This Monday we explored Africa’s ‘contentious’ role in world history. Before the transatlantic African slave trade, Africa was viewed as contiguous with the rest of the world. For instance, the Trans-Saharan Trade connected sub-Saharan Africa to the Mediterranean and west Asia. Additionally, Arabic script would be used to transcribe and record many African languages. The European Age of Discovery would come to redefine Africa from being large, complex, and diverse to being ‘uncivilized’ and immature.

Despite Africa’s active role in the premodern world, enlightenment scholars wrote off Africa’s historical significance as being both minor and isolated. These scholars wrote about Africa in a vacuum, historicizing its place in the world as being subordinate. Professor Ibra Sene explained that the Eurocentric frameworks we use to study civilizations are biased by the European model of civilization. For example, early Enlightenment historians like Hegel viewed history as a study of written documents. Africa has a rich history of civilizations that do not use written script which automatically excluded them from being viewed and studied as ‘civilized.’ In addition, influential historians narrowly analyzed world history as simply a continuation of certain races and civilizations. The fault in this thinking is its teleological and exclusionary basis as it presumes that Europe is the height of civilization and that ‘development’ is not a trans-regional phenomenon, being exclusive to Europe and those it deems civilized.

In our class on September 18th, Professor Michele Leiby, a political science professor from this college who also specializes in Latin American politics, came to class discuss the history of Latin American politics in the later half of the 20th Century as well as answer some of our questions about the politics of Latin America.  She started with answering our questions on the politics of Latin America, which covered various subjects such as political polarization, violence, and similarities to U.S. politics.  Afterwards, she went over two former Authoritarian regimes in Latin America, Pinochet’s Chile and Fujimori’s Peru.

In regards to Chile, we learned that President Allende, who from 1970 to 1973 tried to introduce healthcare reforms and nationalize industries, was overthrown by General Augusto Pinochet, who was aided by the U.S..  Pinochet’s authoritarian rule from 1974 to 1990 involved government spending being cut, tariffs getting lowered, the re-privatizing of nationalized companies, the privatization of various government services, having millions of dollars earned from copper directed towards fighting the dirty war, and the execution of 20,000 to 30,000 people by the government for dissenting.  Even after Pinochet’s ousting from office and subsequent return of democracy to Chile, many scars, both political and societal, from the former regime remain in Chile to this day.

In Class today, Wednesday September 18th Professor Michele Leiby came as a guest speaker. Professor Leiby is a political science professor at the college and has a specialty in Latin American politics. In our course this week we are taking a look at the history of Latin America in the context of our class. Professor Leiby first answered some general questions about Latin American then gave a very engaging overview of two cases of authoritarianism in Latin America, specifically Chile and Peru.  

The cases we studied were examples of Authoritarian regimes and the changes they have gone through. We discussed some major leaders such as General Juan Velasco who led from 1968 through 1975. During his time as a leader, he supported policies like agrarian reform and land redistribution. Another important leader in Peru was President Alberto Fujimori. This presidency was very unique in a multitude of ways. Fujimori was elected in hopes of reducing hyperinflation happening in the country. While he was successful in this, Fujimori was still a detriment to the country. He commits a self-coup where he gets rid of the Supreme court and the legislator and makes the executive far too powerful. During this time Fujimori also commits major human rights violations which he will later be convicted of. His legacy lives on through his politically involved daughter and the “Fujimorism” still active in Peru today.  

During the course of 16 September, we discussed the evolution of Latin America: from the time of the indigenous empires to the beginning of the 20th century. Today, the Latin America comprises a wide area, with over 600 million people in more than twenty countries, speaking different languages and giving the culture a special touch, from Spanish and Portuguese to the various dialects of the different indigenous languages, such as Quechua. The very term “Latin America” introduced by the french Michel Chevalier, reflects a concept impregnated with power relations throughout history. Other denominations include Hispanic-America, Ibero-America which alone carry different perspectives-and categorizations include Indigenous America, Afro-Latin America, and Euro-Latin America in their manifold efforts to approach its identity.

Economically, the region represents a multi-faceted picture of high legitimate inequality coupled with a growing middle class, falling poverty rates, and stark economic disparity across and within countries-as in most parts, an outcome of the lingering shadows of colonialism. Three basic things one needs to understand about Latin America include: the manner in which legacies of colonialism continue to shape structural inequalities; the centrality of transculturation in formulating a Latin American identity; and Latin American culture as an increasingly diasporic phenomenon. The understanding is further deepened in light of the relevance of pre-Columbian civilization that was proven through sophisticated civilizations in Latin America prior to contact, such as the Aztec and Inca empires, while the Columbian Exchange-particularly the introduction of Old World diseases across the Bering Strait-carried an extremely powerful impact on native populations and thus set the stage for massive demographic and cultural shifts. Contemplating this rich tapestry of history and culture pushes one strongly toward the complexity and depth in which Latin Americans had to live.

This overview challenges one-dimensional narratives and invites us to consider multiple perspectives and long-term impacts of historical processes while studying contemporary issues in the region. The stress transculturation receives, along with the diasporic nature of Latin American culture, is particularly provocative in the requirement of any true understanding of Latin America looking beyond borders to dynamic, ongoing exchanges of ideas, people, and cultures that continue to shape the region. The approach/standpoint that it is one which nurtured a more complex and holistic conception of Latin American studies, taking into consideration both common histories and experiences existing within this wide geography and emphasizing contextual understanding in the approach to Latin American Studies and contemporary issues.

Today in History 109, we learned about the history of Latin America. Possessing a rich history, we also learned about the name itself, and what all the different names can tell us about the people that shaped the entire region. In about 45 minutes, we covered roughly 500 years’ worth of history dating back to the colonial period.

In terms of Colonization, we covered 2 main types: planter and extractive. Planter colonization consisted of heavy production of export crops and importing enslaved Africans, while extractive moved resources out of the colonized areas with the use of indigenous populations. One particular location we looked at was the Potosi silver mine, where extractive colonization funneled silver directly into Europe and Asia. We also looked at the extensive sugar operations in Brazil, where at least 4 million slaves were imported to work on sugar plantations. A brutal slavery system resulted from this.

We also covered the impact of this extensively, focusing on 3 main points: a heterogenous population, religion, and land. In terms of the heterogenous population, colonists conducted aggressive sexual behavior on the indigenous people, causing a heavily mixed population of people. Racial diversity is still very prominent today, but it is not simple. With religion, Spanish and Portuguese introduced Catholicism to the native population. Some embraced it, others did not. Some had their own ways to worship, one of these discussed was N.S. de Guadalupe. On the last point, land, colonialism caused a very unequal society that was based on land ownership. Simon Boliuan later commented on this inequality before the revolution form European control, however, he notes 20 years later that the problem is still present.

In the period of Neo-colonialism, this region of the world focused heavily on exports – both to US and European markets – and on extensive urbanization. As we wrapped up for the day, we briefly covered some 20th C. points, including extensive economic change, new political structures like populism and dictatorships within the region, and revolutionary movements. When looking at this period, it is important to note it as a time of great political turmoil and change, whether that be for better or for worse.

Overall today was very informative, interesting, and brought up some points about Latin America (or however you name it) that I hadn’t thought extensively about for a long time. We tend to focus much more on the American aspect in middle and high school, so it’s really quite fascinating to learn more about this area of the world whenever possible.