There is much in the literature which laments the condition of the common man in nineteenth-century Mexico. Most of the evidence for this sad interpretation, however, is circumstantial and qualitative in substance and leaves one groping at times for more convincing arguments. This pessimistic view seems inappropriate for the North where historical interpretation in these matters is deeply influenced by generalizations arising from studies of the South and Center. Careful examination demonstrates that for at least one region of the North a distinct and varied natural and human environment produced a different set of living conditions. This study assesses the living standards in low-income hacienda laborers in the State of Zacatecas during the period 1820–80. The results suggest a reconsideration of the notion that all nineteenth-century Mexican peones were oppressed and malnourished step-children of the latifundia system.

Early in 1869, when the flags of Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay were unfurled from the turrets of Asunción, the capital of Paraguay, an end to the horrors of the Paraguayan War was at last in sight. The conflict between Paraguay on the one hand, and Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay on the other, had raged for five years, since 1865, destroying human lives and material wealth. The fighting came to an official end with the death of Francisco Solano López, dictator of Paraguay, on 1 March 1870.

In a recent critical survey of scholarly writing on dependency theory, Ronald H. Chilcote noted that, ‘like other theory in an infant stage, dependency theory has spawned a plethora of interpretations and applications, and has been adopted by ideologues on all sides of the political spectrum’. This enthusiastic response, while welcome for the new perspective it affords on underdevelopment, has led some Latin Americanists to caution against the over-application of dependency theory and the unwarranted inflation of its explanatory power. Richard M. Morse, speaking specifically of urban development observes that ‘the “external dependency” thesis … easily leads to dogmatism’, and Phillipe Schmitter warns against the indiscriminate use of the theory to explain all of Latin America's ills. Such caveats have merit, especially in view of the plasticity of current thinking about dependency.

The Club 3 de Outubro, overlooked by most studies of the Brazilian revolution of 1930, played a central role in the tenente movement and in the revolution itself. The 1930s were a watershed in modern Brazilian history, when state, society, and economy were altered, sometimes radically. Although some of the changes were responses to the Depression and international conditions, the revolution as a political phenomenon was a dominant force in shaping contemporary Brazil. State authorities ceded power to the Central Government's interventors (delegates), counteracting Brazil's strong regionalist tradition and assuring the dominance of national institutions. In addition, urban voters in the 19305 for the first time had an influential voice in politics, sometimes as allies of the tenentes. The army, strengthened and unified vis-à-vis the state militias, was subordinated to the Federal Government.

After the Chilean junta abolished party democracy in September 1973, it announced plans for a new constitution modeled on corporatist lines. Although, to date, few concrete expressions of these proposals have emerged, there is enough evidence since 1973 to suggest the lines along which the junta is thinking, and this indicates that not only international factors but also two sources of native historical inspiration are at work. First, and most important, Chile's military dictators were considering elevating an existing infrastructure of government-certified functional interest groups to replace the outlawed parties as intermediaries between the State and the individual. These gremios (private economic sctoral organizations, such as the National Society of Agriculture) had traditionally shaped public decisions both as representatives of their occupational fields and as permanent, often official, participants in state agencies concerned with their production sectors.

It is common knowledge that, prior to the military coup of 1973, Chile was the only Latin American country to have strong workers' political parties of the European type. Many reasons have been given for this phenomenon, but it is clear that Chile has been the only country in Latin-America to allow the development of Marxist parties with strong appeal and a strong following, within the framework of what could be called liberal, democratic processes. Up to 1970, the electoral force of the Socialist and Communist Parties in Chile oscillated between 20 and 30 per cent of the total national electorate. This rose to more than 40 per cent during 1975.