There has never been any contestation that Brazil is somewhat unique amongst the assemblage of Latin American states:- It’s Portuguese heritage
- It’s ability to remain united – rather than splinter into numerous squabbling territories, as happened with the Spanish empire
- It’s sheer size – population, economy, territory is as large as that of all the other South American countries put together.
So the differences between Brazil and the rest of the Latin American nations are obvious. However, it would be impossible to see Brazil as anything else but an integral part of any study of Latin America? Well so we thought... Leslie Bethell of Oxford University gave a talk the other week at the Institute for the Study of the Americas entitled “Is Brazil part of Latin America?” Well he would say that given that he was director of the Centre for Brazilian Studies - when it is normally commonplace just to lump Brazil in under Latin America.
Simon Bolivar was supposed to be the great instigator for Latin American unity, However his grand vision had nothing to do with Latin American unity as we know it, but rather of a confederación hispanoamericana – a Hispanic confederation that excluded Brazil. Brazil was not Hispanic and seen as intrinsically different from the rest of the Americas:
Simon Bolivar was supposed to be the great instigator for Latin American unity, However his grand vision had nothing to do with Latin American unity as we know it, but rather of a confederación hispanoamericana – a Hispanic confederation that excluded Brazil. Brazil was not Hispanic and seen as intrinsically different from the rest of the Americas:
- It wasn’t a republic, but a monarchy
- It still permitted slavery
- It has closer ties with Europe, something the new Hispanic American republics were at pains to distance themselves from.
Not that Brazil really cared about not being part of this Hispanic American club. It’s Portuguese heritage meant that it was naturally imbued with a hostile attitude towards anything related to Spain. This along with a sense of superiority meant that Brazilians were quite happy to be excluded.
In the late 19th century, with the dreams of a unified Hispanic Americas long gone, the notion of Latin America did grow as an idea, especially amongst Latin American intellectuals. They sought to focus on the similarities across the Latin American continent as a counterweight to the increasing dominance and interventionism of the US and its of ides of American (North + South) unity through the a US-led Panamericansim.
However well up into the 20th century Brazil was still seen as a non-integral part of Latin America. In an era of fervent anti-Americanism in Latin America, Brazil persistently remained less critical of the US and was of the US’s more reliable allies. Furthermore Brazil continued to perceive itself unique and indeed superior from the rest of Latin America.
Arguably Leslie Bethall had indeed made a persuasive historical argument as to how Brazil had differentiated itself from the rest of Latin America. However he continued to argue that still today Brazil is markedly different from the rest of Latin America, is still perceived so by Brazilians themselves and that it ultimately deserves to be studied as a completely different entity in exclusion from Latin America. I think this was the point at which most people in the audience would have started to take issue with him.
The interconnectedness of Latin American countries – Brazil included – is plain to see. Brazil borders almost all South American nations, and in today’s world can’t not be influenced, culturally, economically, politically by the rest of Latin America and vice versa. Aside from a difference in language, there is no doubt in my mind, that Brazil is an integral part of Latin America. Yes there are many things which are unique to Brazil, and yes Brazilians will no doubt from time to time see themselves as unique and superior to the rest of the neighbours. But you need just to take a trip over the river Plate to realize that the Argentineans are just as capable, if not more so, in espousing a sense of difference and a superiority with the rest of the continent. Brazil’s leadership in MERCOSUR and the recently unveiled Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) only highlights its attempt to place itself, if not at the centre of Latin America, then at least South America – Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean already seem locked into the US sphere of dominance.
In the late 19th century, with the dreams of a unified Hispanic Americas long gone, the notion of Latin America did grow as an idea, especially amongst Latin American intellectuals. They sought to focus on the similarities across the Latin American continent as a counterweight to the increasing dominance and interventionism of the US and its of ides of American (North + South) unity through the a US-led Panamericansim.
However well up into the 20th century Brazil was still seen as a non-integral part of Latin America. In an era of fervent anti-Americanism in Latin America, Brazil persistently remained less critical of the US and was of the US’s more reliable allies. Furthermore Brazil continued to perceive itself unique and indeed superior from the rest of Latin America.
Arguably Leslie Bethall had indeed made a persuasive historical argument as to how Brazil had differentiated itself from the rest of Latin America. However he continued to argue that still today Brazil is markedly different from the rest of Latin America, is still perceived so by Brazilians themselves and that it ultimately deserves to be studied as a completely different entity in exclusion from Latin America. I think this was the point at which most people in the audience would have started to take issue with him.
The interconnectedness of Latin American countries – Brazil included – is plain to see. Brazil borders almost all South American nations, and in today’s world can’t not be influenced, culturally, economically, politically by the rest of Latin America and vice versa. Aside from a difference in language, there is no doubt in my mind, that Brazil is an integral part of Latin America. Yes there are many things which are unique to Brazil, and yes Brazilians will no doubt from time to time see themselves as unique and superior to the rest of the neighbours. But you need just to take a trip over the river Plate to realize that the Argentineans are just as capable, if not more so, in espousing a sense of difference and a superiority with the rest of the continent. Brazil’s leadership in MERCOSUR and the recently unveiled Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) only highlights its attempt to place itself, if not at the centre of Latin America, then at least South America – Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean already seem locked into the US sphere of dominance.
Critics may well turn around and say – and Leslie Bethall would be one of them – that Brazilian leadership is not much wanted amongst South American nations, who view these attempts of regional unity with Brazil at their helm as merely a means to help Brazil to propel itself onto the world stage…
This has been quote a long post…thank you if you’ve managed to get this far. I’ll finish with a few comments by former Brazilian President on this very issue - “Brazil: A Latin American Nation?” - that seem to underscore my point of view as well.
Despite differing colonial histories, languages and state institutions, Brazil does indeed share a relation with Latin America. […] Along with some cultural, geographical, and ideological traits, Brazil and other Latin American nations share a position on the “periphery” of the modern globalized world. […] We belong to Latin America […] We feel at ease in Latin America. (The Washington Institute for International Studies, 14/03/2007)
1 comments:
Hi, amigo! I'm doing an argumentative paper about this issue.
Do you have any other sources about the subject? Can you direct me to some of them? Thanks!
Post a Comment