
Brazil was able to stay together after independence in part due to Portuguese court moving to Rio in 1807 and unifying the various captainacies. Many Brazilians have written that minus this fact Brazil would of followed Spanish colonial example.


I read that Ferdinand also attempted to flee Napoleon like Portuguese court but was stopped and spent rest of war as Napoleon guest. So what if he had escaped to New Spain and was able unify all Spanish colonies what would of happened. Could the colonies now used to being united once Spanish court returns to Spain stay united as single country?
You'd need a completely different Ferdinand VII to do that. Perhaps Carlos manages to slip out when Napoleon snags Ferdinand and Charles. Carlism would take on an interesting dimension in that scenario.
 
I read that Ferdinand also attempted to flee Napoleon like Portuguese court but was stopped and spent rest of war as Napoleon guest. So what if he had escaped to New Spain and was able unify all Spanish colonies what would of happened. Could the colonies now used to being united once Spanish court returns to Spain stay united as single country?

Actually, it was his father who wanted to flee. Ferdinand instead usurped the throne and chose to stay.
 
Brazil was able to stay together after independence in part due to Portuguese court moving to Rio in 1807 and unifying the various captainacies. Many Brazilians have written that minus this fact Brazil would of followed Spanish colonial example.

So in other words, Brazil minus the monarchy would have split into a grouping of regional interests, basically a cluster of Lusophone nations? That also does seem plausible.

I'm not so sure, most people talk about the importance of the monarch to maintain Brazil's unity, but it doesn't necessarily means that it would balkanise that easily.

Brazil had a centralized government since the 16th century, firstly in Salvador and later in Rio, therefore, we have 300 years of centralized government in Brazil. To put in a Spanish America terms, Brazil was a Vice-kingdom of its own. Remember that the rest of Latin America balkanised following the Spanish adminstrative borders (with some notable exceptions). It's also important to point out that all Brazilian centers had similar interests with regards to trade policy, economic activity, culture, etc. (unlike the Thirteen Colonies) and didn't have any major geographic issues (like the Andes).
 

Lusitania

Donor
I'm not so sure, most people talk about the importance of the monarch to maintain Brazil's unity, but it doesn't necessarily means that it would balkanise that easily.

Brazil had a centralized government since the 16th century, firstly in Salvador and later in Rio, therefore, we have 300 years of centralized government in Brazil. To put in a Spanish America terms, Brazil was a Vice-kingdom of its own. Remember that the rest of Latin America balkanised following the Spanish adminstrative borders (with some notable exceptions). It's also important to point out that all Brazilian centers had similar interests with regards to trade policy, economic activity, culture, etc. (unlike the Thirteen Colonies) and didn't have any major geographic issues (like the Andes).
Yes many points you mention are correct we need to understand that each of the Spanish ViceRei such as New Spain or New Granada all split into several countries. While Brazil ViceRei did not. For example support for independence in Maranhao was not supported by majority and many were not in favor of ceding from Lisbon. so the splitting of Portuguese royal house not happen and Brazilian independence been different I see no reason some of the more far flung captainies deciding to go their own way or staying with Portugal.
 
Top