So i never really hard anything about falling apart of Spanish/Portugese empires and forming of modern Latin America

Argentina wanted an european king too and even sent diplomats to Europe to find one. No one accepted.

Kek. Didnt they offered the crown like Mexico did to Fredinand the VII

>No one accepted.
That's the kind of banter you never ever recover from.

Pinochet did nothing wrong

>Brown man walks up to you
>"Hello sir, would you like to be king of a magnificent nation in a far away land?"

>Brown man walks up to you and asks
>Would you like to be king of the whitest country in the Americas?

>Yes,I will accept theri traditions,customes and will try to do my job. I am sure that they will love. I will try my best

there were also proposals to crown an inca king and move the capital to Cuzco

>Mexico offered the king of Spain to be their king too.
When?

...

but Cuzco is in Peru, what were they thinking?

1st Chapter

> Be Spain
> Had a retarded Bourbon king (Ferdinand VII)
> Get backstabbed by your ally (France)
> Your armies need ppl to fight against French invaders
> Ok, we´ll send our Latinamerican armies

2nd Chapter

> Upper classes of latinamerica wants more power and more money.
> Spain is being defeated by France
> Its our opportunity, let´s revolt, and if we win, we´ll have gold and wmnz.
> Latinamerican whites started independence wars (but not for liberty and democracy, but for more power).
> Spanish armies get trapped in Southamerica, and they dont have the support of the invaded Spain.
> Spain gets defeated, we are free.

3rd Chapter:

> Ok, we are free, now, what should we do?
> Of course, we have plenty of everything and we have a lot of brown slaves.
> Lets live like kings, but cover us like if our countries were democracies.
> We are plenty of everything. We dont need to produce anything, just export.

And this is the downfall of Latinamerica.

> Your armies need ppl to fight against French invaders
> Ok, we´ll send our Latinamerican armies

Never happened. The spaniards never had a lot of troops in the americas to begin with and, with the bourbons, the soldiers were mostly americans themselves. The loss in the Napoleonic war was the navy, after Trafalgar the spaniards didn't have a proper fleet to send their armies to the americas.

You also forgot the part where they say "and let's war each other like chimps now that we're free" in the 3rd chapter.

When they declared independence,they offered him the crown

> let's war each other like chimps now that we're free
You nailed it there, civil war, coups and revolutions were permanent all over the 19th century. And it seems a new cycle of that shit is coming back.

What sense does that make? Mexico's independence is probably the one I'm most ignorant amongst the big ones, and I'm far from an expert on latin american history, but this time I think I'm just fucking lost. Why would they declare war and independence to offer him the crown? And why would the king not accept if he was defeated?

>And it seems a new cycle of that shit is coming back.
Elaborate

In the case of Mexico,the royalist side was winning the war,but as Spain was very unstable,they joined the independist side. And offered a dual royalty to Fernando,making Mexico equal to Spain,with its own laws,parliament and such. Kind of a commonwealth,in which the king holds more power.

Another thing to blame to the retard Fernando. That would've been great for both countries and reduced the spanish loss of prestige.

When the movement started, the insurgents were fighting against the colonial government, the viceroy and friends, and chanted Viva Fernando VII, at that time France had deposed him.
Independence took some time and different ideals were added, Repunblican freemasonry, royalists.
And as
Said, the colonial government joined the Independence movement at the very end, and achieved its goals.

Pretty much this.

T. Latin American

Based freemason.

Just google Brasil or Venezuela and the shit going down there in the last weeks

It's always astounding to see how many revolts in the past and specifically in colonial Spain were made in the name of the king (although there's always a good explanation).

This senpai who was descended from the incas, proclaimed himself king of the americas and was basically leading an indian rebellion also tried to appeal to monarchic institutions to save his life.

Great rapper too.

>yfw you remember there was a Grancolombia on the verge of subjugating the whole spanish speaking continent
>yfw Brazil was initially on the same path as the USA or Japan as an emerging non-european major power
>yfw the South Americans learned to finally fight real wars with the Tripple Alliance or the Pacific War
>yfw the chilean navy was at one point powerful enough that they could force the whole US Pacifik Fleet to back down
>yfw the first ever Dreadnought outside the Royal Navy was actually operated by the brazil navy
>yfw just hundred years ago Chile and Argentina were genuinely powerful and prosperous nations and nothing but a glorious future awaited them

And then it just went down.

A lot of people saw the king as this mystical figure that ruled over everything.
When some guy tells you to fight for the king you feel compelled to, more so when he tells you to fight against the taxman.
Down with bad government, long live the king.

>sure enough, uruguay seem like a nice place
>"i'm speaking about argentina"
>..... n-nevermind

See Brazil, with the corrupt parliament impeaching a corrupt President to cover for themselves.
See Venezuela, absolutely destroying their own economy, and now getting paid for it.

>Most latin americans are too poor to be a significant consumer market
Nigger, read before posting something so fucking idiotic, holy shit.

>Your armies
The thing is, Spain didn't really have an army at that point. It had become an extension of the Napoleonic army because of Carlos IV and Fernando VII's utter disdain for humanity and complete retardness, and it didn't change up until well into the 1800s.
Fun fact: Carlos IV was a known cuckold, his bull being his valido -the "primer minister" so to speak-, we even have books about it. Hell, I think we even have a movie.

That's a thing many people in Latin America overlook: How the british, the french and even the americans were instrumental to the Latin American process of independence from an already crippled kingdom

Brazil did not even had something called "independence"

The "good" side of Portugal just moved there.

I'd put my money on Venezuela chimping out.
I'd feel sorry for Colombia having a fucking basket case so next to their retarded country

The US, Mexico, and Brazil stayed together. Central America and Gran Colombia fell apart.

Why?

Read about the Olive Branch Petition. Many Anglo-American revolutionaries thought the king would support their cries for home rule.

Why did Mexico and Brazil embrace their Mestizo heritage, while other countries tried to be Iberian as fuck?

Weaker institutions
Mexico and Brazil as well as most of Central America and Caribbean America did that. Only the retards down the Andes thought they were in Europe

he supposedly confessed that he had british support, but he said that under brutal torture

You know, I wonder what the /pol/ explanation for this is.

We had to have our worst king at that time. Fucking borbtard mang.

...

Latin-American basically traded Spanish Empire for British bankers. They would have been better off under Spain.

>They would have been better off under Spain
Capitalism was gaining momentum in the west as well as in the Americas, why would a country straddled between the french revolution and the catholic tradition and bankrupt as fuck would be a better alternative to the more powerful Britain?

There's a subchapter to 3rd Chapter
>Be Philippines.
>Support King of Spain throughout shitty Napoleonic occupation.
>Stay loyal to king even when Lat-Ams are revolting left & right
>"Hey, I suppose since Cuba and us are your last colonies, senor, could we be of Spanish Subjects and be provinces of Spain and not colonies?"
>LOL GET LOST INDIO
>Y-you'll be sorry!
>1890's independence wars in Cuba and the Philippines.

As a Latin American I'd personally take Anglos over Spanish.

Classic Eternal Anglo.

The Spanish Empire was one big trade block. Once they all became independent their inter-regional trade ended and they all became resource exporters to Britain mostly. Economic dependency happened immediately

Plus all the independence leaders were major landowners who had an invested interest in exportation. As a result they kept their people poor as fuck to keep crop prices low and let Europeans dominate industry and infrastructure. At least under backwards Spain they'd need to develop some internal industry and diversify their economy beyond just being giant farms and mines for the Euros.

>mfw everyone in Spain was crying and traumatized about losing Cuba
>there's still the saying "más se perdió en Cuba" (we lost more in Cuba) to diminish a loss.
>a lot of spaniards probably don't even know they had the Philipines

The independence conflict in Mexico worked differently and lasted more than in South America.

In South America it's all basically about white powerful landlords, european in all but origin (and buthurt because in Spain the "but origin thing was important"), conquering everything to create states better suited to their priorities and ideals. Not that different from the founding fathers of the USA in this aspect. Of course that kind of people would never create state identities based around mestizaje.

That goddamned island is located in a very strategic place in the Atlantic. That's why NO-bama is trying to get in good terms with its dictatorship.

Source: Wulf Siewert's wonderful and tiny book.

>a lot of spaniards probably don't even know they had the Philipines
They sort of did since the USA literally had it's debut as a world power by destroying the Spic fleet there.

Also It was economically more important than Cuba: it was near China for fuck's sakes.

Very true. It was also because there was a massive amount of iberian immigration in the island and a lot of business. The Philipines only had priests and some soldiers (apart from filipinos of course), it was simply too far specially after losing Mexico.

In the spanish imaginarium it wasn't more important than Cuba at all. And you have to understand that it's in the imaginarium that the war was important for Spain (in everything else the country was already shit since the early 19th). It's called the war of Cuba, the memory is about the spanish people sent to die in Cuba and the songs sing about Cuba. Philipines is rarely mentioned and, when it is, it's accompanied by Cuba.

At least it's still better than Puerto Rico.

>The Philipines only had priests and some soldiers (apart from filipinos of course), it was simply too far specially after losing Mexico.
Suez Canal nigga. Made the trip to the Pacific shorter from Europe. Also steamships.

Part and parcel why the Philippines revolted is that more and more Spaniard cunts are arriving in the Philippines, upsetting the local elites of both Philippine-born Spanish/Native/Mestizo/Chinese extractions.

Coupled Spain's continued denial of representation for the Philippines in the Spanish court, the Flips revolted. They were pissed off that people in the Philippines can't be Spanish subjects while Spaniard with not even a cent in their pockets could go to the Philippines and be privileged by legal protection.

>repeating the same mistake twice
spaniards are either unrecoverable libtards or stubborn privilegists

Point taken. The Flip Revolution in the Spanish side was fought by Flips as well. There were just as many loyalists to Spain for them to send troops from the mainland really.

>Part and parcel why the Philippines revolted is that more and more Spaniard cunts are arriving in the Philippines.

Never like in Cuba. Cuba was like Jamaica or the Dominican Republic for most of it's history and nowadays blacks are not even half the population thanks to the 19th century iberian immigration. Philipines is still mostly filipino, they don't even talk spanish as their native language.

>They were pissed off that people in the Philippines can't be Spanish subjects while Spaniard with not even a cent in their pockets could go to the Philippines and be privileged by legal protection.

The same happened in Cuba.

And Cuba was the center of the rich sugar industry, it has some of the first Spanish railways...

Including THE first, even before than the ones in the peninsula.

Largely because the pure-spics were evacuated opt to leave and go home. Very few Pure Spanish Flips remained, often rich ones who were well established in the Philippines. Their ilk are still around, often mistaken for foreigners until they speak local lingos without any foreign accent. A few of my friends and my own maternal grandfather included. Albeit a minority numbering around 1-5% of the Philippine Population.

Also Spanish lingo hung around as a Lingua Franca up until the 1960's. My mum's generation can still speak it since hers was the last generations taught Spicspeak. Spanish however was under the merciless assault of both Americans dehispanizing the Pinoys in all levels (failed to de-Catholicize us though) and Nationalists hell bent in removing the Spanish language.

However, since 0 women came to the Philippines up until the 1800's, there were shitloads of halfbreeds directly loyal to Spain, which formed the majority of the upper class alongside the Principalia, who are pure native Filipino nobility descended from the Chieftains and Rajas that allied with Spain during the Conquest. Spain just had to fuck up in 1811 by not granting the Philippines subjecthood, turning the loyalty of these people against them.

Chile still has a prosperous future (although not Argentina)

All my friends in Chile tell me its depressing down there.

>America's Dark Knight

>Wulf Siewert's wonderful and tiny book.

What book is that? I can find it on Amazon.

Depressing how? I don't perceive it that way at least.

>tfw he was the best leader Mexico ever had and was the good guy in the civil war

>implying it's not uruguay or chile

France accepted

but people here told the ones who had that idea to GTFO

In fact we almost changed our language to french at some point

>Argentina
No. Just Belgrano did. And the ones who didn't accept were the Argies. Carlota Joaquín de Borobon from Portugal was quite willing.

>Chile
>CHILE

You have yesterday's newspaper mate. The Argies are retaking the lead.

Wasn't he actually intercepted?

There's an episode where everyone in Spain becomes butthurt and chimps against the government because they believed that they were trying to smug the king out of the country. But I think it was a baseless accusation.

Anyway, Fernando spent most of the Napoleonic wars "imprisoned" (in a french chateau) by Napoleon.

>Being so stupid as to think a people from the other side of the world would accept you as their rightful monarch

The war wasn't about Independence at first. Mexico initially rebelled against Napoleonic Spain. Not their rightful king

You don't know shit about Mexican history if you think that inbred cunt who "ruled" half the country for half a year was the best leader Mexico ever had

What's happening in Chile and Argentina?

Read about Simon de Bolovar. Not only did he liberate practically all of Spanish-speaking South America, but he was also one of the inspirations for Hugo Chavez's failed brand of socialism (not Bolivar's fault though).

This is a good wiki that describes and links to his and other liberators' campaigns:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_American_wars_of_independence?wprov=sfla1

Mfw. I'm not even Hispanic and it makes me sad.

Brazil experienced centuries as an undeveloped colony. When the court fled there, began to enjoy a status that had never had before. In 1815, it became a constituent kingdom of Portugal. In 1821, after the Revolution of Porto, acquired self-government and right to representation in the newly created parliament - the Courts.

Serious disagreements occurred. The Brazilian representation was significantly smaller than the Portuguese. Just over half effectively participated in the draft of the constitution. During the course of the works, the Portuguese representation issued a decree transferring the Brazilian government's authority to military juntas, said "provisional", in the provinces. The crown prince, in the position of Regent of Brazil, refused to implement the decree (although some provinces have done so on their own).

In mid-1822, part of the Brazilian representation abandon the works, the province of Bahia rebels against the military junta and creates a "free state", and the Regent summons a Brazilian Constituent Assembly. In September, at the latest determinations of the Cortes, he declared the independence of Brazil. The provinces governed by military juntas remained under the command of Lisbon until 1823, when, whether by rebellion (Bahia) or by military intervention (Maranhão and Grão-Pará), fell to the Brazilian control.

Brazil did not turned into a monarchy. It remained. Having as Emperor the Crown Prince - and later, King - of Portugal.