The Monroe Doctrine and its Lasting Signifigance

In February of 2014, Russia refused to recognize a new interim government created in the aftermath of the Ukrainian revolution. This action and others followed by Russia, Ukraine, the United States, and other countries eventually culminated into Russia's annexing of the Crimean Peninsula, seizing control of it. This article, written by the Wall Street Journal, references Russian president Vladimir Putin's remarks in his yearly state of the union address. In particular, the article highlights his accusation that the United States and European Union used the Crimean crisis as an excuse to encourage the placement of sanctions upon Russia, as part of a conspiracy to weaken the country. These sanctions, or economic restrictions, were created by the United Nations as punishment for countries that broke international laws.

If this issue occurred in 1823, the year the Monroe Doctrine was written, the response by the United States would be drastically different. According to the Doctrine, the United States will not become involved in any conflicts that were not directly affecting the country itself. Along with this principle of non-intervention, it said that the United States would regard any attempt by a European country to colonize North or South America as a direct threat. If these principles were followed in the case of the Crimean crisis, the United States would not be involved at all. The US's relations with Russia are not the best, but they are not considered a direct threat to the country, so the United States should not be involved. Also, Crimea, Russia, and the Ukraine are all in Western Asia, so the non-colonization rule does not apply. This shows that while the Monroe Doctrine was very effective and useful back in 1823, the circumstances have changed over the years and now intervention may be required across the globe in foreign controversies.

Marson, James, and Andy Ostroukh. The Wall Street Journal. Dow Jones & Company, 04 Dec. 2014. Web. 05 Dec. 2014.

Race and Identity in Latin American Revolutions and Today

Race and identity are clearly very prevalent aspects in society today. They aid in determining who we are and how others view us, be it positively or negatively. This role in society that race and identity both play is also by no means a recent creation. For as far back history goes, these two factors have been incredibly influential in many historical events. An example of this would be the early 19th century revolutions in Latin America.

In revolutions such as Haiti's and Gran Columbia's, race and identity had very large roles and were instrumental for the success of the revolution. However, in Brazil's revolution, these were not very important aspects, and as a result the revolution remained mostly peaceful. When Napoleon invaded Portugal in 1807, the Portuguese King John VI fled to his colony Brazil. In 1820, the Portuguese army headed a revolution to create a constitutional government, and agreed that John VI would be the constitutional monarch if and only if he returned to Portugal. He returned the next year, and left his son Pedro behind to rule Brazil. 

The push for Brazil's independence was inspired by the other revolutions in other Latin American countries that surrounded Brazil. Parliamentary acts by Portugal also offended many Brazilian citizens, which contributed to their revolution for independence. Instead of fighting the rebels, Pedro declared Brazil's independence from Portugal. This was done because it prevented violence while still keeping power in the Portuguese royal family, because Pedro, John VI's son, was still entitled to the Brazilian throne. This peaceful revolution clearly has few ties to race and identity, for two main reasons. The first is because the final portion of the revolution, the one that actually secured Brazil's independence, was largely orchestrated by the Portuguese parliament and the royal family, not the racially diverse citizens of Brazil. Secondly, the revolution was largely nonviolent. This is significant because violent revolutions usually are stimulated by a conflict of either race or identity. These two factors made race and identity almost non-issues in Brazil's revolution for independence. As a result, the social structure remained largely unchanged, and Brazil took longer than Latin American countries to make reforms such as abolishing slavery because of this.

Once again, race today still has incredible influence on national identity and politics. One such issue that is going on today is the conflict in Ferguson, Missouri. This conflict surrounds the death of Micheal Brown, an unarmed black teenager, was killed by Darren Wilson, a white police officer. Many deemed the death unnecessary and labeled it as a murder, giving it massive popularity and an incredible media following. The recent verdict that the police officer is innocent of the charges presented to him caused an even bigger uproar, causing many protests and riots. What is remarkable is that other similar events have taken place in the short past, and this is a clear indicator that race and identity still have very large effects on society and politics today. The massive uproar after this event and others like it shows how important race is for our country.

Weaver, Matthew. "Ferguson Protests: Calmer Scenes after Night of Violence – as It Happened." The Guardian. N.p., 25 Nov. 2014. Web. 3 Dec. 2014.