Cultural Differences In Guatemala

Before there was Yugoslavia and the balkanization of nations, there was the Federal Republic of Central America. Five small countries after gaining their independence from their imperial master, decided that it was in their best interests to form a new government containing all five nations. These five countries which have so much in common always seem to find a way to turn to disorder and violence with one another. From an outsider’s perspective, it doesn’t make much sense why these countries can’t work together for the common good of everyone. The United States also broke away from a colonial master, they also took fractured states and were able to form a more perfect union. So why can’t/couldn’t Central America? The focus of this essay will

With the cultural and demographic similarities, Guatemala is far and away the leader in population and power. Guatemala contains more people than the rest of the nations combined. [Karnes 5] Guatemala also has more valuable resources to be the economic center of Central America. Karnes suggests that this fostered a fear among the rest of the Central American nations of Guatemalan preeminence. Karnes also brings into question the notion that Central America is a homogenous pot of people. Karnes gives an approximation of the make-up of these nations during the 1820’s. He suggests that Guatemala was 70% Indian with Mestizos and blacks making up the rest. Honduras was a mixture of white, Indiana, and to a lesser extent black. On the other end of the spectrum, Costa Rica, by their own estimation, was 80% white. [Karnes 6-7] Karnes also notes that Catholicism, which the vast majority of Central America fell under, had in no way a singular position of confederation or unification. Officials in the Catholic church had power within the governments and had their own agendas, whether they were against or for unification. So even though they were mostly Catholic, it does not suggest that the bishops in Guatemala were in lock-step with the Bishops in Honduras. [Karnes 8] With concern to the second misconception of why Central America would unify, Karnes explains that there really was no national identity of “Central America”.

It seems that power politics was the root of the problem. The nations were always scared of being dominated by other entities other than themselves. It had been a part of their history for 300 years. When Guatemala, with its large population and resources, became the new dominant power, it filled a power vacuum. It became the new power that all the other nations were fearful of. This has been shown in our discussion in class. Many nations, whether it be Mexico or Cuba, do not like the prospect of being strung around like a new colonial possession. There were concerns of Guatemala dictating what the country would do, so they tried to combat this with a federal style of government. This still, could not stop the advent of party politics from trying to break up the country as well. The Liberales and Serviles played very integral roles in dissolving the union. Going back and forth between partys in power, even leading to the Serviles trying to hinder the progress of stopping cholera was dooming the union. Could the union have worked? Maybe if they had gone with a unitary form of government instead of a federalist form it could have helped. Although the sentiment among the nations was still strong enough to have there be occasional wars and conflicts between each other under a federalist system. A federalist system which, in theory, would give them more freedom than a unitary government. Even to this day there are