The Americas in the Age of Revolution 1750-1850

Table of Contents

Introduction
Approach to American revolutions adopted by Langley
Three revolutions: commonalities and differences
Advantages of Langleys approach and findings
Conclusion
Works Cited

Introduction

The present-day literature has much research available on all issues connected with the emergence of the USA, the development of the country, the fight for independence in the period of colonization, etc. In general, every country has a history of which it is proud and which has to be known by its citizens and intelligent people interested in global affairs. Very much has also been talked about the issue of Americanness, which denotes not only the person living in the United States of America but any person who is a resident of the western hemisphere. There are countries of Latin America and Canada that are also referred to as American, which means that they are situated on one of the American continents. However, the substantial differences that these countries possess in their cultural identity, political patterns, and attitudes have also been widely recognized as evident and unchangeable. The attempt of unifying them under a common basis was undertaken by Langley in his work The Americas in the Age of Revolution 1750-1850 he managed to find the foundation that finally allowed creating a systemic model for analysis of America in a much more generalized sense, meaning the whole hemisphere that is occupied by diverse cultures and nations.

Approach to American revolutions adopted by Langley

The author took a fundamentally different approach to the evaluation of American history and culture by analyzing a number of revolutions that occurred in their territories in different periods of time. The major focus was drawn on the American Revolution of 1750, the Saint Domingo Revolution in Haiti, and the Iberoamerican independence movement in South America (Langley). Unlike the majority of writers who worked with the concept of American revolutions and analyzed the realm of their causes, their implications, and the physical outcomes to which they led, Langley worked out an innovative form of study that could be efficiently applied to all revolutions described (Langley). The author perceives revolutions as a chaotic series of events that may be partly planned and partly unpredicted, deriving from the cultural peculiarities of the nation initiating the change and causing the establishment of a substantially new political form that corresponds to the needs of revolutionary activists. He emphasizes the exceptional role of particularisms in the occurrence and outcomes of revolutions, i.e. the place, time, and accompanying conditions of revolutions (Langley).

The first part of the book represents an in-depth social, cultural, political, and historical analysis of three countries in which the named revolutions occurred throughout the 18th and 19th centuries. The author shows how the revolutionary movement begins, what aims to govern the rebelling nations and what complexity and chaos a revolution represents. He also deals with the issues of unexpected and unplanned violence as an unavoidable outcome of the contradictions existing within the revolutionary groups. At the same time, the author analyzes all revolution-related issues in a very logical and coherent manner, drawing a complete, accurate, and intelligible picture of the western hemisphere in the described period of history.

The second part contains a theoretical analysis pertaining to the patterns of governing that were chosen by the North and South American leaders to build new states out of the chaos of revolution and violence. He ponders over the differences that were evident in the political and cultural identity and that resulted in the American success and the Latin failure to achieve progress. Langleys findings are really interesting and credible from the point of view of understanding the concealed mechanisms in both Americas that form citizenship, cultural identity, and political obedience.

Three revolutions: commonalities and differences

Langley provides strong evidence for the choice of described and analyzed revolutions on the territory of both American continents. Speaking about the USA and its war for independence that the newly settled European immigrants won, Langley notes that in fact, the aspired freedom was a real burden for Americans, and at first it was likely to fail because of the wish to return to old ways of living, e.g. monarchism, colonialism, etc. The evidence Langley provides is truly convincing:

The republic they crafted may have effectively excluded all save white males from the realistic prospect of full enjoyment of the benefits of independence&They excluded women and minorities from any meaningful participation in political life, and for a generation, some resisted granting the suffrage to anyone but property holders (Langley 4).

The choice of Haiti is also grounded because the revolution on that territory of a former Saint Domingo territory marked the appearance of the second free country on both continents, after the establishment of US democracy and independence:

Indeed, the Haitian Revolution and its meaning are essential for understanding the revolutionary age in the Americas. Haiti was at once an affirmation of the universality of such revolutionary credos of liberty and equality and a denial of that contemporary ideology, which subsumed slavery in the revolutionary cause (Langley 5).

Finally, it is important to understand the reasons for choosing the Iberoamerican revolution as the final component of Langleys analysis. The author is very particular about the causes of revolution, but the chaotic, unexpected and uncontrollable evil that revealed itself in the process shows its negative effect on the long-term political, cultural and social situation in the country:

For at least a generation after the wars of independence, elites recalled wartime savagery and unpredictable behavior they identified with those from below, reconfirming&preservation of social control through the restoration of older social relationships and the cloning of European or North American models onto the political corpus. This was the revolution denied (Langley 6).

Advantages of Langleys approach and findings

The main thoughts of the author about the chaotic structure of revolutions and comparative analysis of revolutionary outcomes, with the whole realm of successes and failures aimed at proving that the comprehensive, systematic approach may help evaluate the outcomes of American revolutions, the events that occurred in their process and the measure to which the governments and the nations were able to preserve their acquisitions. Revolutions, according to Langleys opinion, are too complex and multi-level, including a great number of participants whose activities were unpredictable because of the human factor that constituted the major reason for chaos; for this reason, it is always hard to understand how the outcomes were achieved, through which forces the change was enacted and how it was further handled.

Reflecting on the contents from an individual standpoint, it is possible to assume that surely Langley has taken an original perspective that opened up some new facts about the revolutionary past of the western hemisphere. Historians have traditionally considered revolutions from the socio-cultural perspective, viewing them as resistance to political practices, cultural limitations, and social injustice, etc. There have always been multiple reasons for revolutions because they truly expressed the end to the nations limits of patience. However, cross-cultural communication materials, historical and socio-cultural resources always draw a particular emphasis on the substantial differences that govern and used to govern lives, decision-making and activities in both Americas. Northern cultures are known for their rationality and pragmatism, logic and reasonability; Latin countries are known for their reliance on emotion, intuition, and sensitivity. Drawing a conclusion from this viewpoint, it is possible to understand that revolutions on both continents should also have been substantially different. However, Langley manages to show that in spite of the core differences of problems that raised people and initiated the revolution and methods through which the revolutionary aims were achieved.

Personal reflection: originality of approach and contribution made by Langleys findings.

The very notion of revolution remained unchangeable in all cases: it was an unpredictable force, the uncontrolled violence and the unrestricted freedom for those who overthrew the conventional authorities and created their own states. The main complicity of any revolution is not to win, but to preserve the victory, which was not equally successfully done in all described cases. Due to the violence and unpredictability of revolutions, the outcomes were sometimes not appreciated, and peoples dedication to the revolutionary goals faded away, finding no support from those who used to be the leaders of that movement. Every country had its own way of preserving success: the USA managed to do that through national identity and governmental logic united with the sense of exceptionalism granted to all mainstream Americans by means of excluding minorities from the US political, cultural, and social profile. Americans felt that they were loved by the state, so they gave their love back. In the case of Latin Americans, they felt that they were hated by the state, so they returned the same feelings to the government that remained remote and threatening from them (Langley).

Conclusion

Making the general conclusion from everything that has been said about Langleys historical book exploring major revolutions of the western hemisphere, it is possible to say that the authors findings truly make a significant contribution to the overall understanding of the described historical events. However, some elements are missing in the system created by Langley, and the individual who is not highly knowledgeable about the American revolutionary past will hardly be able to appreciate the findings of the author. Langley presents a limited view on the practical side of the issue, while theoretical analysis is very rich and meaningful. Hence, the book will be most useful for those who already obtained a clear understanding of the historical events from other literary sources and read this work only for enriching their knowledge, but not starting to obtain it.