thnically diverse populations of Latin America felt the emergence of a group consciousness. However, because this nationalism was a reactionary force to colonial oppression, after independence was achieved on both continents, it lacked the cohesiveness to bind the masses to the nations welfare.Another key political development which is mirrored on both continents was the emergence of a professional military as an important political device. In both Latin America and Africa, the military has been a source of instability and confusion. As Boahen states, the military has a record of unnecessary and unjustifiable intervention in the political process in Africa. The same was the case in Latin America, where military intervention in government has had a poor economic and political performance. Economically, there is almost a startling resemblance between the development of Africa and Latin America. On both continents, the emergence of a monocrop, export-oriented economy created states that immediately became dependent on other states or the international market for other goods. This dependency was facilitated by the colonialists, and then by the elites who gained power after independence. Focused on immediate growth rather than development, these export economies became tied to the international market, and therefore never created much of a diversified infrastructure to provide stability. Both continents, reeking of a wealth of resources, had their economic potential squandered by the colonists.When one examines these similarities between the impacts on both Latin America and Africa, immediately a common trend begins to arise. The political and economic structure in these independent continents almost mirrors that of the imperialists. The bureaucracies were put forth by wealthy elites who had profited during the colonial era, and in order to protect their interests after independence employed the same tactics as the imperialists. B...
