Customer Reviews

The Pan-American Dream: Do Latin America's Cultural Values Discourage True Partnership With the United States and Canada

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

When I first read The Pan-American Dream I lamented, "Darn, he beat me to it!" It had been my intention to explore the cultural roots of Latin America's underdevelopment by building on the classic works of Salvador de Madariaga, José Luis Borges (both of whom were close to my father), Fredo Arias de la Canal (my father), Robert Putnam, Octavio Paz, Luis Pazos, José Ortega y Gasset, Tocqueville, Domingo Sarmiento and, more recently, George Borjas (who was my professor). It just goes to show how few have written on the subject.

Harrison has written an excellent and ground-breaking book, and rightly does not mince his words. Those of us who have attempted to answer the question of why Latin America is firmly in the Third World realize how perceptive is the idea to link development squarely to culture. Many Latin American intellectuals, as Harrison points out, have attempted to do the same, as have, more controversially, some Americans such as George Grayson and, more recently, David Landes. Harrison's and Grayson's arguments are obvious to most Latin Americans, but it seems to be most unpopular with the American academic Left, as well as with some populist Latin Americans who want to perpetuate the victim myth.

Harrison should be awarded a medal by those of us proud Latins who want to fix the problems plaguing the noble countries of Latin America. He is playing the role of a psychotherapist, making Latin Americans see that the first step in fixing a problem is admitting it is there. Harrison's opponents in the leftist U.S. academic circles are doing a disservice to those of us attempting to build sensible, normal, businesslike and even friendly U.S.-Latin American relations. Fanning and encouraging the "victim" complex in Latin Americans does not augur well for such relations. Worse, it plunges the region into an orgy of self-destruction, since detrimental left-wing, protectionist and populist policies are justified with this fantasy of "victim" nationalism. Interestingly, Latins in the end do not respect those Americans or Brits that pander to their self-victimization, just as an obnoxious and rebellious teenager does not respect passive and apologetic parents. Just ask Argentine president Carlos Menem, who lovingly called Margaret Thatcher "the mother of Argentine democracy" (Russians for that matter are the same-Ronald Reagan is the most popular U.S. president in Russia).

Harrison's repeated association of Latin America's problems to "Catholic-Iberian" culture is the one small shortcoming of the book. One wonders what would have become of Latin America had it been conquered instead by Catalan settlers (whose parliament, founded in 1283, precedes Westminster by 12 years), or perhaps by those vestiges of Spain's more liberal tradition (the king-vetoing fueros) suffocated by Ferdinand of Aragon in the late 1400s. Those were also Catholic, and also Iberian. Moreover, contrary to what Max Weber would point out, there are glaring examples of backward Protestant cultures (Guyana, Suriname, Jamaica) and, conversely, of modern Catholic ones (the Czechs, who are, according to Borjas's research, the most successful European immigrants in the U.S.). The stubborn sense of justice and iron principles of the Irish seem opposite to what Harrison calls the "flexible ethical code" of the Latin. Yet they are also Catholic. Perhaps then, it is not so much a "Catholic-Iberian" culture, but simply "Iberian," or even an "un-representative minority of militaristic Iberians dispatched by Machiavellian Ferdinand and then Austrian dynastic overlords to conquer the Americas."

Aside from that, Harrison's stab at the cultural roots of Latin America's history of self-destruction and irresponsibility is right on target, and he should be commended for that largely thankless effort. And those of us preoccupied in putting Latin America's worst days behind it should say, "Gracias, Señor Harrison." A prominent intellectual named Nina Yomerowska caused the same necessary shock therapy when she observed that the main cultural weaknesses of the Mexican are "irresponsibility, indolence and immorality," and of the Spaniard, "envy, soberbia [intense arrogance] and egoism." Indeed, Harrison's book may be pillaged by the irrepressible Left and by "poor little me" nationalists, but it is required reading at a class on culture and global management at the Harvard Business School.

One interesting point was what Harrison calls his "trauma theory of cultural change," and its implications for international relations. That is one point Harrison should continue to dwell in. I may add that Sigmund Freud discovered something similar when he noticed that children that were suddenly frightened by an animal, began to imitate that animal. He called it a "totemic reaction." Harrison rightly observed that countries imitate a foreign aggressor that humiliated them. Maybe that is why Latin Americans have not imitated the United States more broadly-precisely because the U.S. has been, in the words of former Costa Rican president and Nobel Prize laureate Oscar Arias, "the only benevolent empire in history.

Harrison is correct. But he needs to look a little differently at the problem. Instead of shaping the discussion as a north/south problem; or a cathloc/ protestant issue; he needs to look at the differences in a new way.

This problem can be viewed as the difference between people who believe in innovation, look long term, trust and invest in people, and make explicit their ethical standards; and people who don't. Harrison is a brave and learned voice, but he is shaping the discussion in a way that is bound to raise defensiveness and impede the discussion that nations need to have. If you don't believe me, look down at the reviewer who calls him a racist.

Look at Plowing the Sea by Fairbanks and Lindsay, Harvard Business School Press 1997, chapter 11 for a framework that avoids the traditional religion-based categories, but sheds light on the argument that Harrison courageously takes on.

Harrison has written one of the most important and provocative books on U.S.-Latin American relations published in the last quarter century. Along with his earlier work, "Underdevelopment is a State of Mind: The Latin American Case", it is required reading for those who wish to understand why more than 50 years of international aid to the region has failed to produce sustainable economic progress, social justice and stable democracies.

Harrison has shifted the focus of Latin America's development crisis to cultural deficiencies and family values. His books are reminiscent of Daniel Patrick Moynihan's analyses of the crisis of the black family, Francis Fukuyama's "Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity", and John McWhorten's recent book, "Losing the Race". Much like Senator Moynihan's writings were dismissed as "racist", time has proven him correct. Harrison's courageous leadership in identifying similar cultural and value weaknesses in Latin American societies has generated the same unproductive name calling from leftists whose prescriptions have repeatedly failed to achieve sustainable development in Latin America. International aid agencies and universities do a real disservice to millions of Latin Americans mired in misery by ignoring Harrison's critical point about the cultural roots of their persistent poverty.

Since so many books on Latin America are poorly written and present distorted views of the region, "The Pan American Dream" is a pleasure to read that makes it ideal for introductory courses and study groups. Chapter Four on the destructive role of American intellectuals and the positive contributions of the United Fruit Company is guaranteed to stimulate intense discussion and debate. Given the rigid leftist orthodoxy that dominates so much teaching about Latin America, Harrison's arguments are a breath of fresh air and reflect a historic paradigm shift in analyzing U.S.-Latin American relations.

It should be noted that a growing number of leading Latin American and U.S. writers agree with Harrison's conclusions. Indeed, Harrison draws extensively on the Venezuelan Carlos Rangel and his 1976 book, "The Latin Americans: Their Love-Hate Relationship with the United States". Those who charge Harrison with "racism" should see similar analyses by Mario Vargas Llosa, one of Latin America's most prominent writers and the book "Guide to the Perfect Latin American Idiot" that has been a regional best-seller since its publication in 1996. These and other writers, such as the Argentine Mariano Grandona, and those other academics who contributed to Harrison's most recent book "CULTURE MATTERS: How Values Shape Human Progress" clearly represent a dramatic paradigm shift in thinking about the root causes of underdevelopment. Harrison should be congratulated for his intellectual courage. He merits far greater attention by those concerned with helping the Latin American poor and creating a more positive and constructive Western Hemisphere community of nations.

Harrison isn't above an occasional smirk at the rhetorical excesses of the academic left but in the main his analysis is fair minded and generally sympathetic of peoples long burdened by irresponsible elites and authoritarian ideologies. Harrison applies a modified version of the developmental model originally presented in "Who Prospers" to the developmental record of North and South American nations. One need not share the author's enthusiasm for free market innovations such as the Chile's privatized social security system to appreciate his willingness to move beyond the rhetoric that has dominated the writing of a generation of scholar-activists. He applies a similar clarity of thought to the touchy issue to Latin immigration to the U.S.

Perfect book if you want to understand the route of Latin American culture, esp. if you are a businessperson doing business in Latin America.

I have not seen a better book explaining Latin America's source of cultural values as they relate to lack of economic and social growth.

BUY IT.

A really first-rate book that states the obvious--which, in these PC days we're not supposed to say--and states it lucidly.

While few would deny that culture matters, Harrison would like you to believe that it is all that matters. The book does not present any data to back his twisted arguments apart from self serving anecdotes on every conference he attended and every conversation with minor celebrities. Once you get past the name dropping, however, you find a racist isolationist arguing against NAFTA (he believes that the stereotype that "Mexican are corrupt, have no social consciousness and completely disregard human rights" "is "largely accurate" -pg. 215) and against immigration ( "large numbers of unskilled, uneducated immigrants...confound the high priority objective of steadily increasing high incomes for Americans" ..."our policy must be responsive to the needs of our society, not the failures of other societies" pg. 251). Harrison gets in real conceptual trouble when he repeatedly criticizes economists that emphasize "market signals" to create prosperity. To explain the progress in Chile he has to do a backflip ( the elite there is from Basque descent, he argues). You are left to wonder how he explains the sharply different progress of the same culture in Taiwan and Continental China, in the former East or West Germany , in North and South Korea or in Cuba and Miami, to mention just a few cases. His main argument is that if you are Catholic and brown, you better change your religion, your values and if possible, the color of your skin - but don't ever dare to live in the United States and challenge his culture! Don't waste your time with his book.

A modern example of racism and religious discriminationdisguised as "culturism," this book blames Latin America'slack of uniform development on its traditional Hispanic Catholic culture instead of looking at the effect of 150 years of U.S. domination, exploitation and support of dictatorial regimes in Latin America.