AHC a nation in South America with a similar level of development and economy to Canada?

For broad context Canada: 1.6 trillion economy, 43k GDP per capita, 0.929 HDI. Could there have been a nation in South America with similar levels to those? I've heard the question of who could have been the United States of South America posed a few times but who could have been the Canada?
 
Argentina in a no WWI world. The rise of protectionism in the 20s and 30s completely invalidated its economic model, and it found it very difficult to pivot to a different model.
 
Argentina in a no WWI world. The rise of protectionism in the 20s and 30s completely invalidated its economic model, and it found it very difficult to pivot to a different model.
Is it the rise of protectionism in the 20/30s or for more the collapse of its stable governments and the series of military coops that really killed its economy?
 
Is it the rise of protectionism in the 20/30s or for more the collapse of its stable governments and the series of military coops that really killed its economy?
The latter was at least partially a result of the former. When Argentina was the per capita richest country on the planet (thanks to beef exports of all things...) there was broad support for the status quo. When its economy went to the doldrums there was a lot of tension between various reform groups and the remaining status quo groups.
 
Brazil if Milton Campos became VP in 1960. This would have butterflied away 1964 coup and following military junta that destroyed its economy.
 
The latter was at least partially a result of the former. When Argentina was the per capita richest country on the planet (thanks to beef exports of all things...) there was broad support for the status quo. When its economy went to the doldrums there was a lot of tension between various reform groups and the remaining status quo groups.
Yes, but the commodity export model did pick back up and plenty of nations (CAN/AUS) have done perfectly well out of it. Did Argentina need to actually change it model rather than just survive the short term and not then keep ripping itself apart in violent political power struggles for the next several decades?
 
Yes, but the commodity export model did pick back up and plenty of nations (CAN/AUS) have done perfectly well out of it. Did Argentina need to actually change it model rather than just survive the short term and not then keep ripping itself apart in violent political power struggles for the next several decades?
Canada and Australia had the benefit of two things during the 20s and 30s:

1) Imperial Preference: The exact same mechanism that kept Argentine steak out of the UK (previously their primary market) is what allowed Australian and Canadian agricultural products in. Canada's exports to the US plummeted, but its exports to the UK grew nearly in proportion.

2) An industrial sector: Argentina more or less began industrializing during WWI. This brought about matters of class politics and how exactly to pursue industrialization. In Canada at least there was already a booming industrial sector (second largest auto producer on the planet baby!) and basic questions like "are unions legal?" and "what happens to my family if the machine smashes my hand into pulp?" have already been addressed, to say nothing of "should the state own the factories or should the landed elite own them?".
 
For broad context Canada: 1.6 trillion economy, 43k GDP per capita, 0.929 HDI. Could there have been a nation in South America with similar levels to those? I've heard the question of who could have been the United States of South America posed a few times but who could have been the Canada?
Should a South American country reach a similar level of development and economic prosperity as Canada. Then the whole region should have a higher level of development and economic prosperity than in OTL. Seeing as much of the trade of South American countries is regional. Therefore prosperity in one country can induce development in another.
 
Maybe a better run Venezuela that doesnt pull a Venezuela and instead invests oil revenue into the construction of private industry, mining, agriculture and healthcare. Always thought if the country had been run even mildly incompetently they could have done very well. Of course this would probably take a POD some decades before major oil exports began, but the country could have done so much better.
 
(All of those PODs are Brazilian):
-Portugal allows Brazil to have manufacturing centers (No Alvará de 1785), Brazil develops small industries by the early 19th century
-The Inconfidência Mineira succeeds. Minas Gerais annexes São Paulo and Espírito Santo and develops small industries
-The Strangford Treaty never exists
-The Portuguese court moves to Brazil earlier, maybe after a Spanish victory in the Fantastic War
-Napoleon wins the war and the court remains in Brazil
-José Bonifácio de Andrada writes the 1823 Constitution and Brazil wins the Cisplatine War
-Alternatively there's never a Cisplatine War in the first place, and the Confederation of the Equator doesn't come into existence, giving more credence to the Royal Family and its proposals for slavery and industry
-The Proclamation of the Republic fails and Isabel, with her proposals for land redistribution, takes the throne following Pedro II's death
-Floriano Peixoto and his military partners are able to secure power in the young Republic. Instead of becoming a country run by oligarchical rural elites, it is run by the Military (Which favored industrialization)
-Alternatively, just have the Great Depression happen earlier, allowing for a Vargas-like figure to take power and promote industrialization
-Avoid the 1964 coup, Brazil is a semi-stable democracy which naturally develops industry and is not controlled directly by rural oligarchies like in the dictatorship
I want to talk about more recent PODs but it would slip into current politics so I'm refraining from doing so
 
Free markets and free people works everywhere. It should do very well in South America as they avoided the World Wars and the Cold War. The last destructive war really was the Paraguayan War in the 1800s.
 
For broad context Canada: 1.6 trillion economy, 43k GDP per capita, 0.929 HDI. Could there have been a nation in South America with similar levels to those? I've heard the question of who could have been the United States of South America posed a few times but who could have been the Canada?

Argentina is the obvious analogue, if we are talking about size.

The big problem with Argentina were the oligarchic politics which prevailed in the country's richest times, in turn driving populism et cetera. Manage a transition of Argentina to mass democracy well before the 1930s, or perhaps have Yrigoyen do better, and things could change.
 
Brazil and argentina are the best beds, especially the former if wasn't that agriculture dependant as was before the turn of 19th century
To be honest I think you need both. Either could really do with a local trade partner to succeed.
 
For broad context Canada: 1.6 trillion economy, 43k GDP per capita, 0.929 HDI. Could there have been a nation in South America with similar levels to those? I've heard the question of who could have been the United States of South America posed a few times but who could have been the Canada?
Argentina was at a similar level of development as Canada and Australia for a long time. They needed to diversify their economy though. They became rich with an agriculture exporter and in the early 20th century, was a leader in the area... at time surpassing Russia and America. They need to industrialize though.
 
Last edited:
Top