Institutions and Inequality in Latin America: Text and Subtext

1996 ◽  
Vol 38 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 159-179 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Glade

The production of inequality has been one of the most enduring features of Latin American economic and social systems, and one in which the institutional structure has perhaps exhibited the greatest consistency over time. In a very real sense, inequality is what the Mexican Revolution was all about, as was the Bolivian Revolution of the early 1950s. So, too, with the rise, in the middle decades of this century, of assorted populist political parties and movements. By the 1960s, participatory development had become almost a Zeitgeist, and distributional concerns had ostensibly come to suffuse many of the development programs launched during that first United Nations Development Decade, including the Alliance for Progress. It is relevant to recall that, quite early in the postwar flowering of development studies, Viner (1952) had suggested that the chief aim (and test) of development should be the reduction of mass poverty.

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
Sebastián Hurtado-Torres

This introductory chapter provides an overview of the relationship between Eduardo Frei's Revolution in Liberty and the United States. For the United States foreign policy apparatus, the Christian Democratic Party of Chile appeared to be a model partner in the realization of the goals of the Alliance for Progress, the Latin American policy conceived by President John F. Kennedy and continued, though without the same level of enthusiasm and hope, by his successor, Lyndon B. Johnson. In its original conception, Kennedy's Latin American policy had ambitious economic, social, and political goals. The channeling of aid from the United States to Latin American countries in the 1960s sought to reflect the interplay between those aims, even if the implementation of the Alliance for Progress sorely lacked in consistency and constancy. In the case of Chile and Eduardo Frei's Revolution in Liberty, the exceptionally generous provision of aid by the United States went hand in hand with a deep involvement of agents of U.S. foreign policy, especially the political staff of the embassy in Santiago, in the day-to-day functioning of Chilean politics—welcomed and, in many cases, invited by local actors.


1962 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 351-361 ◽  
Author(s):  
John R. Hildebrand

President Kennedy, in his inaugural address, spoke of an “Alliance for Progress” with Latin America and more recently of an expanded Latin-American aid program. His phrase “Alliance for Progress” underscores the fact that the U. S. chooses not to be identified with blind defenders of the status quo but to support evolutionary change calling for political, social, and economic reform.What motivates U. S. citizens to tax themselves to help the underdeveloped countries help themselves? One observes an interesting mixture of goals with respect to U. S. aid programs. There is no single enforced purpose handed down from higher authority. Each citizen indicates and advances his own preferences with some sort of compromise or majority view prevailing when necessary. One peculiarity of a democratic society is the pluralism of motivations and purposes.


Author(s):  
David E. Hayes-Bautista

The Chicano Generation, largely the grandchildren of refugees who fled the Mexican Revolution from 1910 to 1930, came of age in the 1960s and 1970s and rejected the nativist definition of Latinos by consciously embracing their Mexican and Latin American cultural heritage. When they traveled to Mexico, however, they discovered they were considered to be American rather than Mexican, and they often wound up feeling that they did not truly belong to either identity. New immigrants from Mexico and Latin America arrived and settled in without placing much attention on their cultural heritage.


Author(s):  
Stephen G. Rabe

On March 13, 1961, President John F. Kennedy announced the Alliance for Progress, an economic assistance program to promote political democracy, economic growth, and social justice in Latin America. The United States and Latin American nations formally agreed to the alliance at a conference held in August 1961, at Punta del Este, Uruguay. U.S. delegates promised that Latin America would receive over twenty billion dollars in public and private capital from the United States and international lending authorities during the 1960s. The money would arrive in the form of grants, loans, and direct private investments. When combined with an expected eighty billion dollars in internal investment, this new money was projected to stimulate an economic growth rate of not less than 2.5 percent a year. This economic growth would facilitate significant improvements in employment, and in rates of infant mortality, life expectancy, and literacy rates. In agreeing to the alliance, Latin American leaders pledged to work for equality and social justice by promoting agrarian reform and progressive income taxes. The Kennedy administration developed this so-called Marshall Plan for Latin America because it judged the region susceptible to social revolution and communism. Fidel Castro had transformed the Cuban Revolution into a strident anti-American movement and had allied his nation with the Soviet Union. U.S. officials feared that the lower classes of Latin America, mired in poverty and injustice, might follow similarly radical leaders. Alliance programs delivered outside capital to the region, but the Alliance for Progress failed to transform Latin America. During the 1960s, Latin American economies performed poorly, usually falling below the 2.5 percent target. The region witnessed few improvements in health, education, or welfare. Latin American societies remained unfair and authoritarian. Sixteen extra-constitutional changes of government repeatedly unsettled the region. The Alliance for Progress fell short of its goals for several reasons. Latin America had formidable obstacles to change: elites resisted land reform, equitable tax systems, and social programs; new credits often brought greater indebtedness rather than growth; and the Marshall Plan experience served as a poor guide to solving the problems of a region that was far different from Western Europe. The United States also acted ambiguously, calling for democratic progress and social justice, but worried that Communists would take advantage of the instability caused by progressive change. Further, Washington provided wholehearted support only to those Latin American governments and organizations that pursued fervent anticommunist policies.


1991 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 111-132
Author(s):  
Richard Weisskoff

The Issue of the Distribution of income is once again emerging as a critical component in the debates regarding Latin America's development path in the 1990s and as a factor underlying the proposed Enterprise of the Americas Initiative (EAI). I will argue that the degree of income inequality in the Latin American societies will prove to be an obvious, if unnoticed, obstacle to social progress which will affect the operation and outcome of the Initiative. In this essay, I review some of the hypotheses and recent findings from the research on income distribution. I shall contrast the conditions of the growth decades of the 1960s and 1970s with the “lost” decade of the 1980s. What have we learned, and what have we avoided learning during these years? How many of the initial conditions which the Alliance for Progress aimed at remedying 30 years ago are still with us?


2021 ◽  
pp. 053901842199894
Author(s):  
Frank Adloff ◽  
Iris Hilbrich

Possible trajectories of sustainability are based on different concepts of nature. The article starts out from three trajectories of sustainability (modernization, transformation and control) and reconstructs one characteristic practice for each path with its specific conceptions of nature. The notion that nature provides human societies with relevant ecosystem services is typical of the path of modernization. Nature is reified and monetarized here, with regard to its utility for human societies. Practices of transformation, in contrast, emphasize the intrinsic ethical value of nature. This becomes particularly apparent in discourses on the rights of nature, whose starting point can be found in Latin American indigenous discourses, among others. Control practices such as geoengineering are based on earth-systemic conceptions of nature, in which no distinction is made between natural and social systems. The aim is to control the earth system as a whole in order for human societies to remain viable. Practices of sustainability thus show different ontological understandings of nature (dualistic or monistic) on the one hand and (implicit) ethics and sacralizations (anthropocentric or biocentric) on the other. The three reconstructed natures/cultures have different ontological and ethical affinities and conflict with each other. They are linked to very different knowledge cultures and life-worlds, which answer very differently to the question of what is of value in a society and in nature and how these values ought to be protected.


2002 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 351-362
Author(s):  
Pablo A. J. Brescia ◽  
Scott M. Bennett

This interview with Mexican writer David Toscana ponders the current state of both Mexican and Latin American narrative and serves as an insight into his own works. Toscana's statements about the recurring themes in his narrative (failure, loneliness, characters put to the test, and a tendency to play with different time frames, especially in his novels) help illustrate some of the characteristics of his fiction, which, according to various critics, is one of the most promising today in Mexico. Also noteworthy are his comments about the tendency of writers from his generation (born in the 1960s and later) to reject the legacy of the "boom" writers. Toscana's own interest is to revisit history and tradition by constructing a different voice and a different vision, a new way of seeing and hearing both the past and the present. Esta entrevista con el escritor mexicano David Toscana trata de explorar el estado actual de la narrativa mexicana y latinoamericana, améén de servir como una aproximacióón a la incipiente obra de este autor. Las respuestas de Toscana sobre los temas recurrentes en su literatura (el fracaso, la soledad, los personajes sometidos a pruebas y una tendencia a proponer diferentes marcos temporales, especialmente en sus novelas) subrayan algunos rasgos de su ficcióón, la cual, segúún la críítica especializada, es una de las máás prometedoras en el panorama mexicano de hoy. De especial interéés son los comentarios de Toscana sobre la tendencia de los escritores de su generacióón a rechazar el legado del "boom" latinoamericano. Toscana reacciona contra ese rechazo y propone una voz personal que vuelva a la historia y a la tradicióón y plantee una nueva manera de ver el pasado y el presente de Mééxico.


2021 ◽  
pp. 002200942097476
Author(s):  
Marie Huber

Tourism is today considered as a crucial employment sector in many developing countries. In the growing field of historical tourism research, however, the relationships between tourism and development, and the role of international organizations, above all the UN, have been given little attention to date. My paper will illuminate how during the 1960s tourism first became the subject of UN policies and a praised solution for developing countries. Examples from expert consultancy missions in developing countries such as Ethiopia, India and Nepal will be contextualized within the more general debates and programme activities for heritage conservation and also the first UN development decade. Drawing on sources from the archives of UNESCO, as well as tourism promotion material, it will be possible to understand how tourism sectors in many so-called developing countries were shaped considerably by this international cooperation. Like in other areas of development aid, activities in tourism were grounded in scientific studies and based on statistical data and analysis by international experts. Examining this knowledge production is a telling exercise in understanding development histories colonial legacies under the umbrella of the UN during the 1960s and 1970s.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document