South-South America –
a historical perspective
I will now take you readers to an exotic region which I call: “South-South
America”. It is the most “European” part of South America, and is comprised by
Argentina, Chile and Uruguay. While it achieved it’s independence in 1825,
Uruguay is considered by many, including myself, an annexed “state” to Argentina
even today. I prefer to divide the history of Argentina in two big chapters: the
“colonization period” and the “big immigration” period.
The colonization period: The first human settlements can be found in the
Patagonia 13,000 years ago. The beginning of Spanish domination is marked by the
arrival of Juan Díaz de Solís to the Río de la Plata in 1516. The region was ruled by
Spain with the establishment of the Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata. This
consisted in what is now the territory of Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay. The
Viceroy responded directly to the King of Spain. Check out the following map. As
always throughout the book, understanding historical processes will help us
understand economic developments… and what is to come. The region that is today
Uruguay was called the “Banda Oriental” (Eastern Band). Still today, many people
know it as such:
The Revolution of May 1810 meant the beginning of the end for Spanish rule when
the “criollos” (mixed children between Spanish and Indians) got together to claim
for democracy. War for independence lasted for 6 years, it’s peak at the “Battle of
Salta”, in 3which the army of Manuel Belgrano defeated the Spanish troops.
Consider that this was one of the most important battles, were the criollos who
were only 2.500 against 4.000 spaniards, won under Belgrano’s master war
strategy. Consider how unpopulated the region was, one of the major battles for
independence involved so few soldiers and lasted for only two days. Independence
finally came in 1816, and the Constitution (based on the US constitution and the
values of the French Revolution) was signed only by 1853 after a series of
governments and civil wars. Political instability would become a constant for Argentina, even from the
foundation of the Nation. The civil wars opposed the Unitarians who thought that
Buenos Aires should lead the less-developed provinces, as the head of a
strong centralized government; and the Federalists thought instead that the country
should be a federation of autonomous provinces, like the successful states of the
United States. The federalists won, Buenos Aires being forced to distribute it’s tax
income with the other states as a federal government. Bitter sentiments persist even
today, where the “porteños” (Buenos Aires people), consider that Buenos Aires
should not finance the poorer regions, and should even become an independent
state. Most of the residents of other states hate the “porteños”, who are considered
very arrogant and never do a good job representing the country abroad. This
corresponds to historical reasons, relationships between Buenos Aires and the rest
of the Nation have never been good. Consider that, today, 30% of the population
live in the “Greater Buenos Aires” (Buenos Aires city + suburbs), which accounts
for a massive 50% of GDP.5 A horrible job at the “de-centralization” proposed
originally by the federalists. But we will come back to that later.
In the 1870s, in what was known as the Conquest of the Desert, led by his war
minister Julio Argentino Roca, the military took most of the territories under the
control of natives, and reduced their population. They were financed by the rich
people, who got to keep the lands of the natives that were wiped out by the
government. Even today, landownership is preserved by a few hands, who are
usually ancestors of the first colonizers that occupied the country over 150 years
ago.
The big immigration: the first wave of mass migration began in 1880, people
from all over the world (it was really from all over Europe, but let’s leave it at that),
migrated to Argentina. Causes were diverse: bad economic situation in Europe,
hunger, the spirit of adventure, or the will to progress were some of the causes.
Consider that these were the times of the Industrial Revolution in Europe.
Historically speaking, farmers used to have 10 children who would work the land.
The age of machines implicated the replacement of these workers by machines,
creating masses of unemployed people (there were more people than jobs created at
factories). Ships full of Europeans embarqued themselves to America, the dream
land! Transportation also helped a lot. Travel days went from 50 days in 1850, to
13 in 1930. Security, tickets costs and comforts are improved. The arrival of
immigrants is encouraged by the proletarian landowners, to make agricultural
labour cheaper. This was not what the immigrants were told though, they were told
that if they worked the land hard they could eventually buy a piece of land and
5 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Buenos_Aires
become landowners themselves. They were duped, but once in Argentina, the
prospect of returning to their starving home countries was even worse.
The necessary measures are taken from the government to take in the immigrants,
with pro-immigration laws passed.6 Betwee
land” of Argentina, the miracle happened. Former Nazis and jewish left their
differences aside and worked together to build the nation. The period of
industrialization, which lasted from 1945 – 1975, was the country’s best historical
period. Most of the industrial matrix that is found even today is from that period.
The 3rd wave of migration took place from the 1970s and continues until today. It
consists of people from nearby countries, mainly Bolivia and Paraguay. They
migrate to Argentina attracted by it’s public healthcare and education systems.
Most of them move to Buenos Aires, since they have family there, and establish
themselves in guettos. There, they have access to cable TV and water, whereas in
Bolivia in some regions they have to walk 10 km to get access to have access to
drinkable water. Although they can also be found in other areas of the country,
especially in the North-West. Despite the bad conditions they live in, they have it
better than in their own countries. They are usually discriminated in the job market,
and take jobs in the black economy. This situation persists even today.
And finally, to conclude, the largest wave of emigration took place in 2001 – 2007.
The worst crisis in history in 2001, which caused 25% unemployment and
submerged 50% of the population into poverty, caused a massive exodus. The US,
Brasil and Spain were the main destinations, but many people went back to the
countries their parents came from: Italy, Germany, Russia, and why not, Norway!
This economic cycle, which extended itself from 1976 – 2007, destroyed the
country industrially and left sequels in the population which are easily perceived
today.
In a different story, or scenario, Chile did not receive as many European
immigrants as Argentina did. The first admission of immigrants to Chile was
selective. In 1824, the government enacted a law to encourage Europeans
(primarily Swiss, Germans, and English) to establish factories in urban centres as
well as to populate sparsely inhabited southern areas. The selective policies
achieved their aims. On average, more than 52.5 percent of the foreign-born
population residing in Chile between 1865 and 1920 were Europeans. However,
they did not represent big numbers.
As opposed to Argentina, who favoured European migration resulting from the
WW1 and WW2, in Chile fears of an influx of refugees in the war's aftermath
encouraged lawmakers to restrict the entry of foreigners in 1918. The advent of
World War II strengthened this position, with the government requiring all
foreigners entering the country to have proof of sufficient funds to sustain
themselves for six months.
During Pinochet’s dictatorship and the economic and political crisis that followed,
Chile became a country of emigration as more than 500,000 Chileans voluntarily
left or were forced to flee for countries such as Argentina, Australia, Canada,
Venezuela, France, and Sweden. At the same time, the new social, political, and
economic order discouraged new immigrants from entering.
The numbers of Bolivians, Ecuadorans, and Colombians more than doubled during
the inter-census years, the most notable trend between 2002 and 2009 being the
rapid growth of the Peruvian population. Peruvian migrants are now estimated to
account for nearly 131,000 of the Chile's 352,000 migrants, these recent flows have
changed the landscape of migration in Chile. Peruvians are now the largest migrant
group and continue to grow at a steady rate. This is reinforced by the continued
growth of a Peruvian community — considered to be the only true immigrant
enclave in the country — in Santiago, the nation's capital. Most female Peruvian
migrants are employed as domestic workers in middle-class Chilean homes.
Concentrated as they are geographically in certain sectors of Santiago, these
immigrants have a higher visibility than other migrant populations, and as such, are
the focus of most of the negative public and media attention about immigration to
Chile — specifically, a perception that many of these immigrants are in the country
illegally.
Despite its more recent draw for immigrants, Chile continues to have a negative net
migration. Current governmental estimates show that for every one immigrant
residing in the country, three Chileans are living abroad. The main receiving
country has been historically Argentina, which has a strong demand for labour and
offers highly industrialized urban centres. Argentina has more than 429,000 firstand second-generation Chileans, the largest Chilean community abroad. Since the
return to democracy in 1990 Chile has also seen growth in emigration to the United
States and Europe, with Spain in particular being a large draw for Chileans seeking
postgraduate studies.
Chile is mostly known as an immigrant-sending country, as throughout much of its
history, the foreign born have remained a tiny share (1 percent to 2 percent) of the
total population. Between 750,000 and 1 million Chileans live abroad (about 6
percent of the country's population), according to the latest governmental estimates
in 2005.
Check out the map. The overview I have provided here and the influence of the
Viceroy of the Rio de La Plata explains the regions situation, even today. Check
how South-South America is not like the Caribbean, but quite the contrary, it is a
mountainous area. I clarify this since I always get questions from the “First
Worlders” (who apparently didn’t study geography). The water is mildly cold in the
Argentinian coast line, and even colder on Chile’s Pacific side.
https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batalla_de_Salta
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Argentina
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Buenos_Aires
https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/argentina-new-era-migration-and-migration-policy
http://eial.tau.ac.il/index.php/eial/article/view/1258/1285
http://www.southerninstitute.info/holocaust_education/slguid5.html
No comments:
Post a Comment