Responsibility for Latin America's economic condition

Mutual recrimination between Anglo- and Latin Americans is an old story. Responding to any charges from Latin Americans that their woes are largely due to the US., Tim Brown says:

"I suspect the blame game concerning who is primarily responsible for the economic conditions in Latin America continue to be played for many more decades, and I will continue to engage in iterations of it beyond the electronic walls of WAIS as well as within them, and that there will always be great passion on both sides. But of all such debates in which I have participated thus far, my favorite took place not on the Net but in the magnificent, gilded and mirrored Board Room of the Lima, Peru Chamber of Commerce. They had invited me to discuss with their Board a paper I had published on the Post-Cold War revolution now underway in the region ["Realist Revolution: Free Trade, Open Economies, Participatory Democracy, and Their Impact on Latin American Politics", Policy Studies Review, Vol. 15 No. 2/3, Summer/Autumn 1998].

After my presentation, a skeptical member of the Chamber's Board asked me: "Well, if United States isn't entirely responsible for Peru's poverty, who is?" My response, was first to question whether there was anyone at the table in that Board Room living in poverty. None was. I asked them to stand up, turn around, and look in the mirrors behind them, which they did. I then said: "You are looking at the faces of those who are primarily responsible for the poverty of most Peruvians, because you, like other elites thorughout Latin America, have traditionally used your political, economic, and social power to take far more than your fair share of the nation's wealth for yourselves. That is what has kept most of your fellow Peruvians from climbing out of their poverty."

And then I said: "Not only that, but what you have done is contrary to your own interests. You're all businessmen, so I assume everyone here would like to make more money by selling more of whatever you sell. But in order to do that, there must be more people who can afford to buy it. So if the country's wealth were better shared with everyone, the incomes of more Peruvians would go up, you would sell more, they would have more goods, you would make more money, and everyone would be better off. That's the way it works."

Their reaction? To my amazement, rather than lynching me, they gave me a standing ovation. While I seriously doubt any of them then went home and began sharing their wealth, at least it was a start".

My comment: Such a conversation could take place in New York, if a room with mirrors were available.

Ronald Hilton - 3/6/02