Week Four: Independence Narratives, Past and Present

Having studied the French revolution and the Napoleonic empire for the last two years I was excited to find out what had happened in the Spanish and Portuguese colonies beyond my limited knowledge that they had sought independence shorty after Napoleon’s victory. However, I was sad to learn that in the case of Brazil this was done in an effort to avoid the abolition of slavery. Whilst it was not uncommon during the period for the elites to favour slavery as it benefitted them greatly, in all the revolutions I had previously studied the poor so greatly outnumbered the rich it was possible for them to overthrow the regime. Therefore, I was disheartened to learn how during a time of global revolution liberalism was crushed in Brazil in favour of the arguably dated idea of a constitutional monarchy.

After reading José Martí’s “Our America” a concept that particularly stood out for me was governing specifically for the place being governed. It is the familiar idea that no one size fits all but having read this passage it made me think of governments today and how instability arises because the government does not act in the best interests of the people. Martí’s other point that “those unacquainted with the rudiments of politics should not be allowed to embark on a career in politics” particularly resonated with me given the upcoming US election. I believe that Martí’s commentary on governments is still relevant in today’s political climate and that without the support of the people and a competent leader nothing but instability will ensue.

The third point of Martí’s that particularly interested me was that of placing more importance on studying the history of the region you are in than studying that of Europe. I found this especially interesting given recent discussions in the UK over the whitewashing of history taught in schools. In the phrase “our own Greece is preferable to the Greece that is not ours; we need it more” Martí’s highlights that both America and Greece are equal which was not the view of the European colonisers and that the people of Latin America deserve to hear the history of their ancestors over a history they have no relation to. I believe this is still a problem today with children all around the world focusing on European history over their own national history and agree with Martí’s that European history should not be valued higher than the history of any other region.

 

Discussion questions:

Do you think history taught in schools should include more global history or national history?

What history did you study when you were at school?

 

Comments

  1. Mirella LivotiSeptember 30, 2020 at 3:00 PM

    Hi Serena,

    Personally I think that schools should definitely focus on teaching their national histories to students and should include as many perspectives/voices as possible. When it comes to global history I think that students should be taught the basics and important historical events but should not be required in their upper years to continue studying the hegemonic version of history. Why are people all over the world expected to know the history of European countries and North America but not that of Asian or African countries? Why don't European countries teach about the history of Africa and Latin America prior to their arrival to their own students? I think it crucial to consider which history are we talking about and how expectations differ depending on who the learner is.

    In terms of my own experience, I did the Internal Baccalaureate (IB) Program in my junior and senior year of high school. Fortunately, I was able to choose between studying History (which was mainly about North America) and Brazilian Social Studies. Since I had already learned about the basic important historical events, I chose to focus on Brazilian History. I think that knowing the history of my country is the only way that I can make informed decisions and fight for change.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Jenniah MinchinOctober 1, 2020 at 11:38 AM

    Hi Serena,

    I think you raised an interesting question regarding the history curriculum in schools. I learned national history in high school, but there was an option to take global history in the senior years. I personally think both courses are important, but national history should be prioritized. An in-depth understanding of your countries history, and roles it may have played in important historical events, helps one be self-aware when interacting with people around the world. I do think there should be more global history in the curriculum, because up until this point, I felt like I knew nothing about Latin America. Now of course I could go off on my own time & read about Latin America, but I feel that there I didn't even learn the basics of world history, or world geography. To me, history and geography go hand in hand, so I think if there were to be more of an emphasis on one, there would have to be an emphasis on both.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Samantha MorilloOctober 5, 2020 at 11:35 AM

    Hi Serena,

    After readying your insight. I believe the high school curriculum should focus more on the history of the region you are in, not so much of those who have colonized the land you live on. By learning only the history of those who colonized the land, we become sympathetic to them, when you only learn one side, you start to believe everything you hear. The idea that they should be celebrated for what they have done, however it dismisses the thoughts and feelings of those who’s land we really stand on. Just as Marti said, how can you govern a land when you do not know the history of it, but the real history. The history of both sides, not just of one side.

    Just as in South America, we to here in Canada have people governing our land without knowing the true history. Although each region should be governed differently based on the history, we can definitely relate to them. As we push aside the history of indigenous communities to prioritize the history of Europeans. How can one properly govern a region without knowing the history. That to me just does not make sense. Therefore to answer your question. The national history should be the topic most focused on in school rather then the global history.

    -Samantha

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Week Two: The Meeting of Two Worlds

Having grown up in Europe the image of Columbus presented to us at school was that of the accidental hero who stumbled across America whilst in search of India and returned home with mountains of gold much to the pride and delight of Spain. However, recent socio-political movements regarding the glorification of colonisation in Europe has put Columbus’ heroic status along with other key imperialist figures such as Napoleon and Rhodes into question. And so it is with these two conflicting outlooks that I began this week’s reading and lecture hoping to find a resolute answer to whether Columbus deserves the status of a hero or a villain.   As I began Columbus’ journal I was initially intrigued by his leading strategy, lying to the crew about how far they had sailed presumably in the hope of encouraging them to work harder the next day. He struck me as a respected, competent leader – however this may just be due to his own perception of himself as arguably he cannot have been that compete
Read more

Week Three: The Colonial Experience

I really enjoyed the readings this week, in particular I found Catalina de Erauso’s diary particularly engaging and surprising with it reading like a soap opera at times!  What struck me most about Catalina’s story was that she received no punishment when her identity was revealed but instead was honoured by both the Pope and the King. I found this so surprising as even in Europe today queer people are not always accepted by the Catholic Church – in Italy gay marriage is not legal due to the Catholic Church’s controversial influence over the country’s politics. The fact that she was so readily accepted would perhaps suggest that the Church and the King were not aware of her sexuality but only saw her as a woman who had dressed as a man for the sole purpose of serving her country and not as a way of expressing her own gender identity.   Furthermore, I was surprised that the highest powers at the time, the State and the Church, both recognised that a woman was capable of doing a “man’s”
Read more

Week Five: Caudillos Versus the Nation State

The reading this week painted the picture of Latin America being left in complete disarray following the departure of the Spanish. The resultant “power vacuum” was filled by the controversial Caudillos and the region was heavily divided between the new Latin America and the old. It is still unclear to me whether the Caudillos did more harm than good. Although they did provide a structure when there was none and did truly work in the best interests of their followers the Caudillos were also quick to turn to violence and only provided the “appearance of functioning states”. This is evident in the case of Peru and Bolivia when they were defeated by the poorer Chile. However, although it is easy to condemn the Caudillos as incompetent and unsuccessful if they had not stepped up into such a position of leadership anarchy could have ensued throughout the region with graver consequences.   What I found particularly interesting was the difficulties in ruling a region with such diverse geograph
Read more