Ronald N. Harpelle - A Sample Research Paper

From: Subject: Ronald N. Harpelle - A Sample Research Paper Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 21:29:16 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Location: http://bolt.lakeheadu.ca/~sojourners/samples/sample3.html X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 Ronald N. Harpelle - A Sample Research Paper

A Sample = Research=20 Paper

Nicaragua's Dependent=20 Agricultural Development

by
A = Sample=20 Author

The = Sandinista=20 victory in Nicaragua, although not solely a result of rural support, = owes much=20 of its past and present success to the participation of the agrarian = sector. The=20 history of the Frente Sandinista de Liberaci=F3n Nacional (FSLN) is not = only that=20 of an armed struggle against the Somoza dictatorship, but also of = struggles by=20 the poor against the deprivation caused by the integration of the = agricultural=20 economy into the capitalist world economic system without due regard for = the=20 needs of the rural populace. It was rural dwellers who supported the = Sandinistas=20 during the earlier stages of the insurrection and it was they who stood = to=20 benefit the most from the destruction of the agrarian structure that = stood as an=20 obstacle to their emancipation. By the time that the FSLN came to power = in 1979,=20 tens of thousands of rural Nicaraguans had died in the violent struggle = to=20 commercialize the agricultural sector, countless numbers of their = immediate=20 families had needlessly succumbed to the ravages of malnutrition or = diseases=20 associated with poverty and an unquantifiable amount of damage had been = done to=20 the traditional fabric of their existence. A re-examination of the = mechanisms of=20 agrarian change in Nicaragua is therefore necessary to appreciate the=20 contribution of, and long term implications of, peasant participation in = the=20 revolution.

The long = process of=20 agricultural change in Nicaragua is either viewed as "development," by=20 apologists for the capitalist economic system, or by critics as the = exploitation=20 of one social sector by another. Seldom in the literature on Nicaraguan = history=20 is the disarticulation of the peasant mode of production treated as a = disastrous=20 event in the lives of those who were forced off family or communal = lands, and=20 seldom are the social implications of forced migration examined in = relation to=20 the diaspora. Consequently, two broad groups of research exist on the = transition=20 of Nicaraguan agrarian society. They are divided ideologically and = empirically=20 by the rapid collapse of the Somoza dynasty in 1979. Consequently, the=20 historiography of rural Nicaragua falls into one of two streams that = fail to=20 offer an adequate discussion of the social dynamic caused by the = impoverishment=20 of the rural masses. Much of contemporary Nicaraguan history is divided = into pre=20 and post revolutionary periods and the literature available concerning = the=20 position of the peasantry in the revolutionary process falls into the = same=20 pattern.

Within = the=20 pre-revolutionary period, the first subdivision is characterized by the=20 superficial examination of agricultural development using indicators = such as the=20 increase of exports or the importation of farm equipment and techniques = from=20 advanced industrial societies.<= SUP>(1)=20 The use of statistics such as per capita income, or exports and imports, = with no=20 regard for their relationship to the marginalized rural majority, proves = to be=20 the most glaring deficiency of such reductionism. The information = contained in=20 such statistics is useful but can be misleading when used as an = objective=20 determinant of social conditions. Furthermore, certain sectors such as = women and=20 the underemployed may not be visible in some studies, and therefore will = not be=20 reflected in subsequent analyses. The shortcomings of the reductionist = school=20 results in shallow analysis that is inherent in a non-critical = perspective of=20 the development policies and objectives of an economic system based on = inequity.=20 A less subjective approach using other available indicators of social = well=20 being, such as concentration of capital and land, levels of = proletarianization,=20 and literacy rates, would enhance this type of research.

Another = group of=20 material written before 1979 is that of the critics of "Somocismo", = those who=20 opposed the monolithic structure of the dictatorship and who attacked it = in very=20 general terms.<= SUP>(2)=20 The main characteristic of the often suppressed publications of the=20 "subversives" was the tendency to focus attention on imperialism and=20 dictatorship, rather than on very specific issues concerning different = groups=20 within society.<= SUP>(3)=20 The intense hatred of the mutated capitalist system that existed in = Nicaragua=20 before 1979, as well as the need to explain, in very basic terms, the = nature of=20 the struggle, consistently hindered the presentation of information. = Although=20 factionalism and the specific interests of the producers of = "anti-Somocismo"=20 literature, tends to weaken most of the work and reduce its value in the = wake of=20 the revolution, a considerable amount of information can be gleaned from = the=20 broad attacks on the Somoza dictatorships. A much more important = constraint=20 imposed upon those who opposed the Somozas and dared make their = displeasure=20 known, was the inaccessibility of data which has since been made = available by=20 the new government. Consequently, most pre-revolutionary literature = lacks the=20 clarity of vision that the removal of the dynasty has afforded all = observers of=20 twentieth-century Nicaraguan history.

Although=20 post-revolutionary writing has been hampered by the destruction of = numerous=20 centers of information and the collapse of the infrastructural network = necessary=20 to obtain concrete data, it has benefitted from the exposition of the = immorality=20 of the Somocista state. However, despite the universal denunciation of = the=20 corruption of the former government, divergent ideological approaches = have=20 hindered the development of an adequate historiography of the Nicaraguan = state.=20 As a direct result of the victory of the Sandinista forces and their = subsequent=20 domination of the direction of the state there has resulted an almost = complete=20 ideological polarization. Because of the new opportunity for a country = in the=20 western hemisphere to develop an independent road to socialism, most of = the=20 recent historiography is occupied with the relative merits of individual = programs. Both the left-wing and right-wing schools of research that = dominate=20 post-revolutionary historiography suffer, to varying degrees, from the=20 constraints that their political perspectives place upon the perception = of the=20 changes that have taken place since 1979. For example, even though the=20 Sandinistas are willing to admit tactical and political mistakes, some=20 researchers completely ignore their existence even though the anti-FSLN = forces=20 have mounted successful campaigns on the basis of the internal = discontent caused=20 by the errors. Conversely, critics over-emphasize the mistakes of the=20 Sandinistas through an equally selective manipulation of issues and = events.=20 Between the two poles of thought on the development and success of the=20 Sandinista victory is a broad area within which a comparatively small = number of=20 researchers work.<= SUP>(4)=20 Despite the valuable contributions of authors who deal with the = revolution from=20 a respectable distance, there are problems associated with their = tendency to=20 work within the pre-determined confines of a debate between the = Sandinistas and=20 their adversaries. As a result, there are problems with accounts of = Nicaraguan=20 history that attempt to avoid the fundamental ideological issues raised = by the=20 Sandinista victory, yet operate in the same arena as the people they = have so=20 carefully distanced themselves from.

Shirley = Christian,=20 Roberto Pastor and Abraham Brumberg are good examples of the = anti-Sandinista=20 literature that has come out the United States since the defeat of the=20 dictatorship.<= SUP>(5)=20 Their work, as is common among the critics of the new government, = downplays the=20 previous government's blatant disregard for the welfare of its citizens, = and=20 concentrates on largely unsubstantiated allegations of abuses that are=20 apparently taking place under the Sandinista government. The content is=20 virtually always descriptive and never offers a critical perspective = that is not=20 tempered by an intense hatred for "communism."<= SUP>(6)=20 To this end, the weakness of the writing of the anti-Sandinistas is = illustrated=20 by the sources used, such as U.S. government agencies and the mainstream = North=20 American press, despite unrestricted access to Nicaraguan sources. In = addition,=20 the use of subjective information and the lack of critical analysis is = often=20 compounded by the ethnocentric attitudes that authors like Christian and = Brumberg use in their approach. When such authors deal with the = peasantry they=20 treat the sector with a degree of condescension that does not do justice = to the=20 people who suffered the most during the long period of agrarian change. = The sole=20 redeeming factor of the work by apologists for the Somozas in Nicaragua = is that=20 they voice opinions that can be used to illustrate the economic = interests of a=20 privileged few who continue to coordinate attacks against the current = government=20 in Managua. Despite the oversimplification of right-wing critics, their = analysis=20 is useful in that it can always be used to justify less reactionary=20 positions.

In = contrast to the=20 right-wing critics of the Sandinistas is a group of social scientists = who=20 provide the largest and most important research on agrarian society in=20 Nicaragua. This category of researchers includes a wide range of = scholars who=20 agree and accept the common assumption that Somoza and the forces that = created=20 the dynasty were morally and politically bankrupt. A critical point of = departure=20 from the right-wing scholarship is the extensive use of the Nicaraguan = sources=20 that are available because of the openness of the new government. Both = Marxists,=20 like Carlos Vilas or Carmen Diana Deere, and non-Marxists, like Forrest = Colburn,=20 are included in this category.<= SUP>(7)=20 The academic level of discussion and debate among these authors is much = greater=20 and is more relevant to the understanding of the current problems that = face the=20 Nicaraguan people than that which is written by apologists of U.S. = foreign=20 policy like Christian and Brumberg. Even though far superior to the = reactionary=20 historiography, this group tends to oversimplify the Somoza dictatorship = and=20 consequently treats the relations created by 40 years of "Somocismo" too = lightly. Quite often authors like Vilas, Deere and Colburn use their = work to=20 defend the revolutionary process from the baseless popular criticism of = Western=20 press. According to such authors, the United States government's support = of=20 counter-revolutionary forces is the greatest obstacle to the success of = the=20 Sandinista program. Although it is true that the U.S. sponsored = destabilization=20 of the government and economy of Nicaragua does threaten the survival of = the=20 Sandinistas, many authors consistently ignore the ingrained social = problems that=20 face Nicaragua. Consequently, as a result of over-confidence in the = Sandinistas,=20 generated by a repugnance for the dynasty, there is a tendency to = emphasize the=20 changes taking place without an adequate illustration of the hurdles = that must=20 be overcome.<= SUP>(8)=20 Furthermore, it is often difficult to separate the exuberance of such = authors=20 for Nicaragua's opportunity to develop an egalitarian society, from the = reality=20 faced by the Sandinistas in their attempt to build a socialist society = upon the=20 ruins of half a century of economic chaos.

Another = shortcoming=20 of the many authors who are sympathetic toward the FSLN is the general=20 conviction that the revolution was led primarily by the working class. = Such=20 inadequacy is understandable given the emphasis of such authors on the=20 incorporation of rural society into capitalist structures and relations, = or the=20 creation of a proletariat, and on attempts by the state to control such=20 processes. Consequently. the reinterpretation of Nicaragua's past by a = new=20 generation of socialist scholars has tended to be somewhat perfunctory = in its=20 perception of rural affairs. It has meant that the countryside has been = viewed=20 largely in terms of its functionality to the developing capitalist = system, as=20 housing a reserve army of labour, or as exhibiting the scars of = underdevelopment=20 and impoverishment. Although such an approach is valid, it has not been=20 accompanied by a search for forms of primary resistance by the rural = poor, nor=20 has a serious attempt been made to identify the role of the peasantry = within the=20 broader struggle for liberation in Nicaragua since independence. There = can be no=20 doubt about the relevance of the working class as participants and as an = organizational body within the final push for freedom, however, there is = some=20 doubt about the extent to which a group like the peasantry identified = with the=20 proletariat of which many authors speak. After all, Nicaragua was an=20 overwhelmingly agrarian society until the last years of the Somoza = dictatorship.=20 The fact that relatively few members of rural society were able to = subsist=20 solely on the cultivation of a family farm by 1979 and were therefore = forced=20 into wage labour does not necessarily lead to an affinity with = proletarian=20 ideas. Rather, a question must be raised as to the extent of = proletarianism=20 within the mind set of the peasantry. Most authors assume a linear = progression=20 from peasant to proletariat in Nicaragua but fail to deal with the = question of=20 peasant attitudes influencing the working class. The common denominator = that=20 existed in Nicaraguan society was not the proletarian experience so much = as it=20 was a peasant heritage. Virtually every member of the working class = could claim=20 to have direct social links to the peasantry. The peasantry on the other = hand,=20 had personal knowledge of the proletarian experience but remained tied = to a=20 rural existence that depended on land for security. Not all peasants had = land,=20 but the majority of them desired the security of a family plot. The FSLN = has had=20 to recognize the peasant needs and has had to effect an agrarian change = program=20 that does not force collectivization. Consequently, an examination of = the role=20 played by the peasantry in the development and survival of Sandinism = during the=20 twentieth century is justified by the lack of attention paid to rural = society in=20 most literature on the Nicaraguan revolution.

In order = to deal with=20 the peasantry's problems in post-revolutionary Nicaragua it is important = to=20 understand the development of the current agricultural crisis. A = synthesis of=20 all available material on the revolutionary struggle can offer important = insights into some of the difficulties faced by the Sandinista = government in=20 effecting a meaningful agrarian reform. Such an analysis must = necessarily=20 include all relevant primary and secondary materials but must also = examine the=20 peasantry as central to the history of modern Nicaraguan society. = Consequently,=20 reference points are needed in order to understand the condition and = function of=20 the peasantry in development of the export oriented agricultural basis = of the=20 country's economy.

A primary = consideration for a reinterpretation of Nicaraguan history is the = devastating=20 social price paid by rural inhabitants for the integration of the = agrarian=20 economy into the world capitalist system. The chronic conditions and = acute=20 events that accompanied the introduction and expansion of export = agricultural=20 practices need to be viewed as precursors to the social disequilibrium = that=20 characterized Nicaraguan society in the post-1945 period. If it can be = argued=20 that the effects of the change in mode of production in agriculture had=20 disastrous consequences, then it is logical to look for responses to = catastrophe=20 among the people most affected by the change. To this end, there is an = extensive=20 amount of literature available on the subject of human reaction to = disaster. The=20 bulk of the research that has been conducted into the after effects of=20 destruction and dislocation concerns disasters that are brought on by = war or=20 nature. However, in recent years a new body of research into the social=20 consequences of sustained disasters which are brought on by = socio-economic=20 pressures has surfaced to take the study of human response in new = directions.<= SUP>(9)

In the = case of the=20 Nicaraguan people in 1979, when more than a century of intense = competition for=20 the country's resources came to an explosive ending, the presence of=20 trauma-related symptoms is evident. In the final years of the Somoza=20 dictatorship, unemployment and underemployment affected 55 percent of = the=20 country's population.= ⁽¹⁰⁾=20 Associated with the economic condition of the majority of Nicaraguans = were the=20 exceedingly high levels of mortal disease, infant mortality, illiteracy, = violent=20 crime, abandoned families, orphans, prostitution, alcoholism, and other = social=20 ills. Most of the statistical information available does not distinguish = urban=20 instances of social disequilibrium from those of rural regions. = Generally=20 conditions were much worse in the rural areas and the social = consequences more=20 profound because of the lack of minimal access to the modern benefits = that are=20 supposed to accompany development. Kai Erikson describes such societal = problems=20 as evidence of chronic disaster; one that gathers force "slowly and=20 insidiously."= ⁽¹¹⁾=20 The history of agrarian change in Nicaragua was both protracted and = particularly=20 destructive to traditional society.

A second=20 consideration in twentieth-century Nicaraguan history arises out of the = lengthy=20 debate that exists in Marxist literature concerning the nature of the = peasantry=20 and their potential for political action. As a direct result of their = historical=20 experience, the Sandinistas were well aware of the need to incorporate = the=20 peasantry into the revolutionary struggle and have remained sensitive to = the=20 demands that the peasant majority have placed upon the new government. = However,=20 a series of contradictions between the role of the state and the role of = the=20 peasantry in the aftermath of the revolution have dictated the course of = the new=20 government in its dealings with the rural masses. The problems = encountered by=20 the Sandinistas can be attributed directly to the historical process = that=20 created the conditions for the involvement of the peasantry in the=20 insurrection.

In = Nicaragua's case,=20 Lenin's concept of a "Junker" road to capitalist development = characterizes the=20 process of transition from a subsistence economy.= ⁽¹²⁾=20 Large landowners initiated and guided the process of transition, and the = pre-capitalist estates were slowly transformed into capitalist = enterprises,=20 leaving intact the extensive landholdings and many of the systems = formerly used=20 to maintain control over labourers. Accordingly, capitalism matured very = slowly=20 and aspects of the pre-capitalist relations of production continued to = persist=20 for an indefinite period. Directly related to the gradual transition = from=20 pre-capitalist to capitalist relations is the marginalization of the = majority of=20 the rural population by depriving them of adequate resources upon which = to=20 survive. Nicaragua's history is however slightly different in that the=20 transition occurred much more rapidly then in Lenin's model.

A more = relevant=20 discussion of the transformation of Nicaraguan agriculture is that of = David=20 Goodman and Michael Redclift who explore the role of agriculture in = Latin=20 American development.= ⁽¹³⁾=20 Their focus is on the contribution of agriculture in the process of = capitalist=20 development beginning with a look at European transition before 1900 and = comparing it to the more recent capitalization in Latin America. Using = two=20 prominent Latin American cases, Brazil and Mexico, the authors establish = the=20 distinctions between latent and classical transformations of economies = to=20 capitalism. Nicaragua's transition from a colonial economy to near = complete=20 integration into the world capitalist system occurred more rapidly and = later=20 than in Mexico and Brazil. As a consequence, the analysis of unequal = development=20 of various agricultural sectors in two of the most prominent Latin = American=20 countries is even more evident in Nicaragua.

The two = most=20 important points raised by the authors with respect to the differences = in=20 capitalist development, are that transition in countries like Nicaragua = is=20 distinct from that of Europe and that individual cases in the "new = world" are=20 also clearly distinguishable. In the first instance, the transformation = of=20 social relations in Europe is considered to have occurred endogenously, = whereas=20 in Latin America, because of its late arrival, it occurs exogenously. = Quite=20 simply, the existence of a modern capitalist world economy means that = the=20 transition to capitalism is completely different in Nicaragua because of = the=20 availability of existing market forces. Finally, within the agricultural = sector,=20 the transformation to capitalism in less developed countries must also = be=20 considered in relation to the modern urban industrial centers which = coexist=20 beside the atrophied rural sector. In Nicaragua, after 1900, one city = dominated=20 all commercial and political activity to the detriment of peripheral=20 areas.

The = ideological basis=20 for the Sandinista understanding of the development of capitalism and = the role=20 of the rural masses appears to draw upon the transition described by = Lenin.=20 However, Lenin's depiction fails to adequately deal with the need to = distinguish=20 among the varieties of peasants and proletarians that accompany an = incomplete=20 transition to capitalism. Beginning in the 1950s, a long debate over the = identity and composition of the peasantry began among scholars such as = Eric=20 Wolf.= ⁽¹⁴⁾=20 At various intervals since then, the debate has intensified and subsided = with no=20 universally applicable definition arising. In Nicaragua's case, a = flexible=20 definition is desirable for two reasons. In the first instance, agrarian = change=20 in Nicaragua gained momentum over a period of time and within the = context of an=20 expanding frontier, so that a history of vacillation between peasant and = proletariat was commonplace. Secondly, in more recent years there was a = rapid=20 acceleration of the process accompanied by a curtailment of the = possibility for=20 geographical expansion. Consequently, the historical development of = Nicaraguan=20 rural society defies classification into rigid social groupings. An=20 understanding of the ebb and flow of the rural populace, between peasant = and=20 proletarian experiences is essential to the comprehension of the = dimensions of=20 the problems faced by the new government in attempting to enact = programmes in=20 the countryside.

The = nature of the=20 Nicaraguan peasantry must be understood as a function of the country's=20 particular development as a sparsely populated, agricultural exporter on = the=20 periphery of the most important markets in the world. Rodolfo = Stavenhagen's work=20 on the Latin American peasant illustrates the need for flexible criteria = for a=20 discussion of rural society.= ⁽¹⁵⁾=20 He identifies several types of peasants which range from those in = highland=20 communities with minimal contact with a market economy, to rural = dwellers who=20 are tied to commercial plantations, to workers on mechanized plantations = whose=20 labour is based on salaried or contractual arrangements. In Nicaragua, = every=20 type of peasant that Stavenhagen identifies has been in existence = throughout the=20 twentieth century. Furthermore, changing conditions most definitely = resulted in=20 the positioning of individuals in more than one category during their = productive=20 lives and often simultaneously. Sidney Mintz has argued that although = environing=20 factors will determine the extent to which the proletariat can be = segregated=20 from a peasantry, the alternating "simultaneous participation of large = groups of=20 people in activities associated with each 'type' raises genuine = questions about=20 the topology itself." = ⁽¹⁶⁾

Associated with the=20 problem of defining a group of people who have fluctuated between = organized and=20 unorganized agricultural exploitation, is the issue of primary = resistance versus=20 modern mass nationalism. A review of the twentieth century political = history of=20 the country reveals a series of attempts by the members of established = political=20 parties and the intelligentsia to forge links with the rural masses. The = most=20 successful mobilizations against the government have occurred during key = periods=20 of economic hardship when episodes of spontaneous rebellion by peasants = ensured=20 an otherwise doubtful victory. Augusto Sandino's "pequenio ejercito = loco," and=20 his modern counterparts who now govern Managua owe their success to the = selfless=20 participation, not to mention sacrifice, of rural Nicaraguans in = struggles for=20 justice. The current Nicaraguan government is well aware of the = importance of=20 the role played by the rural masses in the overthrow of the Somoza = dynasty. They=20 are also cognizant of the continued struggle for a just society even = after the=20 assassination of Sandino in 1934, therefore know that the promises of = the 1980s=20 must be accompanied by concrete action if the revolutionary gains are = not to be=20 reversed by the same people who made them possible.

It is no = wonder then=20 that the lengthy debates that surround the development of an acceptable = topology=20 for peasants in Latin America are paralleled by equally extensive = discussions on=20 the composition of the rural proletariat. Therefore, not only must = consideration=20 be given to the point at which a peasant becomes proletarianized, but of = equal=20 importance is the movement of individuals from the rural proletariat to = a=20 peasant existence. In Nicaragua's case, with one of the lowest = population=20 densities in Latin America, the availability of land for the = dispossessed has=20 historically made the proletarianization process reversible.= ⁽¹⁷⁾

The = question that=20 must then be asked of the Sandinistas is whether there is the political = will to=20 grant the peasantry the single most import possession for their = continued=20 existence. In order to attempt to uncover the answer to such a question = it is=20 essential that the context within which the answer must be given be = understood.=20 To establish the context that the Nicaraguan government and society find = themselves in, a reinterpretation of the development of modern = capitalist=20 agriculture must be undertaken. The opening chapter examines Nicaragua's = first=20 hundred years of independence and the agricultural changes that = initiated the=20 massive expropriation of communal and peasant lands. It is also devoted = to the=20 first organized peasant struggle that ended with the establishment of a = basis=20 for the rise of the Somoza dictatorship.

When the = Frente=20 Sandinista de Liberaci=F3n Nacional (FSLN) came to power in Nicaragua in = 1979, it=20 inherited an atrophied domestic agricultural sector which had persisted = despite=20 more than a century of competition for land and resources with an ever = expanding=20 agro-export industry. Between 1945 and 1979, domestic food production = was=20 incapable of matching the demands of the growing population, while the=20 agricultural export sector grew at a phenomenal rate. The development of = an=20 economy, which depends upon agricultural exports, and the resultant = impact on=20 the structure of rural society, have proven to be major obstacles to the = creation of an egalitarian society in post-revolutionary Nicaragua. In = order to=20 understand the difficulties encountered by the new government in = effecting=20 agrarian reform and increasing domestic production, it is necessary to = examine=20 the roles of both the agro-export sector and the peasantry before the=20 revolution.

Prior to = 1979,=20 Nicaragua's agricultural development was based on laissez-faire = capitalist=20 ideology which served to limit the social benefits for the country as a = whole.=20 To complicate matters, export agricultural production developed = primarily along=20 the Pacific coast and generated an unbalanced infrastructural network = that=20 intensified the struggle for land. When the Spaniards arrived in = present-day=20 Nicaragua they encountered a sizable native population that inhabited = the plains=20 and valleys of the western coast. The people who lived in the area = practiced=20 subsistence agriculture with a low level of commodity exchange that can = be=20 described as procapitalist in nature. The Spanish conquest introduced = new=20 economic forces that immediately began to transform the existing = political=20 economy of the indigenous population. For the Europeans, survival in the = "New=20 World" necessitated the availability of both land and labour in = sufficient=20 quantities to guarantee the viability of their agricultural=20 endeavours.

In = contrast to the=20 hospitable west coast, the Atlantic seaboard was sparsely populated and=20 physically less attractive to the kind of colonization envisaged by the = Spanish=20 settlers. It is hot and humid with a lengthy rainy season that limits = the types=20 of sustainable agricultural practices. Furthermore, it is characterized = by its=20 rugged terrain and low relief that make the establishment of = communication=20 networks difficult. In addition to being physically unattractive the = east coast=20 with its tropical environment, was the type of place that the Spanish = avoided=20 for health reasons. Higher instances of disease could be expected in = areas where=20 rainfall and heat were so abundant. Consequently, it was along the more=20 palatable Pacific coast that the technological and economic advances of = the=20 succeeding years would have the most effect on the general = populace.

The = western coastal=20 plain became dominated by large and medium sized producers who engaged = in=20 modern, highly mechanized forms of agriculture, oriented toward the = export=20 market. The region is comprised of huge expanses of fertile volcanic = plains that=20 receive adequate amounts of rain and a six month dry period. The plain = was=20 ideally suited for the livestock, poultry, wheat, rice and assorted = vegetables=20 introduced by the Spanish. In addition, it proved highly amenable to the = export=20 crops that were cultivated initially and to the twentieth century = development of=20 commercial cotton and cattle production. The coastal plain is a narrow = strip of=20 land that proved easy to settle and develop the limited infrastructure = necessary=20 to facilitate exports to Spain. The area settled by the Spanish and the=20 indigenous peoples before them slopes gently from the upland regions of = the=20 interior to the ocean with an altitude change of only a few hundred = meters. It=20 proved ideal for the establishment of a network of communities and = provided for=20 good communication links between them. Consequently, two cities and the = primary=20 port facilities of the country were constructed along the plain where=20 agriculture gradually developed into the main source of export earnings = for the=20 country.

Consequently, it was=20 along the Pacific coast that the technological and economic advances of = the=20 succeeding years would have the most effect on the general populace. The = western=20 coastal plain became dominated by large and medium producers who engaged = in=20 modern, highly mechanized forms of agriculture, oriented toward the = export=20 market. In contrast, the areas where production was dedicated to = internal=20 markets were located in inaccessible parts of the interior where less = advanced=20 agricultural methods were practiced. As a result, the small plots in the = mountainous central region had very low levels of productivity and = existed with=20 a minimal amount of access to larger markets, factors which forced the = owners to=20 sell their labour to the export oriented landowners during seasonal = harvests.=20 The concentration of the best arable land in the hands of the export = sector and=20 the marginalization of domestic producers resulted in the integration of = the=20 entire rural populace into commercial agriculture.

Adjacent = to the=20 coastal plains are the upland areas that became the centres for coffee=20 production in the late 1800s. Their elevation is less than 1000 meters = and the=20 upland areas are a part of the same climatic zones as the plains that = stretch=20 below them. The soil is ideally suited to the cultivation of coffee and = the=20 altitude tempers the extreme heat of the dry season. The entire area was = inhabited at the time of the Spanish arrival but the residents were = forced to=20 give way to the expansion of colonial settlement and the introduction of = coffee=20 as an export crop during the last century. The northern reaches of the = upland=20 area focused on the cities of Matagalpa and Jinotega which were Indian = villages=20 that became important commercial centres with the arrival of coffee. The = most=20 important region of this nature is the Southern Upland where the capital = of=20 Managua was eventually located. It is bordered on northeast Lake Managua = and=20 southeast by Lake Nicaragua, jutting out toward the Pacific ocean as a=20 geographical division of the coastal plains.

In = contrast to the=20 rich soil along the coast, the areas where production for internal = markets=20 existed were gradually pushed towards the more marginal land in = inaccessible=20 parts of the interior where less advanced agricultural methods were = practiced.=20 Over time, production of domestic products became the responsibility of=20 descendants of the indigenous groups that the Spanish had to dispossess = in order=20 to create haciendas and promote export agriculture. As a result of their = location, the small plots in the mountainous central region had very low = levels=20 of productivity and existed with a minimal amount of access to larger = markets,=20 factors which limited the development of capitalistic social relations. = However,=20 by the time that Anastasio Somoza began to implement his agricultural = programme,=20 the marginalized farmers of the interior had become a large pool of = reserve=20 labour and were forced to sell their labour to the export oriented = landowners=20 during seasonal harvests. Other peasants who remained on the plains = developed a=20 variety of contractual relationships with the owners of large estates = and also=20 became participants in the production of agricultural commodities for = export.=20 Therefore, it was the concentration of the best arable land in the hands = of the=20 export sector and the marginalization of domestic producers that = resulted in the=20 integration of the entire rural populace into commercial agriculture. It = was=20 also this forced incorporation of small independent producers into a = wage system=20 that could not meet their needs and the precarious nature of the = landlord/tenant=20 agreements that resulted in continuous and often massive resistance. In = general=20 terms, this protracted transformation of Nicaraguan agriculture began in = the=20 colonial period, languished during the nineteenth century and = accelerated=20 through the twentieth century, leading to a peasant = revolution.

The Legacy of=20 Colonialism

As a = Spanish colony,=20 Nicaragua developed into an agricultural exporter and an importer of=20 manufactured goods. Huge tracks of land and its inhabitants were doled = out to=20 Spanish nationals and the hacienda became the foundation of the new = society. The=20 creation of large estates by the Spanish colonizers resulted in the = emergence of=20 a pattern of monoculture that continues to characterize the economy of = the=20 state. The colonial hacienda served as a political extension of the = Spanish=20 crown and devoted its attention to the production of cacao and indigo = for the=20 home market. Although small farms have predominated throughout Central = America,=20 the economy of the region has depended almost exclusively on the export = of=20 agricultural products. The haciendas not only played an important role = in the=20 formation of the agricultural export sector but also in the cultivation = of=20 paternalistic social relationships between their owners and the people = who were=20 required to work the fields. Throughout the colonial period a system = developed=20 that guaranteed a minimal subsistence level for the rural poor and a = stable=20 labour force for the hacendado.= ⁽¹⁸⁾

For 300 = years=20 Nicaragua and its neighbours existed as minor concerns in a Spanish = Empire that=20 was daily losing its grip on its colonies in the Americas. In Nicaragua, = a part=20 of the Audiencia de Guatemala for most of the colonial period, the = Catholic=20 Church and latifundists were the dominant figures of authority.= ⁽¹⁹⁾=20 The Spanish Crown, although represented in Nicaragua, had more serious = matters=20 to contend with than the organization of development in area that = represented a=20 small fraction of its colonial holdings. In direct relation to Spain's=20 disinterest in Central America, there was a corresponding lack of = interest in=20 the outside world among the residents of Nicaragua. As compared with New = Spain=20 and Peru where a more vibrant colonial society emerged to challenge = Spanish=20 rule, Nicaragua and Central America were passive in their resistance to=20 colonialism.= ⁽²⁰⁾=20 Consequently, Nicaragua's geographical and political isolation, resulted = in the=20 state emerging as a by-product of liberation struggles elsewhere in the = Empire=20 and continued to play a role relative to its position before=20 independence.

For more = than 150=20 years there had been a gradual deterioration of the economic base of the = majority rural population, which resulted in the proletarianization and=20 semi-proletarianization of 75 percent of the economically active rural=20 population by 1978. At the same time, there was a corresponding = concentration of=20 ownership, and expansion of arable land which resulted in the control of = 85=20 percent of land under cultivation by only 5 percent of the economically = active=20 agricultural population. (Refer to Appendices I and II for a more = concise=20 breakdown of the agricultural economically active population and the=20 distribution of land at the end of the Somoza dynasty). The most blatant = example=20 of unrestricted accumulation was the Somoza family's control of more = than 20=20 percent of the country's farm land by the end of their dictatorial rule. = Consequently, two principal types of farms existed when Somoza fled the = popular=20 insurrection of 1979: the enormous agricultural estates that dominated = the=20 economy of the country and a large number of extremely small family = plots that=20 could not guarantee subsistence.

An = analysis by Philip=20 Warnken demonstrates both the dominance of the export sector and the = relative=20 poverty of most rural Nicaraguans.= ⁽²¹⁾=20 Relying on data from the national census and the Central Bank of = Nicaragua he=20 shows that although there were more than five times the number of farms=20 producing basic grain crops in 1971 than were producing export crops, = export=20 crops accounted for 49 percent of the total value of production while = food crops=20 contributed only 19 percent and livestock 32 percent.= ⁽²²⁾Warnken=20 describes the structure of Nicaraguan agricultural crop production as = consisting=20 of a small proportion of all producers oriented to the export market and = a high=20 proportion of producers oriented to the domestic market.= ⁽²³⁾=20 It is the development of this contradiction between the abundance of the = export=20 sector amid the abject circumstances of peasant existence that = conditioned the=20 participation of the rural poor in the Sandinista revolution. Peasant=20 involvement in the 1979 revolution stems directly from the = transformation of the=20 agricultural sector from local subsistence to complete integration into = the=20 world market. The protracted transformation of Nicaraguan agriculture = was=20 initiated during the colonial period, languished during the nineteenth = century=20 and accelerated through the twentieth century.

When the = Spaniards=20 retreated from Central America in 1821, they left a weak political and = economic=20 structure that hindered Nicaragua's development as an independent = nation.= ⁽²⁴⁾=20 A series of attempts at the unification of the five Central American = countries=20 were made by those who were left with the task of building an = independent=20 destiny for the former colonial provinces. Some observers emphasize the = failure=20 to unite in the wake of the Spanish withdrawal as the reason for the = subsequent=20 instability and underdevelopment that has characterized Central American = history.= ⁽²⁵⁾=20 Other scholars point to the role played by contending imperial powers = for the=20 inability of the various heads of Central American states to lead their=20 countries on a stable political and economic course.= ⁽²⁶⁾=20 In both cases economic prosperity and the lack thereof, is presumed to = be=20 secondary to political considerations. However, a review of the = development of=20 Nicaragua as an agricultural exporter consistently reveals that = economics was=20 the most important conditioning factor in political = decisions.

Spain had = never=20 intended Nicaragua's political, social and economic structure to stand = on its=20 own. As a result of a largely unexpected release from colonial bonds, a = series=20 of internal and external political contests ensued which were to have a=20 detrimental effect on Nicaragua's post-independence history. Externally, = the=20 main contenders for imperial influence over Nicaraguan affairs were the = British,=20 whose regional presence decreased substantially by the end of the = century, and=20 the United States, which rapidly consolidated its hegemony over all of = Latin=20 America. The British did have significant contact with the Miskito coast = region=20 of the isthmus during the nineteenth century, but Nicaraguans did not = yet=20 exercise control over their present day portion of the region. In 1860 = Britain=20 agreed to hand the Miskito Coast over to the Nicaraguan government but = took=20 several decades to withdraw completely from the region.= ⁽²⁷⁾=20 On the other hand, the United States actively sought to promote its = political,=20 economic and security interests in Latin America. In 1823 the United = States=20 announced the Monroe Doctrine and two years later, in 1825, diplomatic=20 recognition was extended to the first union of Central America (known as = the=20 United Provinces of Central America).= ⁽²⁸⁾=20 Ostensibly, the Monroe Doctrine held that the countries of Latin America = were=20 protected by the United States from any outside threat to their = sovereignty. By=20 the end of the century, in light of the British withdrawal, the doctrine = had=20 come to mean U.S. dominance over the political and economic affairs of = the=20 hemisphere.

In = Nicaragua, a=20 relatively insignificant corner of the Spanish empire, no cohesive = political=20 opposition to the colonial =E9lite existed at independence. The reasons = for the=20 lack of a powerful mercantile, non-traditional =E9lite stem from = Nicaragua's=20 relatively underdeveloped infrastructural base combined with its = relative=20 isolation within the isthmus. Nicaragua did participate in the attempts = to unify=20 the isthmus but political and jurisdictional disputes among the = leadership of=20 the five republics prevented a permanent federation from being formed. = Shortly=20 after independence, neighbouring countries uniformly rejected the = dominance of=20 elites who were mired in colonial traditions and began to reorient their = economic activity to take advantage of more dynamic opportunities in = world=20 trade. Nicaragua, a country where colonial traditions were deeply = rooted, was=20 slow to adapt to the new market forces it encountered after independence = and=20 consequently failed to develop a vibrant economic foundation until the = late=20 nineteenth century. At mid-century, the stagnant Nicaraguan economy = continued to=20 be dependent on the export of indigo and a small amount of live cattle = for its=20 export earnings while a new dynamism was unfolding in the economies of=20 surrounding countries. Until 1850, Nicaragua was integrated into world = trade=20 primarily as a supplier of natural dyes, however, by mid-century the = markets for=20 the country's main exports had been destroyed by the introduction of = synthetic=20 substitutes. The collapse of the world market for indigo, the principal = source=20 of external income, forced a diversification of the economy on an = unwilling=20 traditional =E9lite. In addition to an unimpressive agricultural export = sector at=20 the time of independence, the largest part of agricultural activity was=20 subsistent in nature and largely outside the mainstream of political = activity.=20 For the most part, Nicaraguans of the nineteenth century lived in = isolated=20 hamlets where pre-capitalist economic relations dominated. In addition, = whole=20 regions of the country were effectively controlled by powerful land = owners who=20 maintained feudalistic land and labour relations with the peasant = population.=20 Capitalist economic activities were focused on the two main urban = centres,=20 Granada in the south and Le=F3n in the north. As a result of the = atrophied=20 internal economy that could not generate a challenge to the political = status=20 quo, no effective opposition to the colonial =E9lite emerged until more = than three=20 decades after independence.

Throughout the period=20 of adjustment between Nicaragua's integration with the Spanish colonial = empire=20 and the country's ability to operate as an independent player in a = global=20 economic system, a series of domestic struggles between competing = political=20 forces occurred. By mid-century the stage had been set for a protracted=20 political struggle between rival economic factions. The political strife = which=20 characterized the latter half of the century stemmed from antagonisms = between=20 two principal groups, the traditional landed =E9lite, who were based in = Granada,=20 and a group of modernizing merchant-producers from the city of Le=F3n. = The=20 traditional =E9lite were anti-nationalist and mired in an outdated = economic=20 structure that was incapable of meeting the demands of post-colonial = society,=20 while the Liberals had established themselves as merchants and were = anxious to=20 introduce a new political and economic structure that would allow them = to expand=20 their role in the state.

Like the = political=20 sphere, the agricultural sector was never united nor uniform in its = halting=20 progression through the series of economic catastrophes that have = characterized=20 post-independence Nicaraguan development. As elsewhere in Latin America, = the=20 large agricultural estates and social relations that were established by = the=20 Spanish colonizers played a fundamental role in shaping Nicaragua's=20 post-colonial agrarian structure. During the first decades after = independence,=20 the traditional agricultural export sector was challenged politically = and=20 economically by the forces of modernization. As a direct result of the=20 traditional =E9lite's unwillingness to change, the Nicaraguan = agricultural economy=20 retained vestiges of archaic modes of production while it progressed = toward a=20 complete integration into the world capitalist system. Economic = antagonisms were=20 accompanied by political differences that clearly separated the = traditional=20 =E9lite from their Liberal minded compatriots. In 1855, William Walker, = a United=20 States citizen, established a government that was supported by his = president in=20 Washington and the merchants of Le=F3n.= ⁽²⁹⁾=20 In essence, the attempt by Walker to claim Nicaragua for U.S. interests = helped=20 to extend the political life of the Conservative oligarchy, and delayed = the=20 introduction of economic liberalism. Walker came into Nicaragua with the = idea of=20 establishing a white republic and a model slave society in Central = America.=20 Nicaragua came under his control for a brief period after he captured = Granada=20 with a small entourage of U.S. mercenaries and the support of Nicaraguan = Liberals. He elected himself president of Nicaragua in 1856 and was = chased out=20 of the country one year later.= ⁽³⁰⁾=20 Of primary importance in the Walker episode is the alliance of the = Liberals with=20 a foreign invader for personal economic gains. Walker as invader and = president=20 did not have a lasting effect on the country; however, the act of = supporting a=20 foreign invasion completely discredited the Liberals and their political = platform. The end of Walker's presidency and the simultaneous disgrace = of his=20 Nicaraguan supporters, served to retard the introduction of the economic = policies that were shaping the economies of neighbouring countries.=20 Nevertheless, the continued presence of and threat posed by the Liberals = did=20 initiate a half-hearted shift in Nicaragua's agricultural orientation = during the=20 subsequent thirty year extension of Conservative rule.

The = prolongation of=20 Conservative dominance over the political and economic direction of the = state=20 further retarded the already latent Liberal attempts to alter = Nicaragua's class=20 structure. The greatest obstacle to the reorientation of the = agricultural=20 economy, and the further development of a merchant-producer =E9lite, was = the=20 legacy of the colonial period that included social relations that could = not meet=20 the needs of an expanded export sector. The Conservative colonial = =E9lite, by=20 virtue of their privileged economic and social position, resisted all = attempts=20 to subvert their authority. Their extensive agricultural holdings = combined with=20 their ability to rely upon feudalistic labour relations hindered all = attempts by=20 the rival Liberals to introduce capitalistic agricultural development. = In=20 addition, the subsistence economy of the peasant communities was = incompatible=20 with the requirements of those who aspired to command the direction of = the state=20 and its economy.= ⁽³¹⁾=20 Consequently, to the modernizing =E9lite the barriers to large scale = agricultural=20 production were threefold: the lack of an adequate labour force, the = laws that=20 prevented a return to the forced labour of the colonial period, and the=20 effective occupation of the best land by indigenous communities and the=20 traditional =E9lite.

In order = to quell=20 internal opposition to their rule, the Conservatives enacted numerous=20 agricultural laws during the latter half of the century. Throughout the=20 post-colonial period, the peasantry consistently resisted encroachments = by=20 individuals or government on community lands. Despite their efforts, by = 1870=20 peasant lands were forcibly expropriated to provide land and the labour = for the=20 production of coffee.= ⁽³²⁾=20 The direct result of the expansion of the cultivated area was the = increased=20 alienation of the peasantry from their means of subsistence. Even though = the=20 Conservative government clearly indicated its willingness to use force = to effect=20 agrarian change, mounting pressure from the merchant-producers dictated = the need=20 to strengthen the legal mechanisms for the expropriation of communal = lands.=20 Responding to the desires of the new capitalists, in 1877 President = Pedro=20 Joaqu=EDn Chamorro, the leader of the traditional oligarchy, passed a = series of=20 laws that specifically attacked the lands occupied by indigenous = communities.= ⁽³³⁾=20 The first massive resistance to the expropriation of communal lands = occurred in=20 1881 when several indigenous communities rebelled against the pressure = placed=20 upon them to conform with the export sector's land and labour = requirements. The=20 war between the landed classes and the indigenous communities lasted for = nine=20 months during which time cities were attacked by thousands of = peasants.= ⁽³⁴⁾=20 The uprising was put down by government forces and resulted in the = massacre of=20 5,000 peasants.= ⁽³⁵⁾=20 However, the attempts by the traditional oligarchy to facilitate land=20 concentration and labour requirements through legal and military means = stopped=20 short of providing the incentives that the Liberal merchant-producers = wanted in=20 order to significantly expand cultivation for export.

Unlike = Nicaragua,=20 where coffee was hesitantly introduced at mid-century, other Central = American=20 countries began commercial production of the crop shortly after = independence.=20 Consequently, the coffee "boom" and sudden wealth it produced for the=20 cafeteleros, resulted in state power falling into the hands of the=20 non-traditional =E9lite in neighbouring countries. Control of the state = by=20 "Liberals" in Costa Rica, El Salvador and Guatemala facilitated the=20 privatization of church, government and most importantly, indigenous = lands.=20 Nicaragua's neighbours served as examples of both the potential of = economic=20 liberalism and the incompatibility of modern social relations with the = interests=20 of the traditional oligarchs of Granada. As in other Central American = countries,=20 the wealth that coffee produced for the entrepreneurial class would = eventually=20 provide means to control the direction of the state.

By the = last quarter=20 of the century, coffee became the most important replacement for earlier = export=20 commodities. Because of its prominence as an export earner, it received = the most=20 attention at home and abroad. So much so that foreign interests played a = significant role in the development of the coffee industry. Europeans = and North=20 Americans invested heavily in the new crop throughout Central America, = however=20 in Nicaragua where land was more readily available, their role was=20 proportionately greater. Initially, foreign interests controlled more = production=20 than did Nicaraguan producers.= ⁽³⁶⁾=20 By 1914, coffee was the most important export crop, accounting for 63.3 = percent=20 of Nicaragua's total foreign trade.= ⁽³⁷⁾

The = ascension of the=20 Liberal regime of General Jos=E9 Santos Zelaya in 1893, and the sixteen = year=20 dictatorship that followed, marked the consolidation of power in the = hands of=20 the merchants. The new policies that were introduced favored rapid = material=20 development through the attraction of foreign capital. As a result, the = state=20 deficit increased dramatically under Zelaya due to the needs of the = expanding=20 agro-industries and the willingness of the European powers to extend = their=20 influence. In addition, the legal apparatus established by former = governments=20 was strengthened to enable the cafeteleros to expropriate the previously = untouched holdings of individuals and communities in the northern = departments of=20 Estella, Matagalpa and Jinotega. A register of civil property was = created to=20 identify irregularly farmed small holdings of peasant and Indian = communities. In=20 many parts of Nicaragua "slash and burn" agriculture was practiced in = the=20 absence of fertilizers and other modern farming methods. Most small = cultivators=20 retained pieces of land that were left fallow for a period of years and = were=20 therefore technically unused. Consequently, farmers had to justify the=20 occupation of their land and in so doing provided the legal basis for = the=20 expropriation of unclaimed lands.= ⁽³⁸⁾=20 The impact of Zelaya and his Liberal ideology is reflected in the = production=20 figures that reveal a doubling of coffee output within the first six = years of=20 his administration.= ⁽³⁹⁾=20 As a consequence of the liberalization of the economy, the conditions = necessary=20 for the development of coffee cultivation on a massive scale were = realized by=20 the turn of the century.

Coffee = rapidly became=20 the most important export earner for the latifundists. It provided for=20 Nicaragua's belated introduction into a world capitalist market that was = undergoing extensive reorganization, owing to rivalries among the = industrialized=20 nations of the period. Nicaraguan agriculture had continued to center = primarily=20 around large coffee and cattle latifundios. Unlike other Central = American=20 countries, Nicaragua did not evolve into a major producer of bananas and = the=20 rural labour movement remained relatively unorganized due to the = seasonal and=20 unstable nature of existing agricultural employment. Organized labour in = the=20 rural areas was limited to industries like mining or plantations that = required a=20 year round labour force. However, both the mining industry and classic = forms of=20 plantation agriculture declined in inverse proportion to the ascension = of=20 coffee, beef and later cotton as primary export commodities.

Although = the=20 cultivation of bananas for export did account for half of Nicaragua's = exports by=20 1930, it was incapable of replacing coffee as the most important export = earner.=20 In spite of the attempts of multinational fruit companies, Nicaragua, = unlike its=20 neighbours, did not have extensive enclaves of U.S. owned plantations. = Even=20 though the total area of land owned by North American fruit companies = did amount=20 to 655,000 acres during the first quarter of the twentieth-century, only = a=20 fraction was brought into production.= ⁽⁴⁰⁾=20 Despite the fact that exports in 1929 were at a record level of over = 4,000,000=20 bunches, Nicaraguan exports were generally far less significant than = those of=20 its Central American competitors.= ⁽⁴¹⁾=20 The fruit company and railroad combination that had accounted for the = domination=20 of foreign interests in other countries did not evolve in quite the same = manner=20 in Nicaragua. One reason for the failure of the four major fruit = companies that=20 were in the country was their inability to secure the conditions which = they=20 wanted from the government.= ⁽⁴²⁾=20 In addition to the government's intransigence, banana plantations were = confined=20 to the Miskito Coast where a severe labour shortage and the lack of a = coercive=20 means to bind workers to the plantations hampered their = development.

The = Miskito Indians=20 who inhabited the area were fiercely independent and were also difficult = to=20 pressure into service because of the nature of their existence. Their=20 communities functioned independently and were largely outside the sphere = of=20 effective control of the governments that came and went on the Pacific = coast.=20 During the nineteenth century the natives of the Atlantic coast had more = contact=20 with the British than with the Hispanic population on the other side of = the=20 jungles and mountains. In addition, they lived in a large, sparsely = populated=20 region that was generally outside of the market economy. As a result, = the people=20 of the Miskito Coast were less vulnerable to the encroachment of wage=20 labour.

Despite = the=20 difficulties of establishing on the Miskito Coast, the fruit companies = persisted=20 and did manage to develop into a significant player among national = export=20 producers. However, events beyond the control of the banana producers = served to=20 permanently reduce their presence in the economy. In the 1930s, diseases = destroyed the Atlantic coast plantations, thereafter reducing the crop = to a=20 negligible export.= ⁽⁴³⁾=20 In addition to the famous blight that affected all of the Central = American=20 banana crops in the 1930s, Nicaraguan producers faced another obstacle = that made=20 their country particularly unattractive. The U.S. owned east coast = plantations=20 became primary targets during the guerrilla offensive that raged = throughout the=20 countryside between 1927 and 1934. Whereas the president of the United = Fruit=20 Company was able to declare in 1927 that his company had "never had to = call for=20 a warship," four years later, the Standard Fruit and Steamship = Corporation=20 telegraphed the White House and pleaded for military protection.= ⁽⁴⁴⁾=20 The combination of war and disease effectively curtailed the activities = of large=20 U.S. fruit companies in Nicaragua causing them to concentrate on = neighbouring=20 countries.

In = contrast to the=20 limited social impact of banana cultivation, the rise of coffee as the = primary=20 source of external revenue in the twentieth century resulted in a = growing=20 population of peasants who were unable to obtain land and were = increasingly=20 unable to augment their meager subsistence with wage labour in the = commercial=20 agricultural sector. Gradually, small and medium sized producers of = coffee lost=20 their farms to merchant-proprietors, or their political and economic = rivals -=20 the landed oligarchy. The dispossessed either moved to the sparsely = populated=20 regions of the country or into towns and villages where they would = compete for=20 employment in the agricultural or service sectors. The pace at which the = displacement of the small independent producers occurred began to = accelerate=20 between 1900 and 1930. The push toward the consolidation of small farms = into=20 coffee estates came as a result of competition in the market place that = required=20 the modernization of the industry. During the early part of the = twentieth=20 century, modernization meant the expansion of the area under cultivation = in=20 order to benefit from the economy of scale. Consistently low coffee = prices,=20 combined with the difficulties caused by the underdeveloped = infrastructural base=20 of the country, meant that the small producers were unable to compete = with the=20 latifundists on an equal level. By 1920, and especially during the = crisis of the=20 1930s when the world economy was in shambles, the minifundistas were = forced to=20 market their produce through merchant-producers. Depressed world markets = translated into loans negotiated on future sales by petty-producers who = used=20 their land as collateral. Prices remained depressed for several years = and the=20 consequence for the minifundistas was impoverishment and the eventual = loss of=20 their means of subsistence.= ⁽⁴⁵⁾

Zelaya's = efforts to=20 secure a future for the interests he represented required an expansion = of=20 Nicaragua's export market and infusions of foreign capital. The = president's=20 attempts to expand Nicaragua's export capacity ignored protocol by = attracting=20 investment from economic rivals of the United States. He contracted a = loan from=20 British financiers for the construction of a railway and initiated = negotiations=20 with Germany and Japan for the construction of a canal to rival that = being built=20 by the United States in Panama.= ⁽⁴⁶⁾=20 As a result, the United States saw Zelaya as a threat to its economic = interests=20 in Central America and to the political stability of the entire = Caribbean=20 Basin.

The U.S.=20 justification for its dominance of politics in the Americas was = predicated on=20 the Monroe Doctrine which had been advanced in the previous century. As = a=20 consequence, the United States intervened in Nicaragua's domestic = affairs. In=20 1909, a few hundred marines landed at Bluefields to support a = Conservative=20 "revolution" which one observer characterizes as leading to "twenty-five = years=20 of chaos."= ⁽⁴⁷⁾=20 Zelaya's government collapsed, making way for a less antagonistic and = more=20 submissive government led by retrogressive Conservatives who restrained = the=20 modernization process initiated under the Liberals. In 1912, the = Liberal's=20 "counter-revolutionary" efforts were met by an even larger contingent of = U.S.=20 marines who guaranteed the further perpetuation of Conservative rule. = During the=20 period between the Conservative revolution in 1912 and the Somoza = dynasty in=20 1933 the U.S. marines occupied the country for all except one year. = However,=20 despite a well organized effort by the United States to establish its = hegemonic=20 control over the state and economy, a new and unexpected force emerged = to=20 challenge the North American presence. Caught within the political = struggle=20 between the =E9lite classes were of course legions of impoverished rural = dwellers.=20 Conservative rule and U.S. occupation, combined with the pressure = applied on the=20 peasantry to conform with the bourgeoisie's desire to increase = Nicaragua's share=20 of world markets, created the conditions for a popular = insurrection.

Resistance to the=20 North American presence was frequent and widespread. Between 1913 and = 1924 no=20 less than ten important armed attempts by the Liberals to overthrow the=20 Conservative government took place.= ⁽⁴⁸⁾=20 Most occurred outside of the capital and resulted in the fierce = repression of=20 all suspected supporters. Rural Nicaraguans had to contend with three = fighting=20 forces and a multitude of individuals who roamed the countryside = demanding=20 assistance and in the process endangered the lives of innocent families. = In=20 addition to the physical and economic damage caused by the decade long = struggle=20 between Liberals and Conservatives, the country also had to pay a price = in=20 political terms. In effect, the U.S. presence served once again to = extend=20 Conservative rule beyond its expected lifespan, retard the = liberalization of the=20 economy and most importantly, further suppress the peasantry by = inhibiting their=20 development as a viable agricultural sector.

The = "chaos" caused by=20 the relentless power struggle between the Liberals and Conservatives, = combined=20 with the U.S. intervention, became a focal point for the dissatisfaction = of the=20 peasantry. Augusto C=E9sar Sandino, a peasant general, waged and lost a = war to=20 wrest control of the state from the government and its imperialist = supporters.=20 He began his military career as an idealistic young man who was heavily=20 influenced by his personal contact with revolutionary Mexico. As a young = man=20 Sandino fled Nicaragua in 1921 because of his role in a fight that = seriously=20 wounded another youth and his subsequent problems with the village = "cacique".= ⁽⁴⁹⁾=20 During his self-imposed exile he worked for a series of North American = companies=20 in neighbouring countries and through his experience developed a hatred = for=20 imperialism.= ⁽⁵⁰⁾=20 Sandino's exile in Honduras, Guatemala and Mexico proved to be a turning = point=20 in his life. He came into contact with Mexican nationalists and=20 ultra-nationalistic Central Americans from whom he developed his = political and=20 social philosophy.= ⁽⁵¹⁾=20 While there is no doubt about Sandino's nationalistic aspirations for = Nicaragua,=20 there is some question as to his conception of social change. Sandino = identified=20 with the Liberals and conducted his war as a nationalist and = anti-imperialist=20 cause. As soon as the United States marines left Nicaragua, Sandino = agreed to=20 end his struggle, retreat to the northeastern Jinotega and abandon his = followers=20 in other parts of the country. Notwithstanding the debate about the = depth of=20 Sandino's radicalism, the fact that he and his army became a "cause = c=E9l=E9bre" for=20 the left in many parts of the world, indicates the perception of his = movement=20 among politicians in Nicaragua and the United States.

Despite = government=20 propaganda that labeled Sandino as a bandit and Communist, the rebel = general did=20 not appear to have a firm grasp of the nature of his supporters' = discontent.= ⁽⁵²⁾=20 Although the general spent his life in daily contact with the peasantry, = the=20 experience that seems to have radicalized him was his contact with U.S. = capital=20 penetration in Central America. To Sandino, the proletarianization of = the=20 peasantry was secondary to the presence of foreign business interests in = Nicaragua. According to Gregorio Selser, Sandino denied that his = movement was=20 basically agrarian and asserted that the "ragged characters" on the = streets of=20 Granada were poor and hungry because they simply did not "choose to work = on=20 coffee estates."= ⁽⁵³⁾=20 The General was more concerned about foreign control over the economy = than he=20 was about the effect that agricultural intensification had on the people = who=20 supported him. Consistent with Sandino's misconception of the causes of = poverty=20 was his opinion that agrarianism, as a basis for popular support, did = not have=20 more than a limited "field of action" in Nicaragua and that the = dispossessed=20 preferred a "modest idling way of life".= ⁽⁵⁴⁾=20 The real issue for Sandino was the United States military and economic = dominance=20 over the country and his solution was to chase the northern invader out = of=20 Nicaragua. Despite his penchant for nationalism, the significance of = Sandino in=20 Nicaraguan history is based upon the support his army had among the = rural=20 populace. His promises of a "humanitarian program" and "liberty" for = Nicaragua=20 garnered the support of the sector of society that suffered the most = from the=20 injustices of the system.

Within = the country=20 itself, Sandino's support among the peasantry can be measured by the = presence of=20 800 men and women, most of whom were without firearms, in his first=20 confrontation with the North American invaders in 1927. Although the = "Battle of=20 Ocotal" as it became known, with its death toll of 300 men, women and = children,=20 was a complete military disaster, it illustrates the willingness of the=20 peasantry to participate with an unknown leader in an armed struggle.= ⁽⁵⁵⁾=20 Despite the enormous efforts of various Nicaraguan political factions = and their=20 supporters from the United States, Sandino's popularity among the = peasantry=20 continued to grow. The rural poor provided and sustained his soldiers, = supplied=20 information concerning enemy actions and paid a price in lives for = openly=20 supporting the "crazy little army" of Augusto C=E9sar Sandino. Between = 1927 and=20 1934 Sandino's support among the peasantry ebbed and flowed with his = ability to=20 maintain their security. By 1933, when the marines left the country and = the war=20 was officially ended, Sandino had 6,000 men under his command and their=20 operations covered ten of Nicaragua's sixteen departments.= ⁽⁵⁶⁾=20 As part of the cease-fire agreement, the peasant general was given = amnesty, and=20 allowed to keep 100 men under arms and retreat to the Rio Coco river = valley=20 where a communal agricultural project was established.= ⁽⁵⁷⁾

Sandino's = struggle=20 and its broad support among the rural masses are typified by the = conditions that=20 he encountered at the U.S. owned San Albino mine. Gregorio Selser = describes the=20 San Albino mine as the place where Sandino grasped for the first time = the full=20 "wretchedness to which the workers of his country had been reduced."= ⁽⁵⁸⁾=20 Workers were not alone in their squalor; the suffering and subsequent=20 willingness to fight of a large part of the rural populace emerges in = the=20 historical accounts of the first Sandinistas. Although Sandino denied = that his=20 movement was basically agrarian because of the limited number of = latifundia and=20 the availability of land in the interior regions, parallels exist = between the=20 abject circumstances which led to peasant support in Nicaragua and the=20 conditions which provided for Zapata's success in Mexico. In addition, = the=20 collapse of the capitalist world's economy and the concomitant need to = intensify=20 neo-colonial exploitation in countries like Nicaragua, increased the = burden=20 carried by the formerly self-reliant peasantry.

The = reasons for=20 Sandino's appeal are reflected in the collapse of the world economy and = its=20 effect on those members of society upon which the exploitive nature of = the=20 capitalist system took its toll. During the 1920s the expanding world = markets=20 for Nicaraguan exports resulted in an increase in the demand for = agricultural=20 land and heightened the tensions between export and subsistence = cultivators. The=20 economic collapse of 1929, and the decade of disaster that followed, = further=20 intensified an already explosive situation. According to Jaime Wheelock, = coffee=20 exports increased by 80 percent between 1927 and 1935 but the price for = the=20 export declined at a corresponding rate to less than half of what it was = prior=20 to the crisis.= ⁽⁵⁹⁾=20 Although the 1930s was considered an economic disaster, the = unprecedented=20 increases in coffee exports, combined with the depression of wages paid = to=20 agricultural labourers, set the stage for the latifundist prosperity of = the=20 1940s. Consequently, the government's struggle with Sandino and the = peasantry=20 was a reflection of the intensification of the exploitation required by = the=20 latifundists to remain competitive amidst a crumbling world economy. The = failure=20 of Sandino's peasant struggle to change conditions of life for the rural = poor=20 marks the beginning of the acceleration of the process of agrarian = change that=20 began with the introduction of coffee as an export commodity back in the = 1800s.=20 Like coffee in the nineteenth century, the introduction of new export = crops=20 demanded changes in the patterns of land tenure to favor the cultivation = of=20 commercial crops. Increased demands were placed on agricultural land and = the=20 rural population to produce more for the export market.

The = emergence of a=20 world economic crisis that paralleled Sandino's struggle and his = popularity in=20 the rural areas contributed greatly to the appeal of the popular = rebellion.=20 Depressed world markets for Nicaragua's exports, combined with the = geographic=20 expansion of the area devoted to non-domestic agriculture resulted in = high=20 levels of unemployment and some cases of starvation among the peasantry. = In=20 addition, the war with Sandino put an added strain on the national = budget and in=20 1931 and 1932 schools and colleges were closed as a war saving.= ⁽⁶⁰⁾=20 In contrast, the National Guard, a paramilitary police force created by = the=20 United States to battle Sandino, absorbed one-fourth of the national = budget=20 during the same period.= ⁽⁶¹⁾=20 As a result of the war, transportation, communication and social service = systems=20 ceased to function in large parts of the country. In addition to the = hardships=20 of war, four years of drought beginning in 1927 were followed by a major = earthquake in Managua in 1931. Natural disasters exacerbated an already=20 difficult situation and added to the dire situation in which most rural = dwellers=20 found themselves.

Neill = Macaulay=20 illustrates the desperation of Sandino's supporters who consistently = sought=20 avenge upon merchants, latifundists and foreign businesses.= ⁽⁶²⁾=20 Macaulay claims that in addition to looting food, clothing and medicine, = Sandino's forces attempted to provide tools for agriculture to their = followers.=20 To counter the effects of the world economic crisis, guerrilla forces = carried=20 out land reform and established agricultural co-operatives in the areas = they=20 controlled. In doing so they dismantled latifundios, levied taxes and = marketed=20 agricultural produce much to the chagrin of landowners throughout the = country.=20 Sandino may not have understood the intricacies of the peasant support = for his=20 movement but he did witness their revenge on the people they held = responsible=20 for their suffering and on the property they owned. For example, the = massacre of=20 the peasantry at Ocotal in 1927 resulted from their refusal to obey the = order to=20 withdraw because of their preoccupation with looting and seeking revenge = for=20 past injustices.= ⁽⁶³⁾=20 The desperation of the peasantry who participated in the attack, is = evidenced by=20 their looting spree which emptied stores of food and clothing -- not = luxury=20 items. As a result of a general lack of control, Sandino's army suffered = several=20 defeats and near obliteration before turning the tide on the North = American=20 troops and their Nicaraguan hosts. Only after the peasant army changed = its=20 tactics from frontal attacks accompanied by anarchic looting sprees to = guerrilla=20 warfare that revenged the mistreatment of the poor, could Sandino claim = to=20 command an army.

A darker = side of the=20 peasant army's struggle in the countryside emerges in the literature in = the form=20 of excesses of war, the purpose of which was to terrify the civilian = population=20 in order to dissuade co-operation with the enemy and to punish those = considered=20 to have committed treason. The famous Sandinista justice system that = penalized=20 suspected traitors with machete cuts to the chest, throat, skull or the=20 amputation of the legs, or genitals, served to traumatize rural = dwellers.= ⁽⁶⁴⁾=20 Lesser offences resulted in the burning or vandalizing of the suspect's = house.= ⁽⁶⁵⁾=20 Sandino's military commanders are said to have tried to prevent = indiscriminate=20 abuses by their followers but with limited success. To this end, = attempts were=20 made to record the dues that were exacted from the land owners and = merchants who=20 were forced to contribute. Despite efforts to control the guerrilla = army, cases=20 of pillaging and unwarranted violence were recorded.

In = contrast, the=20 retribution against suspected enemies of the state by the U.S. Marines = and their=20 partners is always cited as generating support for the peasant general's = cause.=20 Almost all of the counter-insurgency operations of the government and = U.S.=20 forces were conducted in the rural areas. As part of the effort to crush = the=20 rebellion the concept of "strategic hamlets," that would later become = famous in=20 the Vietnam war, was first employed in Nicaragua. Anyone who the Marines = or=20 Guard caught outside of the hamlets was treated as the enemy, which = ultimately=20 meant death or imprisonment in the "concentration camps" that were set = up to=20 deal with prisoners of war.= ⁽⁶⁶⁾=20 In addition to the repression of the foreign troops and the National = Guard, a=20 police force created at the insistence of the U.S. government, was = reported to=20 have burned 70 villages and hamlets in the first year of its campaign = against=20 the Sandinistas.= ⁽⁶⁷⁾=20 The assassinations, rapes, assaults and thefts perpetrated by the = Marines and=20 their proteges were directed against a defenseless and often innocent = peasantry.=20 Peasant families were strafed by the U.S. aircraft squadrons, prisoners = were=20 tortured and bodies were mutilated during the war.= ⁽⁶⁸⁾=20 The immediate result of the repression was to swell the ranks of = Sandino's army=20 with the terrorized peasants whose communities were outside of the = neutral zones=20 and under attack from the government and its allies. Although resistance = was not=20 new to the people who made up Sandino's forces and his supporters, the=20 destructive force with which the government counter attacked = was.

The = Nicaraguan=20 countryside can only be described as in a state of anarchy during = Sandino's war=20 against imperialism. Three different military forces, the Sandinistas, = the U.S.=20 Marines and the National Guard, demanded the loyalty of the peasantry. = People=20 who were thought to collaborate with the enemy were treated harshly by=20 participants on both sides of the conflict. The rural poor, who had = their human=20 rights abused by both sides in the conflict, were well aware of the = tenuous=20 nature of their security. Virtually every confrontation between Sandino = and the=20 government forces occurred in the marginalized areas of the country to = which the=20 dispossessed peasantry had moved after the expansion of coffee. As a = result, the=20 peasants knew that they could only be as openly supportive of the = guerrilla=20 cause as their security would guarantee. Between 1927 and 1933, many = peasant=20 families lived in constant fear that their actions would be interpreted = as=20 treasonable by one or the other army. In spite of the fact that Sandino = and his=20 poorly equipped army could not offer more than occasional protection for = individual non-combatants, a significant number of peasants risked their = lives=20 for his ideals. By the end of the war thousands of peasants had been = affected by=20 the chaos in the countryside but little had changed.

The U.S. = Marines left=20 on January 1, 1933, without securing a victory over the Sandinistas. = Anastasio=20 Somoza Garc=EDa was left to head the National Guard. The withdrawal of = the U.S.=20 armed forces and Sandino's lack of a solid political platform from which = to=20 continue his war against imperialism, led the peasant general to accept = the=20 terms of a cease-fire and disarmament at the beginning of February.= ⁽⁶⁹⁾=20 Finally, in 1934, Sandino was murdered by Somoza's men, hundreds of his=20 followers were massacred and the necessary conditions were created for = the=20 reinstatement of the latifundia system in guerrilla controlled areas. = Somoza put=20 an end to the "crazy little army" of Augusto C. Sandino and the advances = he had=20 made toward ending U.S. dominance of the economy. The death of Sandino = and the=20 destruction of his army ended an important era in the political and = economic=20 development of the Nicaraguan state. The victory of imperialism over = nationalism=20 served as a catalyst for the acceleration of the agricultural changes = that had=20 stagnated during the first part of the century. By the end of the war, = changes=20 in the world's political future could be seen on the horizon, and = Nicaragua's=20 new leaders were poised to take advantage of the opportunities offered = by the=20 coming struggle between the imperial powers of Europe and Asia. Finally, = after a=20 brief flirtation with fascism, Nicaragua became fully entrenched as an = active=20 participant in the maintenance of United States hegemony over the=20 Americas.

1. See=20 for example, Philip F. Warnken, The Agricultural Development of = Nicaragua=20 (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1975); or Gary W. Wynia, = Politics=20 and Planners: Economic Development Policy in Central America = (Madison:=20 University of Wisconsin Press, 1972).

2. For=20 example, Humberto Ortega Saavedra, Jaime Wheelock and Carlos Fonseca, = often=20 clandestinely, published articles and books that were widely circulated = during=20 the 1970s and were later released by the Departamento de Propaganda y = Educaci=F3n=20 Politica del FSLN, after 1979. For example, Jaime Wheelock, = Imperialismo y=20 dictadura: crisis de una formaci=F3n social (Mexico: Siglo XXI=20 1975).

3. A=20 superficial yet interesting account of the Somoza's family's = dictatorship can be=20 found in Eduardo Crawley, Dictators Never Die: A Portrait of = Nicaragua and=20 the Somoza Dynasty (New York: St. Martens Press, = 1979).

4. John=20 A. Booth, The End and the Beginning: The Nicaraguan Revolution = (Boulder:=20 Westview Press, 1982), is a good example of an author who succeeds a = writing in=20 sympathetic yet critical account of the history of the Nicaraguan=20 revolution.

5.=20 Shirley Christian, Nicaragua: Revolution in the Family (New = York:=20 Random House, 1985). Robert A. Pastor, Condemned to Repetition: The = United=20 States and Nicaragua, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1987). = Abraham=20 Brumberg, "Nicaragua: A Mixture of Shades," Dissent = (Spring/Summer 1986).=20 See also, Robert Leiken, "Nicaragua's untold Story," The New = Republic=20 (October 1984). and David Nolan, The Ideology of the Sandinistas and = the=20 Nicaraguan Revolution (Miami: University of Miami Press,=20 1984).

6. Pains=20 are taken by such authors to emphasize their support for the overthrow = of Somoza=20 but their displeasure with the subsequent complexion of the revolution.=20 Coincidently, the United States government, after forty years of support = for=20 "Somocismo", takes an identical stance.

7. For=20 example: Forest Colburn, "Foot Dragging and other Peasant Responses to = the=20 Nicaraguan Revolution," Peasant Studies 13 (Winter 1986). Carmen = Diana=20 Deere, "Nicaraguan Agricultural Policy: 1979-81," Cambridge Journal = of=20 Economics 5 (1981). Carlos Vilas, The Sandinista Revolution: = National=20 Liberation and Social Transformation in Central America (New York: = Monthly=20 Review Press, 1986). See also, James Petras, "Whither the Nicaraguan=20 Revolution?" Monthly Review (October 1979), for an example of the = more=20 "radical" criticism of the Sandinistas.

8. See=20 for example Carlos Vilas, The Sandinista Revolution,=20 p.119-121.

9. Kai=20 T. Erickson, Everything in its Path: Destruction of Community in the = Buffalo=20 Creek Flood (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1976); Anastasia M. = Shkilnyk,=20 A Poison Stronger Than Love: The Destruction of an Ojibwa = Community (New=20 Haven: Yale University Press, 1985); Art Hansen and Anthony Oliver-Smith = eds.,=20 Involuntary Migration and Resettlement: The Problems and Responses of = Dislocated People (Boulder: Westview Press, 1982).

10.=20 Margaret Randall, Sandino's Daughters: Testimonies of Nicaraguan = Women in=20 Struggle (Toronto: New Star Books, 1981), p.v.

11. Kai=20 Erikson, Everything in its Path, p.255.

12.=20 Vladimir Lenin, "The Agrarian Programme of Social Democracy in the = First=20 Russian Revolution", Collected Works: 1908-1909 (Moscow Foreign = Languages=20 Publishing House, 1966).

13.=20 David Goodman, and Michael Redclift, From Peasant to Proletarian: = Capitalist Development and Agrarian Transition, (Oxford: Basil = Blackwell,=20 1981).

14.=20 Eric Wolf, "Types of Latin American Peasantry: A Preliminary = Discussion,"=20 American Anthropologist 57 (1955). Eric Hobsbawm, "Peasants and=20 Politics," Journal of Peasant Studies 1 (October = 1973).

15.=20 Rodolfo Stavenhagen, Social Classes in Agrarian Societies = (New York:=20 Anchor Books, 1975).

16.=20 Sidney Mintz, "A Note on the Definition of Peasantries," The = Journal of=20 Peasant Studies, Vol.1 (October 1973). p.95.

17.=20 Nicaragua has historically had the lowest population density in = Central=20 America and in recent years has had the highest population growth rate = on=20 isthmus.

18.=20 Everyone in the society had a place in the rigid hierarchy, everyone = had=20 obligations to fulfill and they all benefitted to a degree. The system = was=20 characterized by unequal relations between producers and the owners of = the means=20 of production, but it worked and the entire society came to depend upon=20 it.

19.=20 C.H. Haring offers a good survey of the history of the Audiencia de=20 Guatemala in his book entitled The Spanish Empire in America (New = York:=20 Harcourt, Brace & World Inc. 1963).

20.=20 ibid.

21.=20 Warnken, The Agricultural Development of Nicaragua., = (Columbia:=20 University of Missouri Press, 1975).

22.=20 ibid., p.16.

23.=20 ibid., p.27.

24.=20 Ralph Lee Woodward Jr., offers a good summary of the history of = Central=20 America in his book Central America: A Nation Divided (Oxford: = Oxford=20 University Press, 2nd ed. 1985).

25. For=20 example, Thomas L. Karnes, The Failure of Union: Central America=20 1824-1975 (Tempe, Arizona: Center for Latin American Studies, = Arizona State=20 University, 1976).

26. See=20 for example Jaime Wheelock, Imperialismo Y = Dictadura.

27.=20 Woodward, Central America, p.128-136.

28.=20 Karnes, The Failure of Union, p.176-177.

29.=20 Virtually every author offers a version of Walker's exploits in = Central=20 America; none of which could be considered flattering.

30.=20 Henri Weber, Nicaragua: The Sandinista Revolution (Thetford, = Norfolk:=20 Thetford Press Limited, 1981), p.4-5; Woodward, Central America: A = Nation=20 Divided, p.271.

31. The=20 size of the indigenous population in nineteenth century Nicaragua is = difficult=20 to ascertain because of problems of definition. However, contemporary=20 investigators commonly use a figure of four percent to refer to the = sector of=20 society that is considered Amerindian.

32.=20 Wheelock, Imperialismo Y Dictadura, p.25-26.

33.=20 ibid., p.77.

34.=20 idem,

35.=20 ibid., p.65-70.

36.=20 Woodward, Central America: A Nation Divided, = p.157.

37.=20 ibid., p.160.

38.=20 Weber, Nicaragua, p.6.

39.=20 Jaime Biderman, "The Development of Capitalism in Nicaragua: A = Political=20 Economic History," Latin American Perspectives, 10 (1983),=20 p.11.

40.=20 Charles D. Kepner Jr., Social Aspects of the Banana Industry, = (New=20 York: Columbia University Press, 1936) p.55-57.

41.=20 Ibid, 67.

42.=20 ibid, p.56.

43.=20 ibid. p.12

44.=20 ⁴⁴ Charles D Kepner Jr., and Jay Henry Soothill, The = Banana=20 Empire: A Case Study of Economic Imperialism, (New York: Russell = &=20 Russell, 1935) p. 337.

45.=20 Wheelock, Imperialismo y Dictadura, p.74-75.

46.=20 Weber, Nicaragua, p.6-7; Black, Triumph of the People, = p.7.

47.=20 John A. Booth, The End and Beginning p.24.

48.=20 Jaime Wheelock and Luis Carri=F3n, p.86.

49.=20 Joseph O. Baylen, "Sandino: Patriot or Bandit", Hispanic American = Historical Review, (August 1951), p.394.

50. For=20 a critical view of Sandino's uprising see Neill Macaulay, The Sandino = Affair (Durham NC.: Duke University Press, 1985).

51.=20 Baylen, "Patriot or Bandit?" p.394-395.

52. The=20 leading Nicaraguan press of the time consistently referred to Sandino = and his=20 men as "bandaleros" in order to diminish his credibility. Sandino was so = concerned about his image that in the first peace proposal he insisted = that all=20 records that refer to his army as bandits be withdrawn from the national = archives and destroyed.

53.=20 Gregorio Selser, Sandino, (New York: Monthly Review Press, = 1981),=20 p.97-98.

54.=20 idem,.

55.=20 ibid,. p .81.

56.=20 Black, Triumph of the People, p.22.

57.=20 Baylen, "Patriot or Bandit?" p.418-419.

58.=20 Selser, Sandino, p.65.

59.=20 Jaime Wheelock, Imperialismo y Dictadura, = p.125.

60.=20 Selser, Sandino, p.137.

61.=20 Booth, End and the Beginning, p.44.

62.=20 Macaulay, Sandino Affair, p.210-214.

63.=20 Selser, Sandino, p.80.

64.=20 Macaulay, Sandino Affair, p.212-213, and Selser, = Sandino,=20 p.113-115, offer particularly vivid descriptions of sadism inflicted on = the=20 peasantry by both armies. For a glimpse at the way Sandino was portrayed = by the=20 Nicaraguan government see Anastacio Somoza, El Verdadero Sandino O El = Calvario de Las Segovias, (Managua, 1934).

65.=20 Macaulay, Sandino Affair, p.213.

66.=20 Black, Triumph of the People, p.19.

67.=20 Selser, Sandino, p.115.

68.=20 Macaulay, Sandino Affair, p.228-229.

69.=20 Black, Triumph of the People, p.21.

Research=20 Links for Assignments | Courses=20 Offered