Klooster however was not putting together a comprehensive …show more content…
Britain’s continued fiscal measures chipped away at colonial sentiments. The French parliament’s political power undermined Louis XVI legitimacy. France’s imprisonment of Spain’s Ferdinand VII left the Spanish colonies ungoverned in their eyes, and when he returned to power, Ferdinand’s inflexibility caused resentments. Klooster argued four reasons that revolutionary agendas succeeded: A) State policies became increasing unpopular, B) the groups that were not happy with the state policies were excluded from state power bases or representation, C) inadequate shows of power or policing by the state, and D) violence by the state to the groups. Thus, the nation-states escalated or exasperated tensions by making critical errors. Another reason Klooster deduced that the revolutions were not inevitable was due to the conflict and division, the civil war element, within the colony. Loyalists and opposing factions did exist and exerted influence.
Klooster stated that the “revolutionary” agenda was sovereignty, not democracy, and could easily have evolved into a dictatorship, as occurred in France. Nor was hard won sovereignty always a pleasant relief. Haiti suffered with debt, poverty, and illiterate leadership. Economic woes followed revolution in all four events, and manifested in further violence such as coups and civil