Pre-Columbian Politics and Government of the New World
When Europeans began to explore mainland Mexico and Central America, they interacted with one of the most politically advanced societies in the New World. Much like the European colonists themselves, the Aztec empire of present day Mexico and Central America was actually itself administered by a centralized, highly advanced body of government. A king of the Aztec empire maintained rule over its conquered territories by imposing high taxes on the inhabitants of conquered lands. In return, the Aztecs brought infrastructure and growth to the local economy. Although many people resented the high taxes imposed by the king, both the conquered and conqueror stood to gain in the Aztec system of government (“pre-Columbian civilizations").
Image (http://www.freewebs.com/worldtrade/tenochititlan.jpg).
Appointed governors of each of the 38 Aztec provinces collected taxes from a provincial capital city established by the empire, and also maintained order among civilians who often grew resentful of the large sums of money they were forced to pay the government. This money funded everything from organized military campaigns to the construction of large religious and government buildings. Tax money was also instrumental in funding the domestic policing system which maintained order in the territories of the Empire. Aztec government and society was based around this steady cash flow, and it solidified the Aztecs as one of the most effective rulers of the pre-Columbian era (“pre-Columbian civilizations").
Like every indigenous people of the New World, though, the strength of the Europeans was too overwhelming to resist. As explained in the following sections, they fell at the hands of the Spanish Conquistadors by the end of the 16th century (“Native Peoples Prior to European Arrival”). It is a noteworthy observation that a similar style of centralized tributary government was established by the Spaniards once they conquered the land of the Aztecs. Why, then, was Spanish rule (and in more broader terms, European rule) so much more oppressive? Was it the collision of two completely different cultures? Was it a conflict of interest, or rather an indifference to the interests or needs of the native people? What allowed the native people to govern successfully for thousands of years while in places such as Mexico, European rule could only be maintained for a few hundred? These are the questions necessary to ask when evaluating the consequences of European colonization and globalization.