Pros And Cons Of Simon Bolivar

Slowly but surely, the Spanish and Portuguese viceroyalties created in the Americas were disintegrated through the multitude of independence movements that dismissed the crown’s power. Although the newly independent nations had resolved their issues with the crown by proclaiming their independence, they were still faced with numerous other challenges. One of the biggest challenges these nations had to face was the transition of power and authority. “Spanish America experienced a difficult transfer and legitimation of power.” A key participant on the issue of independence and construction of stable governments in the new republics was Simón Bolívar. Bolívar was very vocal on the method in which the new republics should successfully govern in order to avoid the conflicts that derived from the early divisional issues,
For example, one of the biggest limitations that this document presents is that this document only shows a single view point. The only viewpoint that is scene is through Simón Bolívar, and this creates a degree of bias because only the arguments that Bolívar are present and no counter arguments are visible. Another limitation is that all of these arguments derive from a successful independence leader, but that does not guarantee he is a successful politician or governmental authority figure because “he resigned [as Gran Colombia's president] after an assassination attempt and amid bitter division.” This reflects the belief that “war heroes did not make great statesmen.” Thus, Bolívar’s views stated in his Address to the Congress of Angostura,1819 are greatly questioned because of the bias and lack of political