what kind of politics did spanish colonies have?
151154
Spanish colonial governments depended on the period. \n\nWhat made Spain lose its colonies was that the way they treated colonies changed with political changes in Spain. At times, they treated people from the colonies as Spaniards, other times they denied all rigths and ruled by decree. \n\nFor this reason, people in Spanish America decided to get rid of Spain, following the example of the U.S.
260155
There is a historical president in the The US taking over Latin American countries for other purposes than just to rule them. The best example is the Mexican American war. It was mainly a war over the border of Texas. US said it was the Rio Grand, Mexico said it was the Brazos river. So we fought a war all the way to Mexico City. We took over Mexico. But we didn't want Mexico we just want Texas and the other half of the nation. And that's what we got. Plus puppet governments are easy to run than local state government. Hope this helps.
234968
Technically, the term West Indies doesn't actually refer to a specific place. But rather to the people of the Caribbean islands and some parts of South America, who were joined together by Colonial governments. Is that what you're referring to?
681748
Well, I think for the most part there was not local administrators.  There are probably a few exceptions to this.  There was some form of local administration with the original colonies,  so that is the eastern most states, and Florida.  Also, Texas was an independent nation before joining the Union, so I believe it had some local forms of government.  Hawaii had a monarchy system, and is relatively Small, so I do not think it.  As for the vast majority that went the route of territory to state, for the most part they were administered as an entire territory under a civilian organization directly under Congress.  I do not believe there was any sort of county governments.  There were town councils and sheriffs, but nothing on a more organized level.
1048160
a subject stydin societies and their politics.
41388
Yep. They had a significant presence in Spain for over 700 years, and ruled most of the Iberian peninsula for most of that time. A lot of Spanish culture comes from that period of Muslim rule, for example flamenco music. The beginning of the Spanish Empire, which was the first empire on which the sun never set, began with the Reconquista, the expulsion of the Muslim presence by Catholic forces. It finished in 1492 and was presided over by Ferdinand and Isabella, the rulers who sponsored Christopher Columbus' voyage to the New World. I've included a link to a handy timeline.
1123989
Political power.\n\nEDIT:\nI won't vote for López Obrador, Calderón or Madrazo. None of them is better than the others.
215953
In the 17th century the Dutch sailed the whole world in order to find slaves, spices (which where very expensive at the time) and other things to make as much money as possible.\nThe Dutch government set up a company (de West-Indische compagnie or West India company) in that time to trade in the Caribean, Latin America and the eastside of the United States. The company also had a political purpose, it could replace the war with Spain to the Spanish colonies (which were also in the Caribean area). Doing this, it gave relative ease in the Republic of the Seven Provinces of the Netherlands.\nIn order to trade easier, the Dutch set up colonies in the Caribbean, the United States (New York, for example), South-Africa, Indonesia and other countries. Those colonies were also to get some rest and to get fresh food again on the ship (which had to sail for multiple months to get to its destination).
1117304
You mean in the United States?\n\nThe government here has always relied on functionalism as in the 1800s and 1900s when major reform movements were carried out. Prohibition, de-segragation, quota laws.\n\nDemocratic? I'm not so sure, besides some political movements started by citizens a vast majority of "democratic" power lies in the hands of the politicians and the coporate leaders. But of course we are the ones who vote for our politicians so I guess it is democractic in some sense.\n\nHope this helps.\n\nBest WIshes, \nTony
520991
The Spanish and Portuguese.
221814
In the sixteenth century, Spaniards arrived on Philippine shores. One of their expressed aims for colonizing our islands was to Christianize the pagan natives. Many university students of today, however, no longer accept this. They believe that Spanish missionaries were instruments of a merchant empire with designs on cheap raw materials and the strategic ports of a Pacific archipelago.\n\nVarious consequences stem from the manner in which Christianity entered Filipino life. First, priests, nuns and church workers occupied social positions of power, as they were simultaneously loved, feared and revered by the local population. Second, the Spanish Catholic Church attempted to expand very rapidly throughout the archipelago. This resulted in the physical presence of church buildings and church networks even in farflung rural areas.\n\nWhen the Marcos regime became extremely abusive, the only other social counterbalance to the power and physical presence of the dictatorship was the Catholic Church. This occupied positions of influence not only in urban centers, but also in the countryside as well. More so, its physical presence throughout the country became convenient ad hoc centers of dissemination for information regarding political activities.\n\nThe politico-cultural impact of Christianity on Filipino liberation movements runs through history. What has come to life in our society is an integration of Western Christianity with the more deeply set spiritual orientations of an Asian people. As one psychologist writes, "During Spanish times, he (the Filipino) accepted Roman Catholicism whose saints fused beautifully with his belief in a spirit world . . ." (Bulatao, 1986).\n\nDuring four centuries of Spanish rule, pockets of peasant uprisings challenged the colonial authorities. Cultural themes in the popular religious book called the Pasyon inspired Filipino revolutionary activity (Ileto, 1979). Peasant leaders strongly identified with the image of the suffering Christ, whose death on the Cross was the ultimate sacrifice for the common good.\n\nWhen Marcos declared Martial Law in 1972, the ideas if the theology of liberation had begun to take root in the Philippines. Throughout the dictatorship, various liberation movements weaved in and out of a political worldview that combined transcendental ideas of man with more pragmatic Marxist-style outlooks. (Human Development Research and Documentation, 1982).\n\nCatholic bishops took longer than Church grassroots movements to respond to Marcos' regime (Quevedo, 1986). In the first ten years of Martial Rule, pastoral letters by the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) remained relatively non-committal. Later, a significant change took place. For example, its 1983 statements touch the most sensitive social issues of that year (Hardy, 1984).\n\nThe February Revolution of 1986 highlighted the marriage of religion with politics. Thousands of Filipinos faced the regime's tanks unarmed. The street revolutionaries had nothing but prayers and whispered calls to their Mother Mary to protect them from harm. Eventual victory was not only a historical moment of political change, but also "a profoundly religious experience" (Nebres, 1986).\n\nIn those momentous February days, faith-expression was a mixture  of Western Catholicism and folk culture. The Filipino's highly personalistic culture demanded that leadership emanate from persons physically present during the crisis. Throughout the four days at EDSA, there was the "personal participation of the Sto. Niño or the Blessed Mother leading the procession. It was all very Filipino" (Bulatao, 1986)\n\nThe Filipino concept of power blended well with Christian orientations to produce the EDSA victory. In our culture, there are two sources of social strength: lakas and awa. The first is possessed by the powerful; it is their capacity to get what they want because of politico-economic-military re
1134306
The Spanish brought horses, their religion (Christianity - Catholicism), advanced weapons, and new diseases (like chicken pox).\nThey brough from the Americas gold, potatoes, tomatoes, corn, and chocolate.\nThat's just to name a few.  Also, are you talking about the first group of Spaniards (with Columbus) or more in general?  I was speaking more in general.
872788
Unlike the rest of the colonies, in Connecticut and Rhode Island the people of the state elected the governor, and, aside from the Navigation and a few other restrictive laws, were practically independent of the Crown. The legislature was bicameral. The respresentative system of government was common to all the colonies.\n\nConnecticut and Rhode Island were chartered (the corporate was the same as the charter form) colonies.
1077147
Like i said for your other question Spamerica. Spanish America
862916
what government , what country, what century, what decade, what form of government. \nwhy ask vague questions?
790380
The immigration from Europe to the colonies started because of a desire for religious freedom from tyranny.  The Church and the State were too intertwined and both had become too political.
942242
The Souther Colonies consisted primariy of North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia.\n\nColonists wanted gold, land, and resources. The biggest reason however was plantations. Many wanted to reap huge profits from growing a variety of crops including tobacco and cotton. Georgia was a colony where English debtors were sent. Though it always acted as a "buffer" between the English and Spanish (Florida).