Overall, why have the Americas been much more peaceful in last 200 years than Eurasia/Africa?

[Blue3]

Overall, why have the Americas been much more peaceful in last 200 years than Eurasia/Africa?

The United States is the biggest disturber of the peace, with the War of 1812, the Indian Wars, the Mexican-American war, the Spanish-American war, failed coup in Cuba, other coups in other Latin American country (though no true war since the Spanish-American).

There have been internal conflicts - those mentioned coups, civil war in US, civil war in Mexico, civil war in Colombia, etc.

But there's nothing close to, say, the French-British rivalry of the late medieval and early modern times, the French-Germany rivalry of later times, the India-Pakistan rivalry of current times, outright annexation/division of nations like what Russia and Germany did to Poland, or situations like the Korean War or the partition of India or the invasion of Afghanistan, or the equivalent of the world wars' effects in the "old world" happening in the "new world."

Overall, the Americas have been much more peaceful, especially in the last 200 years (though no paradise). Yet humans are still human.

What explains the difference?

[First1There]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Mexico
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Brazil
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Colombia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Cuba
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_United_States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Peru

That looks like a lot of wars to me.

[Zinneke]

There have still been wars, but a huge chunk of the last 200 years the Americas has been subject to a little something called the Monroe doctrine that essentially made it far less volatile than Eurasia and Africa.

[dead0man]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Mexico
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Brazil
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Colombia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Cuba
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_United_States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Peru

That looks like a lot of wars to me.

list of wars by death toll-modern (1500-now)

if you can look at the that list and say the western hemisphere is as violent as the eastern, I'll call you a liar.


to answer the OP:it's because we are better people

[pppolitics]

What are you talking about?

There had been plenty of wars esp. in South America.

[Blue3]

compared to Eurasia/Africa...

Read the first post.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Mexico
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Brazil
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Colombia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Cuba
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_United_States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Peru

That looks like a lot of wars to me.

Read the first post.

[CumbrianLefty]

Whilst it *is* true overall, Eurasia has still had few things as insane as the War Of The Triple Alliance.

[Red Velvet]

Paraguay War was extremely harsh.

[Meclazine for Israel]

What explains the difference?

I saw a YouTube video on this very topic last week.

They put it down to:

(1) isolation with massive oceans on both sides;
(2) friendly neighbours in Canada and Mexico.

[ingemann]

Overall, why have the Americas been much more peaceful in last 200 years than Eurasia/Africa?

The United States is the biggest disturber of the peace, with the War of 1812, the Indian Wars, the Mexican-American war, the Spanish-American war, failed coup in Cuba, other coups in other Latin American country (though no true war since the Spanish-American).

There have been internal conflicts - those mentioned coups, civil war in US, civil war in Mexico, civil war in Colombia, etc.

But there's nothing close to, say, the French-British rivalry of the late medieval and early modern times, the French-Germany rivalry of later times, the India-Pakistan rivalry of current times, outright annexation/division of nations like what Russia and Germany did to Poland, or situations like the Korean War or the partition of India or the invasion of Afghanistan, or the equivalent of the world wars' effects in the "old world" happening in the "new world."

Overall, the Americas have been much more peaceful, especially in the last 200 years (though no paradise). Yet humans are still human.

What explains the difference?

Less people and more room. The Old World is vastly more densely populated, Europe is 25% the size of the Americas and had more people until relative recently, and the Americas have some of the best agricultural land in the world.

Let’s come with examples USA would in the old world with its climate and agricultural potential be home to a billion people, while Argentina would be home to 200-300 million people. Instead both have vast amount of thinly populated land.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/88/World_War_I_battle_fronts_of_Europe_overlaid_over_a_map_of_the_United_States.jpg

[First1There]

I actually agree the western hemisphere is less violent. I was being flippant because I just dispute being much less violent, dismissing internal repression, coups, and civil wars as not counting somehow.

[wnwnwn]

XIX Century South America was nearly a battlefield.

[Agonized-Statism]

I think I understand what you're getting at (why weren't there any big regional, all-in, industrial total wars like Europe, Asia, and even Africa had with the Congo Wars), and there are a few answers: US sabotage of Latin American countries before they can get too stable to challenge Washington (or each other), geography (rough terrain to move troops through and large distances between things), and a lower and less dense population than Afro-Eurasia. There aren't particularly strong racial or religious divides aside from the Anglospheric and Latin American parts and stronger diplomatic channels. There were some pretty nasty regional wars in the nineteenth century like the Paraguayan War, and Brazil and Argentina were doing pretty well with industrialization around the turn of the century, but that was before the US emerged as a great power.

[satsuma]

Hegemony. It's hard to have serious inter-state conflicts in the neighborhood of an unquestioned hegemon. Pax Americana is most noticeable in the Americas, far from the rival powers of Russia and China. If the U.S. occupies or regime-changes a small country in this area, it tends to be quick, and the death toll is naturally less than an evenly-matched conflict that drags out for years.

GDP rankings are suggestive of the amount of money and industry we could afford to throw at a war effort. Countries like Brazil, Mexico, Canada are nowhere near the U.S. here. The great powers of Europe have long been in the same order of magnitude. Their complex dance shows the gains of development and the losses of war.

Latin America's turbulent 19th century had the wars of independence and the Triple Alliance against Paraguay, setting the borders close to what they are today. The American Civil War was the deadliest war in the 19th-century Americas, and practically all major conflicts in the 20th-century Americas have been civil wars. The 1930s Chaco War was between the two landlocked countries, so rather far from the US Navy.

list of wars by death toll-modern (1500-now)

if you can look at the that list and say the western hemisphere is as violent as the eastern, I'll call you a liar.

to answer the OP:it's because we are better people

There's a catch with direct comparisons: the Americas have held about 1/7 of the world's people since the mid-20th-century. They surpassed Europe in the 1990s and only recently hit 1 billion. In the 19th-century, they were fast-growing but not yet 10% of the world's population. 

The Americas punch above their weight in homicide, whose annual death toll would extend into war-like numbers. The Mexican Drug War even gets included on many lists of ongoing wars.

[American2020]

Interesting.

And so many people say in the social media America was in peace only in 25 years within more than 200 years of existence. There's no nuance about the contexts of theses wars. They would forgive Germany, Japan and Italy and celebrate the UUSR winning the war.
They consider America as an impure country that should be isolated, cursed, collapsed and forgotten.

[CumbrianLefty]

Interesting.

And so many people say in the social media America was in peace only in 25 years within more than 200 years of existence. There's no nuance about the contexts of theses wars. They would forgive Germany, Japan and Italy and celebrate the UUSR winning the war.
They consider America as an impure country that should be isolated, cursed, collapsed and forgotten.

There really aren't many who do this outside the terminally online.

[oldtimer]

Because the United States dominates the entire continent by sheer economic and military size, and controlls directly or indirectly almost all of it.

Now if Mexico, Brazil, Argentina or Colombia become strong enough to challenge the United States, that would change.

[Red Velvet]

Because the United States dominates the entire continent by sheer economic and military size, and controlls directly or indirectly almost all of it.

Now if Mexico, Brazil, Argentina or Colombia become strong enough to challenge the United States, that would change.

Not really?

All of the countries are Hispanic and culture is not THAT different between themselves. Why would they fight?

Only reason I can think of are border disputes but those are pretty insignificant. The areas larger in size that are contested we already had or are about to see conflicts involving them: Malvinas Islands and Guyana Esequiba.

Literally every other area contested is pretty irrelevant in size to justify an outright conflict. Maybe the Suriname/Guyana contested area is the only other exception.

And even if you’re saying to fight against the US, what is the beef against them? I can only think about Mexico maybe wanting to regain its territory.

[oldtimer]

Because the United States dominates the entire continent by sheer economic and military size, and controlls directly or indirectly almost all of it.

Now if Mexico, Brazil, Argentina or Colombia become strong enough to challenge the United States, that would change.

Not really?

All of the countries are Hispanic and culture is not THAT different between themselves. Why would they fight?

Only reason I can think of are border disputes but those are pretty insignificant. The areas larger in size that are contested we already had or are about to see conflicts involving them: Malvinas Islands and Guyana Esequiba.

Literally every other area contested is pretty irrelevant in size to justify an outright conflict. Maybe the Suriname/Guyana contested area is the only other exception.

In the past 200 years there have been the following inter-latin conflicts:

Peru vs Equador
Chile vs Bolivia
Chile vs Argentina
Paraguay vs everyone
Argentina vs Brazil
Guatemala vs El Salvador
Haiti vs Dominican Republic
Dominican Republic vs Venezuela

[Blue3]

Because the United States dominates the entire continent by sheer economic and military size, and controlls directly or indirectly almost all of it.

Now if Mexico, Brazil, Argentina or Colombia become strong enough to challenge the United States, that would change.

Not really?

All of the countries are Hispanic and culture is not THAT different between themselves. Why would they fight?

Only reason I can think of are border disputes but those are pretty insignificant. The areas larger in size that are contested we already had or are about to see conflicts involving them: Malvinas Islands and Guyana Esequiba.

Literally every other area contested is pretty irrelevant in size to justify an outright conflict. Maybe the Suriname/Guyana contested area is the only other exception.

In the past 200 years there have been the following inter-latin conflicts:

Peru vs Equador
Chile vs Bolivia
Chile vs Argentina
Paraguay vs everyone
Argentina vs Brazil
Guatemala vs El Salvador
Haiti vs Dominican Republic
Dominican Republic vs Venezuela

Very few, mostly small-scale, and not for a while.

[CumbrianLefty]

You missed out the Football War!

[Blow by blow, the passion dies]

I think I understand what you're getting at (why weren't there any big regional, all-in, industrial total wars like Europe, Asia, and even Africa had with the Congo Wars), and there are a few answers: US sabotage of Latin American countries before they can get too stable to challenge Washington (or each other), geography (rough terrain to move troops through and large distances between things), and a lower and less dense population than Afro-Eurasia. There aren't particularly strong racial or religious divides aside from the Anglospheric and Latin American parts and stronger diplomatic channels. There were some pretty nasty regional wars in the nineteenth century like the Paraguayan War, and Brazil and Argentina were doing pretty well with industrialization around the turn of the century, but that was before the US emerged as a great power.

Correction: Brazil was an agrarian oligarchy rife with illiteracy and voter fraud. Yes, it was industrializing, but not strong at all until circa 1970.

[buritobr]

There were many wars in Americas in the last 200 years, but much fewer and much shorter than the wars in Eurasia/Africa. So, this question is fair.

I think the causes are:
Only 1 imperialist power, the USA, so, no rivalry between imperialist powers
Much more natural resources (so, much less fight for natural resources)
Much less population density

The concentration of wars became even higher after the Cold War. After 1991, the large majority of the wars that place in Eastern Europe and in the Middle East. On the other hand, crime in Americas is very high.