Why did Gran Colombia Fail? (Short Animated Documentary)

Gran Colombia is one of history's great 'what if' countries. It was a large South American power which only existed for 12 years before breaking into pieces and becoming Venezuela, Ecuador and Colombia. So why did this nation fracture? Why did Gran Colombia Fail? To find out watch this short and simple animated history documentary.
TL:DW - Bolivar maketh. Bolivar breaketh.
/ histmattersyt
Patreon: www.patreon.com/user?u=4973164
Merch: teespring.com/stores/history-...
A special thanks to all of these Patrons below, without whom the show wouldn't be possible:
Øystein Alsaker
thypthon
Dummy
Sergio M. Vela
Heath Robertson
0dd
Dave Brondsema
YouKnowWho
Michael Kram
Hasmuffin
Franco La Bruna
Southside Mitch
Azlow the Lion
John
Andrew Partington
Matthew Literovich
William Andrea
JakeBak0905
Ryan Schindeler
Hayden Rivers
Alex Teplyakov
Joooooshhhhhh
Gerald Armstrong
Piotr Wojnowski
Phoenix Fats
Steven Gibson
Stalliarus
Travis Mount
Joshua Rackstraw
Phillip Gathright
Shauna K
imperialgerman
Windischgraetz
Coolin Castleman
Samantha O'Leary
Jack Wicks
Philip Yip
Ariel David Moya Sequeira
Aaron Conaway
sharpie660
Andrea Dekrout
Christopher Godfrey
Richard Manklow
WR
Christian & Penny Gray
Tailsdoll
Vance Christiaanse
Andrew F
Andreas Mosand
Baste
Arthur Hosey Jr.
Dana Spurgeon
Joerg S
Eugene Delacroix
Nicholas Menghini
Erik Hare
Porkmeister
Konstantin Bredyuk
Colonel Oneill
William Swiacki
Ron Johnson
Adrian Marine
Matthew Toles
Allen Rines
Shawn Morse
zockotron
David Johnston
Jack Nelson
Katie Flinn
James Fouts
Jane Sumpter
Zach Rust
Sethars
Liam Gilleece
Roman Kynčl
Keith A. Layton
TheWalkingKen
Wesley Helgeson
Chase Labiste
Harley Raptopoulos
Ciege Engine
Vilena5
Angel Aguiñaga
Dr. Howard Dr. Fine Dr. Howard
Isabel Harrison
Tim Lane
Sahni
Clayton Schuman
Tactical_Jackal
Mark Hoffman
Snowdon
Chris Winther
Michael Galloway
Bradley Backoff
Chris Weisel
Imperial Pony
Serius_Loyola
Mickey Landen
Ian Jensen
Andrew Patane
Christine Purvis
Michael Myers
mgnesium.poetry
HelloAgain
Matt Reed
Leena Al-Souki
Robert Woodward
John Garcia
epic4
Nader Farhat
Perry Gagne
Victor Gomez
Anthony McCann
KNSTRKTVST
JAY ALAN EDELMAN
Matthew O'Connor
William Adderholdt
Wilhelm Screamer
Bernice
Dullis
Steve Bonds
ARandomPaperClip
tosha van opstall
Raymond He
Juliet Werewolf
Joshua Rosenberg
Curt Helmerich
Warren Rudkin
Juan Castillo
Bartosz Zasada
Chach
Abhijeeth
bas mensink
James Bisonette Fan #1
Stefan Møller
Steven Mastronardo
BattleGoat Studios
Joel Cromwell
Nathan Ngumi
Yossi Vainshtein
Aaron Larrow
David van Reyk
Thomas McGill
Joseph Hutchins
Ahmed Roshdi
Richard Wolfe
Dexter_McAaron
Andrew Niedbala
Ryan Marinelli
Joseph Reinsch
Gnar Slabdash
No way
Hexapuma
David Patrick Bucko
Magdalena Reinberg-Leibel
Christian Vasquez Leon
Colm Byrne
Liquid Chief
Marty Myers
Scott O'Donnell
James
Nicolas IDontThinkYouCare
emccabe
Matthew Trimborn
Oliver Jenner
Manny F
Malcolm Estus
Qi Xiao
Yared Cristiano
Adam Rabung
Jonny Minogue
Tino
Bernardo Santos
Tim Stumbaugh
Benjamin Bowring
Parth Sagdeo
Alex Kihurani
Bren Ehnebuske
Alen
SirAlpaka
Bodo Nuber
Ken Warner
Alex Slepak
Burt Clothier
kevinh
Ryan Haber
Matthew Bakke
Nathan Snyder
Daniel D.
Mars Project
Clay Carroll
Emily D
Vegard Tønnessen
Dima Volodin
Eddie
Azul Bravestrong
Coper
Melissa Prober
Bryan Linsley
Sean Long
Michael Cunningham
Mirza Ahmed
nullptr
Peter Marino
Brian Giordano
Yuichiro Kakutani
Gordon Wilson
anon
Mark Littlehale
Robert Mitchell
Tristan Kreller
Pat Stahl
Léon M.
Joker 54
Jeffrey Schneider
Joseph Kerckhoff
John Orr
I'm Not In The Description
Keith Garvey
LambOfLeg
Robert Brockway
Kevin Phoenix
Justin Pearson
Alex G.
Ball State
Michael Dierker
JT96
Justin Pratt
Phil and Lisa Toland
אורי פרקש
Thomas Wang
Wolf
Kinfe85
LUIS JIMENEZ
Jeremy Arghhhhh
mohd
Sophie Winter
Joshua A Bishop
Riley davidson
Tyler Jenkins
Charles Doolittle
Peter A Titov
Mark Ploegstra
Zachary Oertel
Colm Boyle
A. G.
Ellen Teapot
Dr. Schnitzel
Franklin Sousa
blaZzinG_FurY
Mik Scheper
Lech Duraj
Yick Chung
Dr. Sarno
Sean D.
Christopher Lichtenberg
Gregory Priebe
Rita Cragwall
Donald Weaver
Peter Konieczny
Seth Reeves
Andrey Listochkin
Colonel Cheng
Alexander Pozniak
Now Seibert
Dan Reiher
Danny Anstess
Heytun
Casey Frye
Käs
Andrew Sever
Matthew Hogan
Paul McGee
Michael Coates
Abdallah Al-Ammari
João Santos
Froilan Legaspi
Daniel O'Reilly
Ben L
Stefano Deiana
Gezza The Random Reviewer
Pierre Le Mouel
Erik Carlsson
Olaf
Laura Jeal
Rhys Little
Hakkira
Jackarice26
Farquhar Ramshackle
Oliver Robson
Drew Deegan
Gina Service
Friedrich Demmer
Phil Johnston
zemnmez
James Ling
George Gremo
DarkLycan
Roberticus1992

[@ShortHax]

Gran Colombia IRL: Falls in 11 years Gran Colombia in Civ VI: Conquers the world in 11 years

[@alejandrorodriguezhernande7247]

Much better

[@LaCoalicion.]

You again

[@alejandrorodriguezhernande7247]

@@Whatareyoudoinnhere Virreinato de Nueva Granada is bestes tho

[@anon2427]

Just another reason why civ 5 is better

[@alejandrorodriguezhernande7247]

@@Whatareyoudoinnhere they treated them better than the Criollos and following governments ever did. The natives rose against the Criollos in múltiple occasions, Bolívar made sure the ones that did died. Read about Black Christmas in Colombia

[@nightdragonx123]

"It's always Napoleon.." I could near feel the eye roll in that phrase 😂😂😂

[@birisuandrei1551]

What a surprise that the Greatest general of all time caused a lot of weird stuff to happen...

[@retrogamermax8287]

@@birisuandrei1551 - The Holy Roman Empire getting destroyed which led to the unification of Germany and Italy as nations down the road - Latin America revolting and gaining independence from Spain during the Napoleonic Wars - Napoleon selling the Louisiana Territory to the United States to get more money for his war efforts. Yep, the world wouldn't be the same without Napoleon's actions.

[@Edmonton-of2ec]

You could practically hear it

[@morganrobinson8042]

Every. Historians. Reaction. You can hear the frustration as he forces the 19th century Europe to do what he says despite all logic.

[@birisuandrei1551]

@@retrogamermax8287 well cleaning the mess that is the HRE was the best thing he did tbh, a Federation like that in the modern day would literally DIE in the middle of Europe.

[@HappyMan0203]

So basically, in wanting to keep Gran Colombia together, Bolivar did literally everything that would break it apart. It's like an overbearing parent wondering why their kids don't want to hang out with them.

[@kostam.1113]

Same happened in Yugoslavia But i can understand his position Countries by default are to be centralised and united If that is not possible it's either dissolution or federalisation.

[@spencer1980]

Hindsight is always 2020.

[@kikujade]

he was a military genius, not a politician, sadly

[@spk1121]

The funny thing is he probably learned from the experiences of the U.S. _too well._ The USA had 8 years under the Articles of Confederation (1781-89), which was enough time for average citizens to understand how the system of governance worked & eventually recognize it had too many fundamental flaws. This is why there were some protests, but no mass uprisings when the Constitution was adopted in 1789. Bolivar undoubtedly knew this and pushed for a strong federal system immediately. If he had let things play out in similar fashion, I believe there's a reasonable chance he would have succeeded in the long run! Kind of a shame, but his frustration is actually pretty understandable within this context. Why "waste time" implementing a system he had good reason to believe was doomed to fail?

[@ricardokowalski1579]

@@kikujade ja ja ja ja...Napoleon battles are studied even today. None of Bolivar battles is. "La campaña admirable" was a complete failure that left Maracaibo and Angostura standing and both flanks exposed. There is no "genius" here.

[@pridelander06]

"Now that they had to get along, they didn't." You could sum up so so much of history this way.

[@itsblitz4437]

Even today there are countries within that just don't get along like Ethiopia, Afghanistan, and Myanmar.

[@walterclements7968]

@@itsblitz4437 Belgium

[@anthonydelmonte1986]

@@itsblitz4437 Azerbaijan, Armenia, Turkey, Belarus, and Ukraine

[@aikslf]

@@itsblitz4437 That's because of conflict either between local ethnic groups or authorities. In afghanistan it's the regional warlords, the Afghan-Soviet war, and the US intervention that led to the warlords gaining more power and toppling their already shit government. Then the taliban came along with the promise to fix everything. Due to local issues regarding religion, education, food, economy, and civil rights, and regional power struggles between more powerful countries over influence in the region, Afghanistan will be stuck that way for a while. In most of Africa, they got similar or somewhat similar issues + ethnic conflicts over superiority and which one has the right to rule over and oppress or potentially oppress the other ethnic groups. And Myanmar has already got their genocide going so that they could "fix" the problems their ideological differences could potentially cause in the future (that's what their leaders believe even tho it makes no sense).

[@freealter]

Except they could have gotten along in a federation but Bolivar botched it

[@kfp9923]

"Why can't you guys just get along?" "They speak funny"

[@utorner123]

Latinoamérica resumida en tu comentario XD

[@spongekupo]

Latinos and other latinos are natural enemies. Like Englishmen and scots or Welshmen and scots or scots and other scots.

[@Gangkoyt]

@@spongekupo can’t forget the scots

[@l.u.i.s._.8452]

Just summed up our whole history

[@goeintut]

Thats...! way too accurate actually...

[@ChessedGamon]

_Hearing about the collapse of Gran Colombia as a kid:_ Oh, what a tradgedy! _Hearing about the collapse of Gran Colombia after playing Civ 6:_ Oh, what a relief!

[@akramgimmini8165]

Based

[@itsblitz4437]

Civilization games changes everything.

[@mateoprota7406]

Why?

[@Hemdael]

@@mateoprota7406 Gran Columbia gets very powerful generals, unique units, and a passive +1 movment to all units. This makes them a military nightmare in Civ, worse than Gandhi or ...Venice...

[@vehuelbateo5740]

@@Hemdael Me, who likes to play Venice: *Hehe, money go brrrr*

[@leonardoabuawad6569]

Me as brazilian seeing this and realizing how crazy it is that my country remained united.

[@malvarezv97]

That's because the Portuguese didn't have the crazy helicopter parenting, no trade between colonies allowed only back to Spain, approach

[@brandonlyon730]

It was honestly also a miracle my country the U.S survived before the ratified constitution. When it was under the articles of confederation the nation barely held itself together after independence. And even after the ratification it didn't fix everything (namely the whole thing with slavery) and eventually caused a big civil war.

[@dominicvucic8654]

@@brandonlyon730 you would think after the Civil War the US stayed 2 different countries

[@Nostripe361]

@@brandonlyon730 I mean Britain actually positioned troops on the colonial/US border because they were sure it would collapse soon and would be welcomed back by the people as liberators from the chaos that was the confederation

[@robertrichard6107]

@@brandonlyon730 And it's still a slave republic to this day.

[@imitationcrabmeat9901]

Imagine a world where Kelly Moneymaker didn’t make so much money and was unable to fund these quality videos

[@jamesbissonette8002]

That’s a scary thought

[@x_croner]

@@Whatareyoudoinnhere kelly moneytaker

[@jamesbissonette8002]

@Joshua Mills none taken! It’s absurd that I have that many subs for exactly zero content

[@NIDELLANEUM]

@Joshua Mills Yeah, but it is nice that, for once, it's Kelly Moneymaker who receives a shoutout

[@TheAmericanPrometheus]

@@jamesbissonette8002 the man, the myth, the meme

[@piercepayumo4212]

"We have to go back to Napoleon... it's always Napoleon." Me: "Seems about right."

[@Dyknown]

There’s been a lot of complaints about the Great Man Theory. And then there’s Napoleon.

[@LordVader1094]

@@Dyknown Yeah he's the one that proves the theory is objectively true to some degree

[@william2496]

@@Dyknown The exception is the Mongols

[@morganrobinson8042]

@@LordVader1094 Him and Alexander. Bolivar too, to an extent. Every so often somebody actually manages to make the world move around them. It's frustrating mostly because it is the exception to typical history, but it's also what causes rapid, noticeable changes.

[@annabethchase2569]

It's always either him or the British doing things they weren't supposed to over 2000 miles away from where they reside.

[@Longshanks1690]

Napoleon is like Rome, all roads lead to him.

[@cpegg5840]

Wow a based monarch in the replies! Too bad your son was a weak little beta!

[@imperiumgrim4717]

@@cpegg5840 lol sheeeshh

[@karmo1629]

fairly confident that ill get a solid history grade now if i answer every question with "Napoleon"

[@ThomasSev29ID]

What's the catalyst that severed the bond between Julius Caesar and Pompeii Magnus, thus leading to the Roman Civil War and thereby the fall of the Roman Republic and the rise of Augustus as the first Roman Emperor? "Napoleon"

[@morganrobinson8042]

@@ThomasSev29ID Bill and Ted have much to answer for, and leaving Napoleon unsupervised is a good quarter of it.

[@andrewlinnen7896]

@@ThomasSev29ID Sounds legitimate.

[@epicgamerzfail4575]

I mean almost everything significant in the 19th century and beyond can likely be tracebacked to something napoleon.

[@andrewlinnen7896]

@@epicgamerzfail4575 I sometimes wonder who the most important political figure of 19th Century Europe was and as much as I want to say Queen Victoria or Chancellor Bismark, it has to be Napoleon.

[@maresgoez]

As a Colombian it is nice to see my country being acknowledge. To add a bit. The problem with the unification of the provinces is geography. Colombia has 3 mountain range crossing it from south to north. So getting to bogota from Caracas was extremely difficult. Whatever laws Bogota would have promoted they would have arrived 3 months later to Caracas. Road and rail conexion is still a big problem in Colombia just because how expensive it is to build roads on the andes mountains.

[@NordeGrasen34]

Thanks for explaining that, it's really important for people to know how geography affects nation-states. A lot more than people think.

[@suddenllybah]

... would the US not have worked if the 13 colonies had actually been across a mountain range? Because the US has got them, but only claimed them after the federal government became a thing.

[@Dominator2930]

@@suddenllybah the US also has many more natural passes and rivers that cut through our mountain ranges. The mountains there are more similar to the Andes than to the Rockies or Appalachia in that they're steeper and more treacherous. Even back before the train lines were created, people and information moved slowly across the country. As an example the Battle of New Orleans in the War of 1812 took place I think it was 1-2 weeks after the war had officially ended because news of the ward's end hadn't reached either US or British forces in time. Had there been a mountain range in the way it might've been 1-2 months

[@carlossanabria7991]

Not only that. People aren´t aware of the extension of the territory. Gran Colombia was as big as the western roman empire at it´s peak, and bigger than the first napolenic empire. If you add geographic difficulties (mountains everywhere plus amazonian jungle) to that huge mass of territory, and the great desorders after independence wars, you get an ungovernable state.

[@mathewfinch]

I would argue that a bigger problem for unity was a lack of economic integration. Trade between the Spanish colonies was forbidden because the Spanish were worried about their colonies becoming more powerful than the home country, so all trade had to go through Spain. As a result, none of the South American states had any real economic integration with each other at the time.

[@matthewgillies7509]

America is a country with an army. Prussia was an army with a country. Genghis Khan was a man with an army who unified a people, whom made an empire. Napoleon was a man with many countries to build him many armies, which he used to get more countries. Gran Colombia was a man and his army trying to make a country.

[@adarshmohapatra5058]

We have this common saying in India that: India is a country with an army Pakistan is an army with a country Because it is well known that the Pakistani army controls the government and they can't do anything without their approval. Otherwise the army will stage a military coup and seize power.

[@ArrechoGuy]

Colombia* not columbia

[@matthewgillies7509]

@@ArrechoGuy I blame autocorrect for that.

[@hussite7235]

And he almost succeeded

[@eduarz723]

Did you hear that one somewhere or wrote it yourself? Gonna use it in the future

[@LotharTheFellhanded]

The more I learn about other revolutionary leaders, the more I’m convinced that America’s worked out was because Washington stepped down and didn’t want to be king or dictator for life. That’s it, really. If he had been a bit more corruptible we wouldn’t have had any stability to start or example.

[@HansLemurson]

Yeah, and there were even people who WANTED him to take greater power. Really dodged a bullet with that man. Cincinatus would be proud.

[@looinrims]

Remember at the time of his election he didn’t want to be called “your majesty”, but instead requested everyone refer to him as “Mr President” As the saying goes, he had nothing to compensate for…unlike a certain French dictator

[@Jose-xx7lg]

Agreed. Is also important to note that the US did in fact got into a separatist civil war, so it wasnt a smooth sailing go stay together

[@mariamonicavega8890]

Is wasn’t only that he didn’t wanted, the constitution was well thought and limit power. Colombia didn’t have what the US had, Patrick Henry and The anti federalist, who helped outline the bill of rights and limit the powers of the government. Always thinking ahead

[@athingwhichexists]

@@Jose-xx7lg Don't forget about the articles of Confederation, the US first government which failed because it didn't tie the states together strongly enough. Shays rebellion showed the weaknesses and gave the needed justification to make the Constitution.

[@Longshanks1690]

“And now that they had to get along, they didn’t.” Isn’t that the UN’s tagline?

[@mkosmala1309]

Truth

[@Zraknul]

The League of Nations was made to keep the peace with the ability to exert force. The UN was made to keep the peace via dialogue. Peace keeping with the UN is basically just a small force attempting to create some buffer space between factions.

[@str2010]

@@Zraknul dude, the LON was created with the same goal as the UN: peace through dialogue, then force if necessary. The LON however sucked at both way harder than the UN. It had no way to enforce economic and military sanctions at all. The way you're phrasing it implies it was a success

[@50shekels]

Ah, look. An insular brit taking his name after the last time his nation was great. The angloid then mocks international cooperations while it mutters geriatrically something about a never setting sun. Some things never change

[@SuperWiggler]

@@50shekels King Edward I's reign was in the 1200's, long before the British Empire. No comment about a "setting sun" either. Also. the UN isn't that great of an organisation.

[@luismarcialvergaradiaz5363]

As a south american, It would be interesting if you could make a video on the Peruvian-Bolivian Confederation

[@dariusgunter5344]

To learn about the Peruvian Bolivian Confederation ... we need ... to go back ... to ... Napoleon *inaudible sigh*

[@brandonlyon730]

Also one on the FRCA, Federal Republic of Central America.

[@theonly802]

this would be cool to learn about

[@hukllankanchis1575]

OH YES, this one is great because compared to the rest, the majority of the population was content with this new unification and the Confederation was brought down by EXTERNAL factors, a military coalition by Colombia, Argentina, and Chile.

[@nicolaszan1845]

@@hukllankanchis1575 Really it was mostly Chile.

[@vostroyanfirstborn]

You should make a mug with napoleon's face peaking out, and have it say "it's always napoleon"

[@tomrogue13]

I would but

[@mdmjeremiah]

Yes! I wholeheartedly support this idea. Mugs, shirts, mousepads! Okay maybe not mousepads.

[@mekingtiger9095]

*FULLY SUPPORTED!!!*

[@CarlMarxPunk]

Bolívar famously said: "The Americas are ungovernable". Which is often used to berate ourselves among latinos about how we can't seem to get things right. In context, it's clear the phrase it's more about Bolívar's ego and inability to compromise. The Americas are ungovernable if you try to rule alone. If you are a caudillo. Things needs to get done together. That's the lesson of this story. A lesson South America needs.

[@IANXZ]

Bolivar believed we (latinamericans) were too ignorant and backwards (too used to a monanarchy and nanny state) to function as a self governing federation.

[@makutas-v261]

Certainly! had he only surrendered his ego and made it a united state thing while still being the emperor dictator thing himself, it would have been great!

[@aoikemono6414]

I'm surprised no one is blaming it on Spain. In Africa especially, people like to blame their former colonial rulers and demand reparations, even when multiple states fail in the same area, year after year, all on their own.

[@quidam_surprise]

_La_ América es ingobernable para nosotros.

[@Laszlo5897]

@@aoikemono6414 "all on their own" is kinda dismissive of the existing power structures set by these who came before, don't you think? Also disregards a lot of the globalized market forces and foreign interests

[@mestre12]

That just goes to show you how big was Napoleon in the history of the world.

[@aoikemono6414]

Recent history anyway. And mostly just western powers and colonies.

[@epicgamerzfail4575]

@@aoikemono6414 which in turn had a big impact on modern history.

[@aghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh]

@@aoikemono6414 subsequently, western powers dominated so Napoleon influence is all over it

[@scatman8963]

@@aoikemono6414 western powers and colonies = the world

[@martinhorvath4117]

stop roasting the Japanese, I can't click all likes.

[@thomas_lale]

You should do a video on why the Isle of Mann is not part of the UK. An Island right next to the UK, which had a high proclivity for taking land wherever it could, that wasn't incorporated into the

[@pecadodeorgullo5963]

It is a crown colony which means the UK controls its foreign affairs and defence and the citizens are British. It is basically an autonomous region of the UK. This is the same for the channel islands.

[@ilikecheese4518]

theyre flag is pretty funny 🇮🇲🇮🇲🇮🇲 foot swastika lmao

[@Spongebrain97]

@@ilikecheese4518 like some strange tribal call back

[@DustMug]

@@ilikecheese4518 beyblade*

[@varana]

Because for all things that actually matter, it _is_ part of the UK, only technically not. So no reason to change anything if you already run the place anyway.

[@andrewgutmann9432]

I’m getting the sense that Napoleon is to this channel what Walpole is to Extra History.

[@akepatherainwing145]

Same.

[@ecurewitz]

he will be now, James Bissonette will make sure of it

[@longislandlegoboy]

Napoleon is to history as Walpole is to extra history

[@hornet370]

james bisonette didn’t fund gran colombia, that’s why it fell apart

[@jamesbissonette8002]

Nah

[@jamesbissonette8002]

@@DingDingTheKZbinBuddy I feel real enough

[@javieraravena5345]

Important to note that when the viceroyalty of New Granada was announced a century prior, it took 20 years to establish since both venezuelans and the people from Quito hated the idea

[@candyzevallos8981]

Also, the creation of the viceroyalty make a big problem with the viceroyalty of peru about the frontier, which wasn't well delimited and, as usual, end it up in wars.

[@lhistorienchipoteur9968]

So Venezulans already identified like this at the time of the creation of New Grenada ?

[@javieraravena5345]

@@lhistorienchipoteur9968 more around their capitany. They liked been their own entity on the empire, and thought under Caracas they would be ignored

[@flaggy185]

If you think about it, the name didnt helped He could named it anything, like Unión Tricolor or something, but no Gran Colombia, leaving both Venezuela and Quito out of the ecuation, and making it look like annexation more like an Union

[@lore9828]

@@lhistorienchipoteur9968 Yeah, and Venezuela is one of the oldest entities in the american continent, the oldest in mainland South America at least, so they already had their own identity that was way more unified than New Granada or Quito, you can see this division in modern day in Colombia where regions are veery different and people often identify with them first, Venezuelans have a greater sense of unity through regions even if regionalism still exists, but it does in a more "normal and expected" way

[@jovanweismiller7114]

I'm an American Years ago, I had a friend from Colombia. One day I asked him when they were going to try to recreate Gran Colombia. He looked at me and said, 'How do you know about Gran Colombia?' I answered, 'I read'. LOL!

[@imperiumgrim4717]

LOL that's hilarious

[@kieranduffy6760]

Colombians are always amazed if a foreigner knows anything about the country.

[@afanasymarinov2236]

Because it lacked the financial support of James Bizanette.

[@jamesbissonette8002]

They needed to set up a Patreon account

[@ilikecheese4518]

@@jamesbissonette8002 so would you be a financial backer of sealand if they set up a patreon?

[@maclain728]

You’ve gotta give it to Napoleon, in just over a decade he managed to change every place in the world for hundreds of years to come

[@aoikemono6414]

More a matter of his circumstances than anything else.

[@ritikshaw5868]

@@aoikemono6414 nope. He impacted everything. On the modern scientific temperament and introduction of standardised units...to a government which actually cared about its people.

[@rootigaroot9922]

@@ritikshaw5868 cringe

[@mr.snaplles5964]

@@aoikemono6414 yeah circumstances he directly caused

[@edixonvc5101]

Caused the revolts on South America, gave the Louisiana to U.S, desolved the Holy Roman Empire my man did his stuff

[@rfij3268]

just a bit of context prior to the Spanish American wars of independence that would give birth to Gran Colombia. indeed the immediate cause of the wars was the capture of Ferdinand VII by Napoleon's forces and the transfer of the Crown to his brother Joseph Bonaparte. This was due to the internal chaos of Spain itself between King Carlos IV who was forced to abdicate by his son Fernando, this made Napoleon see the internal fragility of the Hispanic monarchy and he believed that he could improve it by putting his own brother on the throne, however this power vacuum would generate chaos in the colonies and spain itself because; 1) the Spanish empire was not organized in the same way as the colonial empires of the 19th and 20th centuries where the colonies are owned by the state of the metropolis, but rather in the spanish emperie all the American colonies were not part of the Spanish state , but personal property of the King of Spain himself, and European Spain and the American colonies were united only by the figure of the King. 2) the Magna Carta that organized the kingdom of Spain was in the "Partidas of King Alfonso the Wise" which were a set of laws created in the reconquest period that established the social organization of the kingdom in the following way; ''The king's power emanates from the people, the king rules based on this fact, once the king is gone, the power returns to the people.'' 3) This was the right that ruled over Spain and his american colonies during the Trastamara and Habsburg dynasties, but the Bourbons implemented the French absolutism where the king's power emanated from God, which generated discontent in the colonies, and they continued to operate with the spirit of the `` Partidas of King Alfonso '' 4) in this way, once Napoleon captures Ferdinand VII and puts his brother Joseph on the throne, part of the Spanish state resists and forms the courts of Cadiz as the new goberment created to oppose the French Hegemon, but in the colonies, neither recognized nor to the French king or to the courts, but the Hispanic law was appealed, and since the legitimate king had been imprisoned and the only thing that united the American colonies and Spain was the figure of the king, then power returned to the people, which would govern itself until the return of the rigthfull monarch. 5) In this way, the first government boards were created, with which the colonies would govern until the return of Fernando VII, however the Viceroyalties did not recognize these incipient forms of government and sent military troops to put an end to these "rebellions", in response, the criollos defended themselves from these aggressions, which would finally make the colonies want to be part of the Spanish empire and seek independence. all this without counting the influence of the Enlightenment. , the French Revolution and the American Revolution and all of the abusive, racist, monopolistic and authoritarian factors of Spanish institutions that were creating a deep feeling of discontent on the part of the Criollos towards the metropolis of Madrid

[@a2falcone]

Great comment, but I think it has some inaccuracies: - The Siete Partidas don't say what you quote. They do contain some elements that can be used to support that thesis, though. Still, they weren't a Constitution in the modern sense and any king could modify or overrule them as he pleased so using them as legal support against royal power wasn't very sound. By the way, they were still in place in all of Spain in 1810. The Bourbons enacted many reforms but they didn't change the Partidas. The idea that, without a king, power returns to the people, was a political theory that wasn't exclusive to nor originated in America. The first government juntas formed for self rule under that political principle were formed in metropolitan Spain, actually. The colonies only followed suit. There was no special preference for that theory in America. What did exist in the colonies was a desire for more autonomy, and self rule during a king's captivity was a great way to achieve that. Neither thesis (royal power comes directly from God / God gives power to the people, the people entrust it to the king and without a king it returns to the people) was ever explicitly enacted into law, as far as I know.

[@rfij3268]

@@a2falcone Thank you very much for your comment, I tried to synthesize one of the many events that could led to the wars of independence, at least in the Chilean case (my country), the first national Junta of government used the capture of the king as an argument to justify self-government through the return of power to the people, obviously this can vary in different cases

[@jorgec.a3123]

I cringed every time you said colonies because they weren't, they were viceroyalties. Besides that it's pretty accurate

[@rfij3268]

@@jorgec.a3123 why? The American territories within the international law of the time were considered as res nulius, this means that when they were conquered by a state, they were transformed into colonies. the very history of Hispanic America within Chile is located refers to the period between the Spanish conquest and the independence process as '' The colony '' or ''the colonial period'', also despite America was divided into viceroyalties, this also had subdivisions called the governorates and the capitanias generales, which sent their natural resources such as silver, wheat, coffee or sugar to the metropolis as part of the commercial monopoly

[@DeusExMau5]

this is why i dislike the short video format, a lot of context and important details are left out.

[@TomasBelloXD]

Fun Fact: All the countries that were part of the Gran Colombia (Ecuador , Colombia and Venezuela) share similar flags and colors.

[@juandiegoprado]

Not all, Panama has a different color scheme

[@BlackBass]

@@juandiegoprado literally the flag of panama is the flag of the two major parties of colombia

[@Frnxzz]

Yes, that's because it comes from a Flag brought from Europe by one of the Venezuelan independency fathers and heroes Francisco de Miranda. He was heavily influenced by the illustration and fought in the French revolution and the American Revolution, he's considered as the mind behind the independency dream in the Americas. At least in Venezuela the colors mean this: Yellow is for the wealth of the country, Blue for the Caribbean sea and Red for the blood spilled by our liberators. But there is a common legend that the colors are for Tsar Catherine The Great, whom is rumoured to be a lover of Miranda, and that the Yellow is for her hair, Red for her lips and Blue for the color of her eyes.

[@hukllankanchis1575]

Ecuador however, is more culturally Andean like Peru and Bolivia

[@delano4526]

Not Panama or Brazil or Peru

[@Talulah_Enjoyer]

Hello! Colombian historian here, I wanted to say that it was really a really very entertaining video and it is interesting to see how important issues are touched for the separation of the great Colombia and the formation of the Republic of the new Granada (Of which a relative of mine was president ) and yes indeed, there is much that remains to be said about Gran Colombia after two centuries of historiographical scuffling, at the same time, they demonstrate what is already being done at that moment and the great potentialities of the subject in the immediate future. Gran Colombia contains two problems that, as a historical subject, have made it uncomfortable: it is halfway between what has traditionally been seen as the tremendous dream of the liberators - from what we could have been, if we had listened to the designs of the great dreamers - and the disappointment at their shipwreck, which has only been made conceivable by pointing out the meanness and clumsiness of our ruling classes. This supposed failure is explained by denouncing our precarious modernity, the interference of foreign imperialism or the unfortunate rivalry of the caudillos. And, in the case of the cult of Bolívar, which has played an important role as a legitimizing ideology of the State, this discourse acquires especially complex connotations, since it is a political historicism, according to which what is said by the Liberator is a norm of Compulsory compliance and the condition of patriot is equated with that of Bolivarian. In this sense, how to explain that precisely the State and nationality began to come together in 1830, destroying Bolívar's most important political project? Before this question, an answer is usually given in accordance with the ideology of the day. Either the paradox is attributed to the "betrayal of Bolívar", not as a work of the people, but of the oligarchy, thereby demonstrating its essentially anti-national character, or, at the other extreme, it is attributed to an ignorant and ungrateful people, that it cannot govern itself and that it must remain under the tutelage of some necessary gendarme at each juncture. The epic of Independence, the "Magna Gesta", has fulfilled the function of nurturing the national identity - in fact, the self-esteem - of Hispanic Americans. It is the founding myth, the golden age that demonstrates all our virtues, abandoned at some point, but still latent in us, which only require some kind of historical push to reappear. It is the heroic past as the promise of the future of all historicisms. In this context, Greater Colombia is seen as a magnificent hiatus, but after all, on our irremediable path to nationality or as a premature frustration of our longed-for Latin American union. Both cases produce discomfort. The point is that it has been difficult to deal with the fact that, if his great military victories are discounted, especially in Peru, his role in the creation of Bolivia and a very successful diplomacy for the circumstances, taking into account the internal order are put manifesting, already in Independence itself, all the problems that will plague our republics for more than a century: civil wars, rivalries between regional leaders and elites, between liberals and conservatives, economic famine, separatism, institutional weakness, dictatorship and, finally, collapse. La Gran Colombia is, then, perceived as the anticlimax of the Magna Gesta. All of the above explains the poor understanding of the period and even a certain lack of interest in reviewing the inherited budgets. In addition, this allows us to understand why the Republic of Colombia, as an event destined to be remembered, has not yet been explained. Its actors and witnesses were frequently assisted by the urgency to record their testimony and take sides. The event generated illusion or fright, depending on the opinion. Colombia was one, but it was not lived in the same way on both sides of the Orinoco. With the passing of time, the republic - what was built, dreamed of, thought possible and remained pending - was associated with Bolívar, and its collapse, therefore, appeared as a product of the despotic inclinations of the caudillo or of demagogic naivety of his opponents. Consequently, the memorialist channel will fundamentally follow two courses. In the case of New Granada, still many years after Gran Colombia, the Bolivarian people of Granada cultivated the nostalgic pen of the greatness of a lost order. Two texts are worth highlighting: Memoirs on the life of the liberator by Tomás Cipriano Mosquera (New York, 1853) and Historic-political memoirs. Last days of Gran Colombia and the Liberator by Joaquín Posada Gutiérrez (Bogotá, 1865-1881). During the first years of the transition, on the other hand, a narrative that vindicated the role of the Santander party, defender of the Constitution and legality in the face of the arbitrariness of Caracas, prevailed. Santander publishes the Process followed by General Francisco de Paula Santander, as a consequence of the event on the night of September 25, 1828 (Bogotá, 1831) and, later, his Apuntamientos para la memoria sobre Colombia i la Nueva Granada (Bogotá, 1837). Florentino González, a September conspirator, Francisco Soto and José María Obando (My relative) published defenses of their own actions over the next decade. In 1857 José Hilario López published the Memoirs of him (1857), concluded in 1840, but whose publication, according to him, had been delayed because of the passions that dominated the country.

[@Talulah_Enjoyer]

In order to be a founding event, the scarcity of historians who undertook the challenge of explaining the vast social and political transformations that it entailed is striking. José Manuel Restrepo established the official version in History of the Revolution of the Republic of Colombia (1827), retouched in History of the Revolution of the Republic of Colombia in South America (1858). Colombia was the miraculous product of a single man "giving unity and becoming the center of the revolution," and his collapse was evidence that the vastness of his contemporaries did not share his genius. José Manuel Groot resumed the aristocratic restraint of Restrepo in the third volume of the Ecclesiastical and Civil History (1869-1870). The republic appeared as the backdrop for the gala night of heroes. They absorb everything and do not allow a more global look. Even the so-called philosophical history fails to address a history of the republic that goes beyond the figures. José María Samper, born "during the hazardous time of Bolívar's dictatorship", published in 1853 his Apuntamientos para la Historia politico y sócial de Nueva Granada, an outline of the storm that the public spirit faced in "the ways of that fertile civilization that seeks the advent of individual sovereignty. "The Republic of Colombia appears at its dawn as the time of organization, triumph, and industriousness to create a free and sovereign nation where there had only existed a tributary and abject people", to go years later through a period of popular fermentation; of treacherous ambitions alongside generous sacrifices" and reaching the ignominious age of the saver, of "usurpation by brutal force", a history of freedom punctuated by the actions of the dictator. Some of this, although with a contrary ideological sign, is also present in the histories of the political parties of Manuel María Madiedo (1859) or in the essays of Miguel Antonio Caro and Sergio Arboleda. In Venezuela, the Gran-Colombian republic has traditionally been seen as the product of its most important son. There, many of the characteristics of Neo-Granada historiography are repeated, even in the challenge of exalting the figure of Bolívar and his time as a golden age, but at the same time having to account for the rebellion against the Gran-Colombian union that gave the push end for the collapse of the republic. The Summary of the history of Venezuela, by Rafael María Baralt, published in 1841, will become the canonical text that the rest of the historians will follow for almost a century. Baralt essentially makes a narrative of the events, organized by years. At a time when the organization and systematization of the multitude of scattered and relatively recent data was necessary, the book came to fulfill that mission. But it must be remembered that it also responded to the mandate of endowing the new State with its own history, so that the narrative focuses on what happened in "old Venezuela" (that of 1777, revived in 1830), as they thought. and the Venezuelans lived it. References to Bogotá are made only to the extent that they are absolutely necessary to understand the Venezuelan process. An exception, which will be imposed in the future, is that of the Peruvian campaign, which is attended to. This kind of invisibility of Gran Colombia as a whole is not surpassed even by the epic poem La Colombiada (1878) by Felipe Tejera, which has no greater resonance and is very quickly overshadowed by the enormous success of another epic text, Heroic Venezuela. (1881) by Eduardo Blanco. This situation will change when in 1909 the second great general history of this country appears, the Constitutional History of Venezuela by José Gil Fortoul. The third book of the first volume is dedicated to Greater Colombia (a name that then became popular, largely because of this work), and it is probably the first systematic attempt to see that republic as a whole. Gil dedicates four chapters to its foundation and laws, its army - in fact, its war history, with the victories in the South and Peru - and its political and diplomatic history. The next five chapters refer to Venezuelan life within the Colombian Union and its separatist rebellion. The author makes a basically dispassionate analysis and manages to displace Baralt from the canon, for several generations. However, in this aspect it was only partially so, since that does not mean that Greater Colombia ceased to remain more or less invisible, only named in later manuals based on the wars in Peru or the secessionist rebellion. But even understanding the ideas of the great Colombia as Bolivarian are wrong, it is the same story that has been in charge of bringing up the figures forgotten by the popular, one of these being the figure of the illustrious Venezuelan, Francisco Miranda, what is it? who for the first time conceived the idea of ​​a "Colombia" (Land of the Columbus) that was from the Mississippi to the circle of fire in Argentina :>

[@suikamanti9131]

""Of which a relative of mine was president """ que pendejo....

[@vonjoris2153]

yo I'm doing a project related to the history of Gran Colombia from it's formation to collapse. Do you of any websites/books for research?

[@FenriZz]

Oh now that's dope

[@pancake-yum]

my eyes trying to read all of this 🔥 🔥 👁 👁 AAAA

[@marioponce7529]

Venezuelan viewer here. Great video, very historically accurate! The only thing I will say is that it’s that Venezuela didn’t have it’s modern borders while a constituent of the Gran Colombia. There was a pretty large border dispute between the countries for over a century and a half after this. Other than that, excellent video as always.

[@quedtion_marks_kirby_modding]

Don't forget the border conflicts with guyana (the british) too.

[@galerinha]

The Venezuelan government says that a part of Guyana (half of the country actually) was supposed to be Venezuela aswell

[@ViroRads]

I'll never get tired of saying the Esequibo is part of Venezuela :v

[@morbidsearch]

Love how it's only the ex British countries that get picked on by Latin America

[@LuccianoBartolini]

@@galerinha It's not half of Guyana, it's 1/7 of Venezuela.

[@CaribbeanHistory]

I’m sorry, I love this channel so much but the intro is not entirely correct. The main reason why there was fracture and instability in Spanish American during the Peninsular War dates back to the War of Spanish Succesion. When the Bourbons won the Spanish throne, they directed many reforms different from that of the Hapsburgs before them, one of them was replacing American born Spanish (Creole or Criollo in Spanish) politicians with Peninsular ones. The Creoles wanted their power and prestige back. When Napoleon invaded Spain in 1808, there was a lot of uncertainty among the 4 Viceroys in America. The people, fearing they would favor Joseph, they revolted, not for independence, but for the loyalty and return of Fernando VII. During the Grito de Dolores on September 10, 1810, Miguel Hidalgo cried out “Viva Fernando VII”. Yet he is known as the igniter of Mexican independence even though he did not advocate for it. Agustin Iturbide on 1820 was the person who did call out for independence and made it a reality the following year. In South America, the case was that of independence vs loyalty to Fernando once again. Very few favored Joseph. Bolivar was born into the local aristocracy and knew that independence was the only way that the creoles could return to power.

[@Redactedredacted5837]

I would have preferred it if Gran Colombia became a federation after the constitutional convention and then later on some guy slowly undermined the federal states and centralized the country. There'd be a large and powerful Spanish-speaking state that could adequately defend against the growing USA and the potential Latinamerican superpower, Brazil. Gran Colombia could easily defend the northern approach (Isthmus of Panama) with numerous transverse fieldworks like the Portuguese 'Lines of Torres Vedras.' Naval resupply could maintain a stubborn and unbreakable rearguard. The east could be held at the Guiana highlands and Orinoco Delta. The south is protected by the virtually impenetrable Amazon, although the Colombians could fall back to a defensive line situated on the Guaviare River. The west is not an issue because it's got large mountains and easily defendable passes along the north-south axis. Gran Colombia could also build naval bases in Buenaventura, Manta, and Puerto Bolivar on its west coast; and in Barranquila and Cartagena. Upon completion of a 'Panama Canal' the Colombians could effectively control trade between Atlantic and Pacific, and enjoy naval supremacy in the Carribean by quickly moving their warships east through the canal when needed. Such wasted potential! (I'm an American who plays *WAAAY* too much EU4.)

[@cpob2013]

More ambitiously, be annexed into the USA and further absorb all the new world colonies from Argentina and Chile to Quebec and Alaska. English, French, Spanish, and Portuguese colonies united in revolution. The United States of America indeed. It would dwarf any European empire in Africa India and the pacific.

[@sevilla2187]

As a Colombian, I'm impressed that you know geographical locations such as Guaviare and Orinoco rivers. You know my country better than the average pedestrian in a big Colombian city.

[@nicolasisquithcarreno9692]

Also communication between cities was very difficult and travel was made worse because of the Andes mountains, complex geography did not allow for the building of big roads that could used by horses or carts, in 1830 it took more time to travel from the port city of Cartagena to the capital Bogotá then it did from Cartagena to Sevilla in Spain

[@aaronmarks9366]

Jeez, that's crazy

[@nicolasisquithcarreno9692]

@@aaronmarks9366 That is why in Colombia regionalism is still very strong today, many regions were essentially isolated from each other so they developed distinct culture, the city of Medellin capital of the Antioquia Departament (Province) was essentially isolated from all the important ports so it was hard to export products, it wasn’t until 1920 when the Quebrada Railway Tunnel was finished that there was firm connection to other cities so you could travel rapidly between them

[@aaronmarks9366]

@@nicolasisquithcarreno9692 How connected (roads/rail) is Ecuador to Colombia?

[@JoseGomez-zy5ih]

@@aaronmarks9366 They are connected by a road in Pasto, but I’m not sure how good the road is

[@himnosdecolombia7106]

@@aaronmarks9366 there are 4 official border crossings as of right now they are all roads, the Main is the Panamerican highway

[@TheLegoMaster261]

As an American with strong Colombian ethnicity, I very much appreciate you covering Colombian history! If I could make a suggestion, maybe do a video on how Panama gained independence. The US was a major factor in its independence so it should be an interesting watch!

[@cassidybrash4243]

Second that!

[@mochi182tv]

How Panama gained independence would imply a video about colonial rule, given that our independence was first to Spain. I would also hope that he mentions the attempts at separating from Colombia prior to american involvement. If such a video gets done, I hope he gets all the facts. Rarely the case...

[@bealu9459]

In Colombia we learn that the US stole Panama from us lol

[@flaggy185]

Venezuela: Chamo que dices

[@greenamogus]

Username checks out (DK loves bananas and Colombia grows bananas)

[@xxxBradTxxx]

2:39 No (in Spanish) the little things always make me giggle.

[@ihavetowait90daystochangem67]

2:57 It didn’t Fractured, Chad just Colonised It

[@AlejandroRodolfoMendez]

Belgium too

[@treasureobasuyi894]

This comment is gold.

[@oenrn]

It became part of Andorra.

[@mateogomezramirez870]

As a Colombian I like the video, it explains what happened quickly but summarizing a great deal of the main reasons why it failed

[@zap3231]

The animation and quality of your videos just keeps getting better with each one you put out and I masively respect that. Good job!

[@bumpierfall2493]

It does?

[@zap3231]

@@bumpierfall2493 Yes! For example in the very start of the video with Gran Colombia disspearing, that's a method to express something. Just a few videos ago, in the "did the USSR have a blue scare" video, he for the first time animated a person being dragged on the ground. It keeps getting better!

[@timesnewlogan2032]

I love the off-screen *thunk* when he dies. Also, it's times like this that I realize how much we lucked out with Washington.

[@APG19912009]

0:20 “It’s always Napoleon” 🤣🤣🤣

[@mercuby]

“To begin, we have to go back to Napoleon. It’s always Napoleon.” Lol

[@matthewshipley739]

History Matters: *covers literally any topic after the late 18c.* Napoleon: "Where did that bring you? ...Back to me."

[@harristli]

Thank you for making this video! I’ve always wondered this. I’ve spent multiple nights trying to figure this out. Putting together in this clear narrative was super helpful!

[@dragosstanciu9866]

It is a pity it failed, Gran Colombia today could be a superpower with the Panama Canal and Venezuelan oil.

[@andym.s.5231]

The Panama Canal would still be Colombia’s if it weren’t for the US fucking with literally every country in the continent because it felt like it

[@brandonlyon730]

@@andym.s.5231 Would they even have the money and resources to build the canal? It was not simple task, costing tons of money and thousands of people dying in the jungles. Same with the Suez, but with deserts instead.

[@diegogalvan1110]

@@andym.s.5231 well that's just a terrible interpretation.

[@Frnxzz]

I dont think so, it probably would be a Brazil 2.0

[@cassianoneto1553]

Population , resource and territory wise, it would be pretty similar to Brazil, so basically another Mexico-Brazil tier power that is homogenous locally but can’t get into the great powers club yet.

[@andrevont9065]

Video suggestion: "Why did Prussia and Austria have territories outside the HRE?" By that I mean why weren´t they included inside the HRE.

[@looinrims]

Well Prussia was a vassal of the PLC and Austria was an empire of various non German ethnicities, probably is the reasons

[@GuyNamedSean]

Funny. Everyone mentions Bolivar when discussing the fight for freedom and self-determination, but no one mentions that he wanted to be a dictator.

[@fabriziozagonel5720]

All south american liberty idols wanted freedom from some european or other major power to do some tiranny himself.

[@raptorfromthe6ix833]

thats pretty much everyone that isnt washington representive democracy as we know it was an english thing so it isnt surprising

[@loadsofbuts]

Seconding Fabrizio. If you take a look, most of them ended up pariahs in the end.

[@aoikemono6414]

What if the freedom they desired was for him to be a dictator?

[@fibo4108]

Then you have San Martín who fought in Argentina, liberated Chile and Perú and then retired back to Europe when he realized the politics back in Argentina would be a cesspit.

[@thomashogan9196]

A leader like George Washington is something that was unprecedented in Revolutionary military leaders, and he alone is the reason the American Revolution succeeded where almost every other failed. Caesar, Cromwell, Napoleon, Bolivar, Lenin, Mao, Castro all made revolution about themselves. George Washington had an army loyal to him and enough public support to have been "Imperator ad vitam," but he didn't do it. Stepping down after 2 terms set a precedent that lasted 140 years (until someone messed it up) and the United States established a culture of limited executive power that lasted up until now.

[@Samuel-wm1xr]

try not to indulge so much in great man history. in the early united states the federal government was extremely weak and the states were largely self governing. they intensely distrusted each other and the federal government, and were massively divided on everything from social to economic to foreign policy. they constantly brought up threats of secession on everything from free speech to tariffs and of course the most famously slavery. even if Washington had stayed as president forever, and the federalists indeed argued that presidents should serve for life like the supreme court, it would not have solved the lack of unity that would cripple any attempts at centralisation. His popularity would not last very long once he starts making difficult decisions. also, communist regimes are specifically based on the idea that limited government benefits the rich. obviously, they wouldn't agree to limit power, or else they wouldn't have launched the revolution in the first place. Julius Caesar's revolution was also victorious for the same reason. his entire popularity was based on the idea to cull the power of the wealthy elite. Cromwell tried to return power to parliament but it plunged into chaos. Napoleon was not revolutionary and he made it clear that he was only making use of the revolution.

[@thomashogan9196]

@@Samuel-wm1xr Washington was a great man. Robert Mugabe was not. The French Revolution descended into the Reign of Terror and utterly failed. Cromwell used his "New Model Army" to force through the same policies he cut the king's head off over. Washington personally led the Army to put down the Whiskey Rebellion. Once he obtained compliance from the rebels he promptly pardoned them. Napoleon had mutineers shot. The point is, Santa Anna, Bolivar, Napoleon could not hold their countries together because they were corrupted by their own lust for power. Washington was not. George Washington may be one of the only Freedom Fighter who actually wanted people to be free. And as for weak government favoring "The Rich?" Mao rode around in a Red Flag limousine and Zhou Enlai lived in a mansion while 40 million people starved to death. Maduro is fat. The average Venezuelan lost 17 pounds from hunger. Why do I care how much Henry Ford made if I can own a house and buy a new car at a good price because of him? Government didn't build that. Government builds NOTHING. It only takes away what others made and passes it around, keeping a big chunk for themselves.

[@looinrims]

Coincidentally that someone was a socialist and the largest traitor to the nation before or since! Weird that

[@looinrims]

@@Samuel-wm1xr the weak federal government died when Washington became President under the constitution, so I’m not sure what you’re on about

[@thomashogan9196]

@@maximipe Che Guevara? You're saying a guy who admitted he murdered every political opponent he ever had won "free and fair elections year after year? Fidel Castro never lost an election for 60 years? Idiot.

[@Riku-zv5dk]

As someone who is writing an Alternate History project, I like to thank History Matter for his videos, I mean, more then I already do. These types of videos are oddly helpful in being crash courses for specific subjects.

[@harrisonlee9585]

"It's always Napoleon." -Prince Klemens von Metternich

[@alejandrotoro9676]

Thank you for this video, its nice to have videos talking about the history of my country, seeing that we have a very interesting history but it tends to get overlooked

[@Menckenperson]

Thank you for finally doing this episode. Will share widely

[@ValueNetwork]

The simple answer: it was the most powerful nation in Civ 6 so got nerfed in the next Patch

[@mikeskadi]

It didnt fail! It merely failed to win!

[@capitalistussr2484]

Some oversimplified shit again

[@Void_Dweller7]

Which is failing.......

[@velasquez1984]

I was waiting for this episode! thanks, History Matters! Saludos desde Colombia.

[@DonJuan911]

He was the "El libertador" and freed many countries from Spanish tyranny but he was a terrible or at best Mediocre statesman in my opinion. He certainly had charisma but far too less statemanagement skills.

[@matthewgillies7509]

There's a quote somewhere about not all generals make good politicians, and the similar, politicians do not make good tacticians. So, Bolivar was a good general, but failed at the political and economic side, due to his regimented and hierarchical military thinking. He desired centralization when none yet existed. His regime was more of an army in need of a country.

[@candyzevallos8981]

He was a megalomaniac who prettying much want it to be king of everything, that's why, at least one of the reasons, he was force to quit.

[@matthewgillies7509]

@Hernando Malinche the Romans were statesmen first, generals second.

[@ShinigamiInuyasha777]

@@matthewgillies7509 Well, the guy was in a really messed up situation. The most prosperous colonies were those that actually had the money to fight but their local elites were not interested in fighting the spanish this happened in Mexico and Grand Colombia. While the poorest colonies were so disconnected that the broke with Spain didnt destroy their economies, but were so poor that they simply couldn't build themselves for decades, like the case of the Rio de la Plata colonies

[@darkknightbatman8269]

Viceroyalty of new granada>>> gran Colombia

[@robertquiggleiv8696]

I can't save these for later. Favorite channel.

[@garybrown2039]

1:45 - 2:19 speaking as an American that learned about the revolution and tensions over the north and south over things like a strong federal government and slavery that makes SOOO much sense to me.

[@ronanmurphy98]

I just love this channel. I would just have a random thought about historical geopolitics during the week and suddenly there's a video on it. 🥰

[@villeporttila5161]

You have a fantastic way of just slightly changing your tone to bring life to how you narrate these. It's a really rare skill to be able to do it that subtly and understated. The 'He kept getting made president of more and more countries' is a fine example

[@pineutrino]

2:06 “WELL” I love these little nonsense-jokes ❤️

[@bowenc24]

Definitely an interesting “what if” nation. Like what kind of nation would they become if they managed to stick together as a federation?

[@avolto4822]

An incredibly rich one as it would have contained the oil of Venezuela and eventually the Panama Canal.

[@galerinha]

@@avolto4822 Venezuela by itself is incredibly rich, that doesn't mean anything as Venezuela keeps getting poorer

[@aagamjain1395]

@@galerinhaIsn't that mainly because of government ineffectiveness and economic mismanagement?

[@ViroRads]

@@aagamjain1395 Add in there a pretty ignorant population and there's your answer, coming from a Venezuelan.

[@juand.cardona2208]

@@ViroRads Add in communism and a president who can't go 5 minutes on a speech without saying something incredibly stupid

[@sskuk1095]

Finally! I've been waiting for this since I found this channel

[@myleshungerford7784]

Great episode! I'm not sure if you did this because of my suggestion but thanks for doing it!

[@TheFourthTankist]

What a great video to wake up to! Good job!

[@nicolasinvernizzi6140]

you have the best anthem.

[@eriathdien]

Imagine a world where Colombians and Venezuelans didn't argue about which country invented arepas...

[@tonycorona8501]

La arepa es venezolana.

[@redknight344]

@@tonycorona8501 La "arepa " gordita es mexicana

[@kikujade]

@@tonycorona8501 la arepa es 100% colombiana

[@Alonne1]

what have you done!

[@cbz3000]

I loooove how this channel can squish complicated subjects into 3 minutes. Sometimes I might want a longer video, sometimes I just want a 3 minute TLDR

[@SwimBodyEVill]

I am not embarrassed at all to disclose how much I have and do learn from your videos. And I consider myself to be quite the history nerd. Keep up the amazing work.

[@juandiegoprado]

Great video as always. Just one tip for future reference, Bolivar is pronounced Bo-LEE-var, with the accent on the “li” and not the “bo”

[@aoikemono6414]

Not gonna happen. Gonna British everything. If you thought that was bad, think of all the butchered Asian names that were poorly transliterated into Roman letters. 🤣

[@hrotha]

Yeah that thingy on the i isn't just for show. Bólivar sounds kinda cool though, like a member of the Fellowship of the Ring

[@pedroharres]

Nice one! Cool that you are starting to cover latin american history. The Paraguay war is another interesting one. The Canudos Revolt in Brazil too. As well as the Zapatist movement in Chiapas, Mexico. And how the border between Mexico and Usa came to be where it is now. Cheers

[@colombianguy8194]

Excellent video as always. First video to feature Colombia? I hope to see some more, my country has an interesting history, thanks!

[@adriansz343]

Those wells always make me chuckle, excellent video as always

[@SpaceMonkeyBoi]

Napoleon is almost as consistent as James Bisonette

[@SA-pj3fz]

As a Colombian, this greatly disappoints me

[@IAmGlutton4Life]

I've always wondered how would Gran Colombia be if it was around today

[@juanpablosuarezbautista1993]

@@IAmGlutton4Life i'm grateful that Ecuador, Panama and Venezuela jumped out, because we're a mess, and we never had a single moment of peace since the declaration of the republic in 1819

[@galerinha]

@@juanpablosuarezbautista1993 brazil is a mess but I'm happy it stayed together, even with we that live in the richest part funding the development of the others. We have a strong sense that together we're stronger than the sum of the individual parts

[@IAmGlutton4Life]

@@juanpablosuarezbautista1993 man that's sad but that's the truth man I hope things get better

[@italiansoutherner]

The really quick "well" with just a well in the frame at 2:06 was a nice touch.

[@JohnVance]

Congrats on hitting a million! You deserve every one of your subscribers. I’ll be here for 10 million!

[@danielbonilla431]

**A time machine exists** *Girls:* Hi, I'm you from the future. *Boys:* Hey Bolívar, how many more countries do we need for Gran Colombia? It's incredible to see how my country (Colombia) have lost many territories because of its mistakes. Now we have a problem with Nicaragua with sea borders again. In 2012, we lost a part of our sea and some cays was given to Nicaragua, because Nicaragua won in the Tribunal of Hague.

[@genghiskhan5701]

Gran Colombia falling apart: How are you not dead? United States: I have no idea!

[@artilire]

I have been waiting since FOREVER for this episode!!

[@TheKobiDror]

Your videos are always amusing - at least. But this one was high on top. So many little perks that stand out on its own. I had a blast 😂

[@vexillarius6376]

Greetings from Colombia, HM

[@fleetwoodcraic4235]

It’s amazing how spectacularly avoidable this was

[@joaoonda]

Fantastic explanation of a often overlooked event in history! :D

[@eduardogalvan2315]

funny i barely watched your boxer rebellion video rightnow and 5 seconds later i see another video, keep up de goodwork.

[@fuckenxio]

As a Colombian History student, I have to say this is very accurate. We literally had one civil war after another one until the last in 1902, after which Panamá gained its independence. Great video ^^ ¡Saludos!

[@marcosfonseca8195]

Pls do: how was life in central asia during the soviet union? Great video by the way!

[@kamakiller1145]

Well the borders of the central asian countries don't make any sense they're like the sykes picot borders of the middle east and they were more like provinces to russia during the soviet era

[@TheVicariousone1]

such an awesome channel!

[@kevincordoba-llanos4856]

Great video, love seeing you take on South American history

[@freekmiddelburg5604]

Because James Bisonette wasn't a patron.

[@nicolaswalsh5651]

Watching this makes you realize just how special and unique the US and it’s founders were. Washington gave up power willingly and Bolivar wanted to keep it for himself, which to be fair is what pretty much everyone else in history did as well.

[@DarkshadowXD63]

Lol I needed this video like a week ago but it's all good another fantastic video once again

[@Jamesmor999]

As A Venezuelan is good to see these kind of videos and also remember that Bolivar lost all support from Venezuela when he declared Bogota as the capital, bad idea to betray the trust of the people who supported for the very start

[@Jamesmor999]

@@BENNY-THE-DOG to simply put it was logistics, he wanted the capital to be in the center of the country and Bogota did fulfill that.

[@pulanjuri1]

"Now that they had to get along they didnt" Story of yugoslavia

[@fabriziozagonel5720]

Since we are about things that are Napoleon's fault you could do a video about the time he indirectly did the United Kingdom of Brazil and Portugal and then the Brazilian Empire.

[@freiervogel3440]

None of these things were caused by Napoleon, go easy on your eurocentrism.

[@fabriziozagonel5720]

@@freiervogel3440 Literally the portuguese royalty went to Rio de Janeiro to run away from him, the united kingdom of brasil and portugal only existed because of it.

[@freiervogel3440]

@@fabriziozagonel5720 True on the fact, false on the conclusion.

[@d1sney_fanboy615]

i really love theese videos your'e one in a million evrytime u upload u make my day

[@alparslankorkmaz2964]

Nicely explained.

[@martinmarvinii3139]

Well he was right, if Gran Columbia was made a federation like the US who were under the Articles of Confederation at the time it would’ve collapsed just as quickly and even the US became much more centralized in the future to keep itself together. Basically Bolivar had the right idea but he failed to implement it, if he had succeeded we could be looking at a world with a South American equivalent to the US

[@shauncameron8390]

Nah. Bolivar got too big for his britches.

[@DarkLordoftheMeme]

A few suggestions for future topics: Why did it take so long before anyone built something bigger than the pyramids? Was the "axis of evil" a real alliance? Why did no communist country other than the Soviet Union use the hammer and sickle in its national flag?

[@Toonrick12]

A: If you mean the Pyramids of Giza, it was mostly because of the lack of the buttress or cheap steel, structures couldn't support the massive weight above them. Could also be the lack of a (near) universal standard of measurement meant that multiple places could claim to be the tallest in the world. B: No. Bush Jr made it more of "Our enemies list" after 9/11 to people to rally around and to have scapegoats. C: I would assume that the countries didn't want to look like their country was controlled by the Soviet Union, like if they were a colonial state.

[@iapetusmccool]

Angola has a similar flag, with basically the same symbolism.

[@sDaenerysTargaryen82]

Cool video thanks!

[@chaos3007]

Really good Video continue like this

[@georgeamesfort3408]

"We have to go back to..." _Let me guess, Napoleon?_ "Napoleon. Always Napoleon."