has Simon Bolivar been the problem of the last 500 years of bloodshed

kerry says on Feb 15, 2005, 09:37:

also five hundred years of blood is really what bolivar left behind him and that is so sad

0 funny, 0 helpful.

ColombianoX says on Feb 15, 2005, 10:26:

Did Simon Bolivar create the FARC? Did Simon Bolivar create the drug cartels? Did Simon Bolivar create the Paramilitaries? The answer is NOOOO!! Don't come here and blame the Liberator for the actions of others!

BTW, that house in Santa Marta was not Bolivar's. It was the house of a spanish friend of Bolivar where he stayed at on his way to Europe, but unfortunately, while staying there he succumbed to tubercolosis.


ColombianoX

'Defensor de la Colombianidad'

ColombianoX 'Defensor de la Colombianidad'

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Miguel says on Feb 15, 2005, 10:40:

Mire Kerry Estoy cansado con su bullshit...y sus palabras tonterias. Basta!
CO X, otra vez, tiene razon.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

michaelz says on Feb 15, 2005, 10:44:

bolivar The problems experienced by Colombia (and by all of the other Spanish colonies) after independence were caused more by the nature of the Spanish colonial system than by the timing of the breakup. (If timing were the thing, why isn’t the USA as unstable as Colombia - it was colonized later, but was independent sooner.)

In the Spanish colonial system, vast tracts (called economiendas or something close) were sold or given to a minority of well-connected people, who monopolized political and economic powere. These huge land holdings depended largely on slave labor and generated fixed and deep social divisions. Class and racial antagonisms became entrenched, and a stable middle class never developed.

In former English colonies such as Australia, a more democratic, egalitarian society developed. Actually, if Spain kept her colonies longer, social disparities would be greater today, not smaller. Likewise, the gap between Colombia and the USA might be larger, not smaller.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

kernow62 says on Feb 15, 2005, 11:13:

In many of the former British colonies the land was given basically to anyone who would work it, I think this is the biggest difference and a significant reason why prosperity is generally more evenly divided. The US and Australia needed immigrants and would often pay passage and offer incentives to encourage immigrants to come to their respective countries. Of course now things are different and we don't really need to import brains and labour any longer.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Miamigo says on Feb 15, 2005, 11:35:

If you want my opinion That cocksucker Santander and that Venezuelan separatist bastard Paez were much more responsible than the great Liberator. If it wasn't for them, Colombia might have been not only made up of Colombia, Panama, Venezuela, Ecuador, Peru, and Bolivia, but probably the Southern Cone countries, too, because he was in contact with Jose San Martin, the Liberator down there. That would have been one hell of a country, with Bogotá as the capital.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Hunter says on Feb 15, 2005, 11:45:

Kerry It takes time.

Cromwell over threw the King, but he did not create a democracy, or a republic as it was known at the time, he created a dictatorship with him at the head of it, I can't remember what he called himself, something like The Lord Protector.

It took a few more centuries for democracy to arrive in Britain.

Hunter

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Mi_lukea says on Feb 15, 2005, 13:00:

Australia's Independence - the reality From an Australian's perspective I can tell you my home was colonised by both prisoners and those hired to stand over them, feed them and rule over them, creating the infrastructure of what was essentially the world's largest prison.

However, on release from prison - if you survived it! - you were given two pieces of paper - one was a deed to land, the other a map to where you will find it. So on release from Prison, you were set free but on what terms. Your family remained behind in England, some prisoners were children when they were sent here! Others mothers and fathers! There was never a return ticket from Australia.

Alone, in a foreign man's land. In a harsh but beautiful country. They became farmers and industrialised my history. Creating this rich nation with low unemployment levels, strong educational facilities; a society built around law and order - or you shall receive the consequences!!!

However, whilst white Australians may have benefited from the 'peaceful' idependence from the "motherland", England - I hate that saying, by the way (btw). Our indigenous population was slaughtered and eradicated like plagues from day one. So our relations with England where not so "peaceful" for our original dwellers, the Aborigines. History should not forget this.

Colonisers were cruel - whether they were British, Spanish, Portugese, Dutch or Roman to the people who they had the least right to be EVER cruel too! The indigenous people of the lands they stole.

(On a side note: in our history Australia has had only one rebellion, the Eureka Rebellion150 years ago, its lasted only a few hours at the goldfields and under 200 people were killed. end of lesson)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

kerry says on Feb 15, 2005, 13:52:

think again What MR Bolivar left behind him was a breeding ground for anarchy. If you asked MR Bolivar what his plan was after he liberatted Colombia, he would probably looked baffled. Or if he had one it would be very vague. Forward planning is something he was not very good at. Karl Marx stated that when you have a revolution all it leads to is another revolution and that is why he was against the idea of revolutions. No Bolivar did not create the farc but he left behind him complete instability. Taht is iresponsible and in the long run achieves nothing

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Feb 15, 2005, 14:49:

Bolivar...just a man, neither perfect nor totally flawed The problem is that, at the time of Bolivar's lifetime, objective social, economic, geographic and political conditions were such that there was almost no way to keep the newly free republics together for long, other than by force of arms. In fact, it was mainly fear of Spain that kept the nations together for a few years, in practice.

His ideals were beyond practicality at that moment, and he himself, unfortunately, slowly realized this in the last years of his life.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Gator says on Feb 15, 2005, 20:35:

I Don't Think You Were Ever There He died at La Quinta de San Pedro Alejandrino outside of Santa Marta, and the home where he died was owned by a friend Don Joaquin de Mier. He died of tuberculosis and he died poor and bitterly hated by many Colombians, especially in Bogotá. In fact he arrived at Santa Marta on December 1 and went to to La Quinta de San Pedro Alejandrino on December 6, 1830 and died on December 17.

He was buried in the Cathedral of Santa Marta and, after an uproar, his remains were transferred to the Cathedral of Caracas in 1842.
The is a folk tale in Santa Marta that says Bolivar's heart was removed by the people of Santa Marta and many say that his body may be in Caracas but his heart is in SanTa Marta.

I suggest you read "El General en Su Laberinto (The General in his Labyrinth)", by Gabriel García Márquez, Magdalena River. BTW I don't think you ever visited La Quinta de San Pedro Alejandrino or you would not have made those mistakes. Sniff! Sniff! I smell a troll.

"Credidi pretio parvo emere et magno vendere tibi in animo fuisse!" .

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Mr. Hollywood says on Feb 16, 2005, 07:47:

Whatever If Bolivar is the one responsible for the violence and poverty in Colombia, how does one explain the violence and poverty in Guatemala, Mexico, Brazil, El Salvador, Nicaragua, and a dozen other places with similar history (minus Bolivar) and problems.

Blaming long ago historical figures for contemporary problems is simply lame. It would be like blaming slave-owning George Washington and Thomas Jefferson for the contemporary problems of American Blacks.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

kerry says on Feb 16, 2005, 08:48:

to mr hollywood Blaming slave owners for the problems that black people have today is a very valid argument. There culture was destroyed, the family was destroyed by slave owners. I have been to Africa and seen how strong the family and community are. Guess what Africa is a peaceful place full of helpful people

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Mr. Hollywood says on Feb 16, 2005, 08:56:

Okay, you're a troll A couple words for you: Sierra Leonne, Burundi, Somalia, and, lest you forget, Rwanda

0 funny, 0 helpful.

kerry says on Feb 16, 2005, 09:05:

yes there are wars all over Africa there are 50 countries in Africa and you have named a few. You are like someone that has watched a documentary on Colombia and then tells people that Colombia is a terrible violent place. You have not been to Africa and it shows that you dont know much about it

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Mr. Hollywood says on Feb 16, 2005, 09:15:

Bozo filter time I didn't say Africa is terrible or violent or anything like that. You, however, made an extremely naive generalization about Africa that I contradicted with concrete examples.

Feel free to have the last word about where you think I haven't been or don't know because I'm putting you on the list of people whose posts I simply don't read.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

michaelz says on Feb 16, 2005, 09:29:

africa Sure - Africa it just GREAT

Lets add a few more to Mr. Hollywood's list:

Congo: years of civil war
Uganda: Does the name Idi Amin ring a bell
Zimbabwe: Mugabe turns breadbasket into basket case
Liberia: Samuel Doe, Charles Taylor - need I say more
Sudan: genocide in progress
Somalia: Does "black-hawk down" ring a bell?

According to Ibrahim Elbadowi and Nicholas Sambis in the paper Why are There so many Civil Wars in Africa - "Over the last 40 years, nearly 20 African countries (or about 40% of the Africa south of the Sahara) have experienced at least one period of civil war.

Get real.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

lpdiver says on Feb 16, 2005, 09:51:

Kerry Black people started and perpetuated the slave industry long before the white man came on the scene. It was still wrong. What was the point you are trying to make.

What about the war and poverty in the United States?

T

"cook some rice!"

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Miamigo says on Feb 16, 2005, 13:42:

Tinto Lentils, but also a bowl of guayabas and fragrant farting.

A great scene in the book is when the barge he's riding on down the Magdalena is almost swamped by a giant steamship going the other way. The name of the steamship is El Libertador.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

kerry says on Feb 17, 2005, 08:17:

to michaelz What you have said about AFrica is actually nothing compared to Colombia. If 40% of African countries have ahd civil wars in the last 20 years then that leaves 60% war free which is a much greater achievement than say Colombia. People on this site are showing the same limited view as people all over the world that think they know what Colombia is like.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Gator says on Feb 17, 2005, 08:33:

Sr. Kerry Amigos,

No le pongas attención, porque él es un cero l la izquierda. Siempre que viene aquí, tenemos dificultades. Va de mal en peor. No le hagas caso e ese tonto.

"Credidi pretio parvo emere et magno vendere tibi in animo fuisse!" .

0 funny, 0 helpful.

maskow says on Mar 31, 2005, 16:56:

The mysterious convdrsation with San Martín... Being from Argentina, I'm especially interested in what the hell happened during their meeting in Ecuador! Very strange, eh? The army of the north and the army of the south meet...and San Martín declares his loyalty to Bolívar, and the loyalty of his troops to Bolívar, resigns and moves to Europa to die 30 years later in poverty.

WTF?!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

kerry says on Apr 1, 2005, 12:48:

to maskow good Question, Also another good question is why did most Colombians hate Bolivar at the end of his life, but love him now.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

ARMacleod says on Apr 2, 2005, 00:12:

Like you kerry
You will also be loved at the end of your life, I hope to love you quite soon.

anguis in herba

JamesVH

The brain is like a parachute, it only functions correctly when it is open. Pax vobiscum.

0 funny, 0 helpful.