The South American politics are a product of various factors, which are social, geographic, and economic in nature. As a result, the countries found in the South American continent have unique political structures, which ride on certain policies accumulated over time. Mostly this part of the globe has attracted various nationalities over the centuries that have been keen on making it in this resourceful part of the world. Perhaps of the greatest significance is the way investors from across the globe most especially the US have taped the resources to the detriment of this concern. Of concern is the United Fruit company which began in 1899 and which have had varied impacts on South American politics.
Background of the United Fruit Company
The United Fruit Company, which was an American corporation, began operation since 1899 in Costa Rica with the aim of trading in tropical fruits most specifically bananas. Owing to the fact that the central and South America plantations offered endless banana supplies, the company was sure of raking huge profits. In essence, the United Fruit Company flourished for an extended period between the early and mid-20 th century (Gonzalez, 2008). As a result, it had dominance when it came to banana trade on a global scale. In its wake, the company controlled vast areas such as Guatemala, Honduras, and Costa Rica (Bethell, 2008). In fact, this dominance seemed like a monopoly in as much as other companies such as Standard Fruit Company was in existence (Donovan, 2013). As a result, the nations that the United Fruits Company dominated came to be known as ‘Banana republics’: a title that is still in use up to date. Due to such kind of influence and infiltration, the United Fruits Company came to gain more influence. Its influence was not only financial but also political which has shaped the politics of this continent.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Effects of the United Fruit Company on Present-Day South American Politics
The United Fruit Company brought modernity to many South American nations, which still lagged behind at the time the company began its operations. The company’s activities, revolved around banana production, harvesting, processing, distribution, and marketing, brought about a new way of life. Individuals could now get employment as well as market to the little-known bananas at the time. From here, the fruit company employees joined workers’ unions to fight for their rights, which often led to strikes (Alcoff, 2007). The strikes came when the workers realized that the foreign company was exploiting them. These acts formed the basis of a democratic society, which aims at looking for equal treatments. The Fruit Company is keen on making it big in this continent, in turn, resorted to using of violence to quell the striking workers. The use of such force is what Chapman (2007b) refers to dictatorial foreigners who run the continents with waves of bullets.
The fruit company played a significant role in the development and decline of the South American continent. The company’s policies which were in line with the American policies infiltrated into the South American politics progressively. Batres (nd), notes that this company was indeed more powerful than most of the nation states which make up this continent. In fact, the United Fruit Company was considered a law in itself and treated the nations as part of its business operations. The nation states thus were rendered helpless, and they had to do as ordered by the company or risk financial and political sanctions (Aliano, 2006). In essence, the philosophy of neocolonialism was at work during this era though it was not conducted overtly. The sad part of this whole affair is how the banana trade was so extensive that the control went to other spheres of life.
The United Fruit Company made use of various strategies to remain afloat most of which were detrimental to the political well-being of the South Americans. One of the strategies used included the making of corrupt deals with the individuals at the helm of power who got promises of getting political benefits (Plantamura, 2013). In exchange, the people in the powerful positions were expected to help the United Fruit Company look good in the eyes of the public. Piper, 2017 that one of the public relations stunts was Senorita Chiquita Banana, which was a cartoon character representing the Latin American Nations (Chapman, 2007a). The use of this character was hypocritical as it represented how foreign dictators combined paternalism and violence to control the workers. More so the powerful, individuals were expected to help the company in its marketing campaigns. At the end of it, this company ended up controlling about 90 percent of the banana plantations and the entire production process. The capital gained from such ventures was repatriated back to the US leaving these countries with nothing to show for their effort.
The South American nations top the charts when it comes to efforts for regime changes owing to bad and corrupt leadership. However, this is not a new concept as it can be traced to the era when the United Fruits Company thrived. In this era, political tensions were high as leaders tried to outdo each other to gain from the activities of this company (UNESCO, 2012). In fact, while most nations undergo regime changes due to conflicts arising from oil, these nations had bananas to be blamed for constant civil wars and internal conflicts. The company came to spotlight for its role in hiring assassins who attacked anyone who defied its effort of achieving political and financial milestones. Schlesinger (2011), agrees to the fact the reason for this is the fact that bananas become a basis for reckless and rapid globalization. In essence, no measures had been put in place on how to manage the fortunes that came with investing in banana products. Such failures then contributed to heightened political activities, which led to numerous uprising with negative consequences.
The production of bananas in a large scale and for economic purposes became problematic at the onset of the United Fruit Company. The populations consequently came to depend on the bananas for profits, livelihoods as well as increased political power by the governments of the day. In a desire to attract the political goodwill, the company also built telegraph lines, railway, hospitals, housing units, and ports in the banana producing areas (Shragai, 2011). In line with this, whoever controlled more banana production units was considered influential as compared to others. The result of investing on only one product for economic acceleration instead resulted in negative effects. Some of these negative effects included poverty, economic stagnation as well as increased resentment in the banana production regions. The civilians came to blame their political leaders for their conditions. More so the over-reliance on banana production meant that the economies were locked out of meaningful competition which is vital for accelerated growth. According to Holme (2013), such an overreliance on a single company may limit innovation due to lack of free-market policies. Such a scenario then put these nations in a disadvantaged position, as it had no means of competing with other nations in equal terms (Bucheli, 2006). As a result, the nations had to seek help from developed nations thus creating a perpetual trend of dependence, which has continued to haunt the South American nations to date.
Extensive banana production and distribution created a new wave of capitalist ideologies creating a gap between the rich few and the poor. With temptations to get fast profits and easy jobs, the Latin American nations took the wrong path, which has haunted this continent for a long time (Centeno and Cohen, 2010). The desire to make these profits forced the governments and political class to ignore the real needs of the society. Such crucial needs included health, education, and social development, which continued to deteriorate. The fact that United Fruit made so much negative impact on the lives of the South Americans is not debatable. The company defied governments’ controls and thus operated within minimal regulations and control. In doing this, the company did not care about the welfare of its workers or the environment. More so the company contributed to increased economic busts and booms, which affected the poor in a significant manner. Sadly, according to Nissanke and Thorbecke (2010), the policymakers who are largely drawn from the political class became helpless, as they had no idea of how to fix this economic meltdown.
The political sphere of the South America countries owes their existence partly to the establishment of the United Fruit Company. Prior to the establishment of this company, most of the civilians lived in rural setup working in agricultural and cottage industries. Once this company was established, a new way of life, which was largely urban, came to be the preferred lifestyle for many workers (Bucheli, 2005). This newfound kind of lifestyle transformed how people related width one another in individual and national levels. The company also created job opportunities, which were highly individualistic thus abolishing the communal spirit that had for a long time bonded the civilians. The individualism fueled civil strife and harmony as each individual tried to make it into the new lifestyle. Perhaps one of the most hit countries at the time was Guatemala. According to Dev (nd), the United Fruit Company chose Guatemala as one of the countries where it began its operations due to its volatile political climate. During this time, Guatemala was considered as the most corrupt weakest and most pliable nation in Central America. Riding on the wave of political weakness and instability, the company thrived both politically and economically. However, later on, Guatemalans realized their imminent doom and thus organized revolution activities, which were led by Che Guevara, which led to the death of over 200,000 civilians (Gordon, nd). Elsewhere in Cuba, Fidel Castro was outraged against the exploitation of the Cubans by the foreign policies, which the company rode on. More so, there was an increase in government crackdowns, which targeted corrupt officials, involved in political and economic frauds.
The United Fruits Company apart from seeking financial mileage was an instrument used by foreigners to spread imperialism. According to Bucheli (2006), the United Fruits collaborated with the dictators of the time to oppose organized unionism, which was a threat to their objectives. As a result, the company enjoyed numerous benefits as the authoritarian government was opposed to their own. In return, the dictators got immunity as well as economic stability, which in turn helped bad governance to thrive. The civilians and the workers were on the losing end as the governments did everything necessary to keep the company afloat (Russell, 2015). In the years, the company was in operation in Latin America the countries witnessed the immense power that this company yielded. With the support of the parent country, the company dominated governments, exploited its consumers, oppressed the workers, choked cooperatives, and oppressed competitors (Drale, 2010). This excessive use of power by an industrialized country's corporation in a weak economic nation translated to economic imperialism. The nations thus were doomed to suffer at the hands of this imperialism going by the fact that their leaders were part of this political ideology.
References
Alcoff, L, M. (2007). Mignolo’s Epistemology of Coloniality . Syracuse: Michigan State University Press.
Aliano, D. (2006). Curing the Ills of Central America: The United Fruit Company’s Medical Department and Corporate Americaʼs Mission to Civilize (1900-1940). E.I.A.L. 17(2):35-59.
America: Findings from Case Studies. World Development, 38(6), 797–802.
Batres, A. (nd). The Experience of the Guatemalan United Fruit Company Workers, 1944-1954: Why Did They Fail? Teresa Lozano Long Institute of Latin American Studies. Retrieved on 19 March 2018 from http://lanic.utexas.edu/project/etext/llilas/tpla/9501.pdf.
Bethell, L. (2008). The Cambridge History of Latin America . New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bucheli, M. (2005). Bananas and Business: The United Fruit Company in Colombia, 1899-2000. New York: New York University Press.
Bucheli, M. (2006). Confronting the Octopus: United Fruit, Standard Oil, and the Colombian State in the Twentieth-Century . International Economic History Conference Helsinki, 2006.
Bucheli, M. (2006). Good dictator, bad dictator: United Fruit Company and Economic Nationalism in Central America in the Twentieth Century. University of Illinois. Retrieved on 19 March 2018 from https://business.illinois.edu/working_papers/papers/06-0115.pdf.
Centeno, M. A. & Cohen, J. N . (2010) Global Capitalism. Polity Press.
Chapman, P. (2007b). Rotten Fruit. Financial Times . Retrieved on 19 March 2018 from, https://www.ft.com/content/778739c4-f869-11db-a940-000b5df10621.
Chapman. P. (2007a). Bananas: How the United Fruit Company Shaped the World . New York: Canongate.
Dev, S. (nd). The United Fruit Company: Hindering the Division of Labor. Journal of the Core Curriculum , 15, 39-47.
Donovan, M. (2013). Banana Culture: The Cultivation of Border Literature in Central America (Honors Thesis). University of Vermont, Burlington, USA.
Drale, C.S. (2010). The United Fruit Company and Early Radio Development. Journal of Radio and Audio Media, 17(2), 195-210.
Gonzalez, A. (2008). Costa Rican Identity and the Stories of Carmen Lyra. The Latin Americanist, 53(4), 73-80.
Gordon, D.L. (nd). Guatemala 1954. The Cold War Museum . Retrieved on 19 March 2018 from http://www.coldwar.org/articles/50s/guatemala.asp.
Holme, J. (2013). Creating Wealth Out of the World’s Waste Spots: The United Fruit Company and the Story of Frontiers, Environment, and American Legacy, 1899-1930 . Montreal: McGill University.
Jimenez, D. (2009). Carmen Lyra: A Political Existence. Sarah Lawrence College, 2009, 6-47.
Nissanke, M. & Thorbecke, E. (2010). Globalization, Poverty, and Inequality in Latin
Piper, A. (2017). The Creation of a Banana Empire: An Investigation into Chiquita Brand. Harvard Political Review .
Plantamura, P. M. (2013). Impacts of U.S. Foreign Policy and Intervention on Guatemala: Mid-20th Century (Graduate Thesis). University of South Florida Graduate School, Florida, US.
Rankin, M. A. (2012). The History of Costa Rica. ABC-CLIO , 90-114.
Russell, S. (2015). A Country for a Company – The 1954 US-Backed Guatemalan Coup To Support United Fruit Company. War History Online Retrieved on 19 March 2018 from https://www.warhistoryonline.com/war-articles/country-company-1954-guatemalan-coup-support-united-fruit.html
Schlesinger, S. (2011). Ghosts of Guatemala’s Past. The New York Times . Retrieved on 19 March 2018 from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/04/opinion/04schlesinger.html.
Shragai, A. (2011). Do Bananas Have a Culture? United Fruit Company Colonies in Central America 1900-1960. Iberoamericana, 42 (2011): 65-82.
UNESCO. (2012). United Fruit Company Infrastructure . Retrieved on 19 March 2018 from http://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/5770/.
