Much of the early nineteenth-century instability resulted from unsuccessful attempts to reconcile two powerful ideals—the sovereignty of the nation and the sovereignty of villages. Neither centralists nor federalists were able to create a functional national government and simultaneously respond to villagers’ desire to control their own resources. Elites of any persuasion seeking power often mobilized locally based militia forces to claim power. After the elites took power, the communities that had been mobilized would retain their arms and demand concessions, such as the confirmation of community lands and municipal sovereignty, which those in power were loath to grant.132
Early Mexican history differs sharply from that of the United States, which had become independent less than half a century earlier. In New Spain, the entire government had been built on a top-down basis, with power coming from the Crown. When this single legitimating institution disappeared in 1821, nothing bound Mexicans together. Not only did Mexicans have to create new institutions, but people had to learn to respect them.133
Simon Bolivar commented on Spanish Americans’ poor preparations for democracy:
As long as our countrymen do not acquire the political talents and virtues which distinguish our brothers to the north, wholly popular systems, far from working to our advantage, will, I greatly fear, come to our ruin. Unfortunately, these characteristics are beyond our reach in the degree to which they are required. On the contrary, we are dominated by the vices contracted by rule of a nation like Spain, which has only distinguished itself by ferocity, ambition, vindictiveness and greed.134
In British North America, there had been a significant degree of self-government. The institutions the British created, such as J. P. courts, country courts, houses of burgesses, and town meetings in New England, remained intact after U. S. independence and provided a stable framework for the new government. Similarly, the colonies had enjoyed a relatively free press, which continued after independence. Economic diversity—shipbuilding, farming, and some manufacturing—led to internal trade ties that held the former colonies together. Britain’s 1783 recognition of U. S. independence minimized the danger of recolonization and decreased the need for military spending. Finally, the elite in the United States enjoyed a high degree of cohesion through the first five U. S. presidencies.135
World History
