Great South American Leaders

Chilean President™ · August 31, 2001, 02:31

Which ones will be the most remembred leaders of South America. Saint or Evil...

From Chile I have to put on the list:
1. O'Higgins our great first Supreme Governor.
2. The Carrera Brothers, who fought with General OHiggins in the Independece War.
3. President Alessandri who start the reforms that brings Chile out from the under development.
4. President Salvador Allende. A conflictive man. The first comunist free elected on the western hemisphere. He nationalize the Copper Chilean Industry, but also destroy the economy with his "people´s reforms".
5. Supreme Chief of the Nation General Augusto Pinochet. Save us from a comunist totalitarian state and save the chilean economy. However under his regime 3.000 chileans dies or dissapear.
6. Chilean President... great leader

Alfonsus72 · August 31, 2001, 05:52

I guess a very representative caracter of South America history (in the bad side) was Francisco Solano López, president of Paraguay, that let his country enter in a war that killed 75% of its population.
He represents the dreams of greatness cruelly beaten back by reality, a constant in South America countries from their independence (and even before) and posibly and heritage of spanish character.

Dr. Nick · August 31, 2001, 05:55

For Argentina- can't speak for anywhere else accurately.

Presidentes Historicos (Bartolomé Mitre/Domingo Faustino Sarmiento/Nicolas Avellaneda)- First federal presidents of the whole nation, unified after a bloody 30 years civil war. Their economic, educational and military reforms paved the way for a unified Argentina and the creation of a strong central government.

Julio Argentino Roca- He ruled after Avellaneda and he laid the foundations for the growth and progress of the Argentine economy and is credited with leading Argentina to its 1914 status as 6th economic world power. He also added the Patagonia to our to our territories.

Roque Saenz Peña- Sufragio Secreto, Universal y Obligatorio. Need I say more?

Hipolito Yrigoyen- Nationalised petroleum, first truly democratically elected president. He ruled for the worker, providing lots of jobs in the national bureaucracy. He was the first man to think in the workers.

More to come later, hard pressed for time.

Dr. Nick · August 31, 2001, 05:56

To be honest, Solano Lopez can't be blamed. I'll expand later.

kIndal · August 31, 2001, 11:15

Oupppsss.

Double posting.

kIndal · August 31, 2001, 11:16

What´s about José Martí??

I always have thought that if haven´t died so young he could be became a important South American politic.

Fiera · August 31, 2001, 13:46

Can't we extend this to México as well?

Viva Zapata! Viva Pancho Villa!

Chilean President™ · August 31, 2001, 14:40

Fco. Solano Lopez was a bizzard man. He believes that Paraguay has the destiny to become the south american image of the France of Napoleon. He must have a lot of courage (or be really mad) to fight a war against the Triple Alianza (Argentina - Brasil - Uruguay). The country was almost destroyed, however when he died in the battle of Cerro Corá in 1870 he became a heroic figure for the paraguayans who remember him until now for his courage and not for his madness.

Abouth Martí, I dont believe that he would be a great south american politic for two reasons. First of all, he was a caribean

and second, more than a politic man or an army man, he was a rebeld and a writer. Marti's weapons where his writed words, thats all. He never lead a important group of people or do anything like that. However he was the most recognizible face of the cuban will of freedom.

Do you know the senator a minister of several chilean administrations Diego Portales?

Jay Bee · August 31, 2001, 14:45

Quote:

Originally posted by kIndal
What´s about José Martí??

I always have thought that if haven´t died so young he could be became a important South American politic.

Hey, I had already said that on another thread!

Be as it may Presi, Marti had the integrity that most other Latin American and Spanish leaders never even suspected it could exist.

Jay Bee · August 31, 2001, 14:52

Quote:

Originally posted by Fiera
Can't we extend this to México as well?

Viva Zapata! Viva Pancho Villa!

Yes, Mexico is something so special at least for me

Talking about "aprovechateguis", what can you tell me about Agustin de Iturbide? Nice guy.

Dr. Nick · August 31, 2001, 15:19

Francisco Solano Lopez was a good leader... you can compare him to, say, Hitler.

Paraguay was the most emergent economy in Latin America around 1860. It was industrialising through the purchase of capital goods and becoming an important centre of manufacture for the local market at least. Paraguay was prospering.

The Guerra del Paraguay was caused due to the rivalry in Uruguay. The Blancos and Colorados were constantly squabbling. The point is that Brazil favored one side, Paraguay the other. When the side that Paraguay favored gained power, the Brazilians invaded to restore their supporters, whilst the party supported by Brazil trained its army in Corrientes, Argentina. Paraguay then declared war on Brazil and Uruguay and asked for permission to move through Corrientes, as Argentina immediately declared itself neutral. Unable to assist Uruguay, Solano Lopez had one of two things to do:

1) Declare war on Argentina and march through Corrientes to attack Uruguay.
2) Sit on his thumb.

He was pressured to opt for declaring war because it was evident that Brazil and Argentina were allied and that Argentina would intercede in the future and attack, if Paraguay dealt the first blow perhaps they'd manage to keep Argentina at bay. But Paraguay saw itself against a manpower that overwhelmed her as well as being cut off the main trade routes with Europe. Unable to purchase guns, materiel, and unable to manufacture it as well, they were fighting a loosing war from the beginning. When the second front was opened the end would come. But the Paraguayans, despite all these problems, managed to keep it going for 5 years, from 1865 till 1870 and it wasn't till Solano Lopez was brutally murdered by Brazilian troops in Cerro Corá that the war ended.

Solano Lopez acted out of his own nobility and to save face of him and his nation. When Brazil and Argentina threw mud in his face, he couldn't just wipe it off, smile, and pretend that nothing had happened. However, this war saw the glorious resistance of the pueblo Paraguayo, as almost 95% of all able bodied men were killed in the war. We were told that after the war, there were so few men in contrast with women that polygamy was allowed.

Dr. Nick · August 31, 2001, 15:22

I'd like to add Peron to the Argentine leader list. He brought about a revolution in political thought at the time and rebuilt the economy. Despite my hatred for him and what he represents as a corrupted "milico", I must admit he did a lot for the country and it's peoples.

From there, I must add Arturo Humberto Illia and Frondizi. They both tried to keep the militares in check, both strengthened the economy and led the nation through trying times when an unhappy military could mean Martin Garcia for them the next day.

Chilean President™ · August 31, 2001, 21:05

Iturbide create the Iturbide Empire in Mexico and Central America right?

Alfonsus72 · September 1, 2001, 04:48

Quote:

Originally posted by El Awrence

Paraguay was the most emergent economy in Latin America around 1860. It was industrialising through the purchase of capital goods and becoming an important centre of manufacture for the local market at least. Paraguay was prospering.

I thought that Paraguay was, lets say, "prospering", cause Solano Lopez, in the way to his imperial dream, builded iron works and magazines to serve to his army. He changed butter for cannons, and in fact he was leading the country to a war economy and to a total mobilization of national resource, which only end could be a terrible war against his neighbours.

Instead of secure the navigation among the Plata River and produce trade goods, servign as moderator beetween Brasil and Argentina (whose relationship was bad), Solano made Paraguay and enemy of both of them. The Uruguay (which later will also declare war to Paraguay) affair was only an excuse to test the was machine he created.

Jay Bee · September 1, 2001, 15:17

Quote:

Originally posted by Chilean President
Iturbide create the Iturbide Empire in Mexico and Central America right?

Right, sire

whosurdaddy · September 1, 2001, 23:56

Bernardo O'higgins ... ja ja me encanta esa nombre. Well I was almost a history major but nevertheless its a shame that i don't know enough about south american history. Something has always bothered me about south american history, why was there never any attempt to unite all the former spanish colonies under one nation ... the former 13 english colonies had no problem doing it (well they couldn't get canada but who wants all those frenchies up there anyway

). I know at times large sections former Spanish south america were united as in the case of Gran Colombia, etc., but that never even came close to creating something like the United States of South America. Well, any ideas .....?????

whosurdaddy · September 2, 2001, 00:00

oooops .... my damn spelling, quise escribir "Bernardo Higgins ... me encanta este nombre."

Chilean President™ · September 2, 2001, 01:18

The name is Bernardo O'Higgins, chilean General, born in Rancagua (south of Santiago), the father of the Republic. He is the son of the irish Virrey Ambrosio O'Higgins, and the biggest proud of the actual chilean - irish comunity in the country.

As I said before the countries in South America never could be united because the big diferences beteewn each others. Maybe small countries like Peru, Bolivia, Equator or Paraguay wanted to be a mega nation, but biggest countries like Brazil , Argentina, Chile and Uruguay (big in terms of economic, militar, political and cultural power) were proud of their own independence and sovereignty. In the early days of the Republic (in the case of Chile), the sentiment of nationality and "chilean spirit" grow fast. Also I have to add that the countries of the Cono Sur (Argentina, Chile and Uruguay) have a little xenophobic attitude against poorest countries like Peru, Venezuela or others.
The problem is that the US and Europe see Latin America as one big nation, but actually there are 2 diferent regions in this "continent". Latin America and the Cono Sur (Southern Cone) of the continent. One is poor and underdeveloped, the other have a developed economy, few social problems and a strong democratic politic heritage (besides the coups of the 70's)
On the case of Chile I must say that we don't consider our selves latin americans, we are CHILEANS, and we are damn proud of our nationality, culture and chilean history. I believe that other countries like Argentina feel the same, right El Awrence?

N35t0r · September 2, 2001, 06:51

Yeah...

Thae main reason between the US and Latin America was that the US' 13 colonies were on a territory smaller than Argentina when it had independicized, and only later expanded W of the Appalacheans; while all of the land of Sa was settled, and the fact that both liberators (San Martin and Simon Bolivar) wanted to 'liberate' the different 'provinces' from the Spanish. Chile, Argentina, Peru, bolivia, etc. were different subdivisions, and also many countries (Paraguay, Uruguay from Argentina) separated from others during civil wars...

As for O'Higgins, he commanded a column of San Martin's army when he crossed the Andes, and was then appointed Director of Chile, where he bankrrupted the government to help San Martin.
As for the ships that enabled san Martin to reach Perú, they were British.

Jay Bee · September 2, 2001, 07:10

Good to see ya back, hodadcito!

Re the 'Latin American' tag, I always wondered why the Americans don't call themselves 'Anglosaxonized Americans' or simply 'Anglo Americans'.

More to the point, I always wondered why people like Robert de Niro, Al Pacino, Madonna, Coppola, NY's major, Joe di Maggio, etc etc etc etc aren't considered Latin Americans.

There's more, I always wondered why the Quebequese aren't considered Latin Americans as well if they speak French.

Conclusion: the 'Latin American' denomination is an absurdity that we hispanics have stupidly adopted for no reason.

And that's all what I have to say

Waku · September 2, 2001, 07:13

I'm not too guevaristic but don't you think El Ché is a must.

Fiera · September 2, 2001, 07:21

I'm pretty guevaristic but, still, I think he never reached the leadership of an American nation, did he? Now, Fidel Castro...

Jay Bee · September 2, 2001, 07:38

I cannot think of anything more manipulated in all of XX century history than the figure of Ernesto Guevara. I'm with Waku, good or bad, he deserves to be on top of any list of Latin American leaders.

About Castro, Maradona's comments about him say it all

Fiera · September 2, 2001, 07:41

Quote:

Originally posted by Jay Bee
About Castro, Maradona's comments about him say it all

I missed them. What did she say?

Jay Bee · September 2, 2001, 07:46

she?

Remember, no political talk allowed in this forum

PS. He said what he said before the Wall fell. Now I think it does not apply anymore. He said that Cuba was the only Latin American country that had erradicated extreme poverty and famine and that shoud mean something about Castro's regime.

Fiera · September 2, 2001, 07:50

Ooops!!! I had read "Madonna" instead of Maradona the first time!

Well, I guess Castro didn't remember those commets when he offered Maradona a place for recovery in Cuba... Funny relationship that they've been going lately...

Jay Bee · September 2, 2001, 07:54

Well, To me, Maradona has been the #1 hands down. But when it comes to matters unrelated to the round thing... it's amazing he can't realize the immense waste he's got himself into.

Waku · September 2, 2001, 07:58

BTW, Castro is the best example of spanish pigheadedness (I've just learned a new word) which is no more than strong individualism.

Fiera · September 2, 2001, 08:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Jay Bee
Well, To me, Maradona has been the #1 hands down. But when it comes to matters unrelated to the round thing... it's amazing he can't realize the immense waste he's got himself into.

Yep, it's a great shame... He isn't getting what he deserved, at least for the hours of joy that he brought to his country, and to all people loving football around the world.

And, yes, Waku, Castro, is the modern and updated version of the typical Spanish Cacique.

Chilean President™ · September 2, 2001, 11:47

Quote:

As for O'Higgins, he commanded a column of San Martin's army when he crossed the Andes, and was then appointed Director of Chile

O'HIGGINS HAS NEVER BEEN A MEMBER OF THE ANDES ARMY!!! HE WAS FIGHTING AT THAT MOMENT IN THE CITY OF RANCAGUA AND ARRIVE TO A REGION CALLED MAIPU THE SAME DAY THAT SAN MARTIN.

And the fleet that liberates Peru, was the Chilean Naval Fleet who carry O'Higgins but it was under the command of the admiral of the chilean navy Lord Thomas Cochrane and the second of the navy admiral Francisco Crosby.

The Fleet was the unity of the Chilean Second Fleet (of the North), the Third Fleet (of the South) and The Fleet Command (of Valparaíso). The ships were:

Frigate O'Higgins the head of the fleet.

Galvarino and Lautaro (first line of transports)

Mackenna, Potrillo, Golondrina, Chilena, Jerezama, Perla, Aguila, Emprendedora, Consecuencia, Gaditana and Dolores (line of brigs)

Moctezuma, Araucano and Pueyrredón (Second Line of transports)

Condor del Mar, José Miguel Carrera, Estrella, Valparaíso and Colo-Colo (Second line of frigate)

Minerva, Libertad, Hércules, San Martin and Independencia (3rd line of frigate, ships of Argentina).

The fleet mine from Valparaíso on agust 20th 1820, to arrive later to the spanish port of Chilca in Peru.

"The glory and freedom of Peru, belong to Chile, and in second place to the british and argentinians that fought under chilean flag. The objective of this expedition was complete; the capture of the representative of spanish power, the Virrey, and the freedom of the nation" -James Monroe, President of The United States. June 20th 1824, when he recieve the credentials of the peruvian ambassador.