This was an assignment for my Latin American Literature class, though I made it more research-based than literary.
Latin American Literature
17 October 2024
From Colonialism to Neocolonialism: The Neoliberalization of Latin America
Latin America has been destabilized throughout the colonial period, and even today in the contemporary era. One thing remains evident capitalism’s metamorphosis into what we have today, neoliberalism, has created an environment where the privatization of everything has shown to be disastrous to Earth. However, its sights have been locked into the global south, where multinational corporations exploit both land and people, in pursuit of capital accumulation–a central tenet of capitalism. Before neoliberalism, Latin America had dictators who allowed for the colonization of their state by the US directly or in the interest of the US. However, this tactic is harder to maintain, but with notions of neoliberalism, it helps justify exploitation, as it says that it will help the economy grow, which in turn helps the people of the state. Even in the age of bureaucracy, corruption remains prevalent, more solidified than in the dictatorship days, as explained in an article by Stephen D. Morris, titled: Corruption and the Mexican Political System: Continuity and Change. The article talks about the history of corruption in the Mexican nation-state, how it’s changing, and the posturing about change by the dominant ruling party, the PRI. This article will help drive my analysis of neoliberal posturing, about corruption. The author does bring up some interesting points about corruption in the nation-state, that'll use. This corruption has led to destabilizing neoliberal policies, more specifically in Mexico, in which one such neoliberal agreement has exacerbated the issue, NAFTA. An article by Kathleen Staudt titled: How NAFTA Has Changed Mexico, in which she talks about the agreement's history, and how it has taken a toll on the Mexican working class. She mentions “NAFTA has changed Mexico for the better and for the worse” (Staudt, 48). This article will help outline how neocolonialism has created a situation in which the health of the Mexican people has become worse, primarily through the increased consumption of sugary drinks, such as Coca-Cola. Coca-Cola has maintained a staying power in the southern region of Mexico, in Chiapas. They have created a situation in which Coke is much cheaper than bottled water–which they also hold a monopoly in that region–and a video by the channel Fern titled: How Coca-Cola Is Killing Mexico, dives into how the issue was created. The video will help with understanding the reason Coca-Cola has become as big as it has in such a short time, and also creating the issue of high diabetes rates in Mexico, which are higher than in the US, and even more so in the southern region of Mexico, which is twice the rate of them combined. All of this relates to the work of infamous journalist Juan González, with his book: Harvest of Empire: A History of Latinos in America, and the documentary by the same name. In it, he mentions the push and pull factors for migration from Latin America towards the US. The push/pull factors are very much still the same in the contemporary era, yet under different contexts. Latin America in the postcolonial era has suffered so much by way of dictatorships and neocolonialism. It has led to the devastation of health and exploitation of the people in the region, as well as of the land. If the US state left the region alone and the corporations exploiting the region were punished by democratically elected leaders in the region, Latin America could break free from the chains of neoliberalism. Additionally, this would make it so that the people in the region wouldn’t be pushed out of their homelands and pushed into the imperial core, the US.
Latin America has been ravaged by the global north for its existence as a postcolonial entity, it has pushed out colonial powers yet they always attempt to make their way back in. For example, France tried to take over Mexico with their puppet Maximilian, however, the US helped Benito Juarez overthrow him for the Mexican nation. The US utilized the Monroe Doctrine which warned European colonial powers to stay away from the Western Hemisphere (archive). If only the US reflected this action inwards in the contemporary era, but as I’ll explain later, the US either funded coups or let corporations run their capitalistic nature, like a parasite infecting its host, and destabilize the region for their accumulation of capital since it’ll benefit the US. The Monroe Doctrine was extended through President Theodore Roosevelt, which was known as the “Big Stick Policy” (Britannica). It further solidified the neocolonial aspect of the US corporations and the world police state of the US. This sort of explicit policing of the Western Hemisphere has been reduced through power narratives, through the “Good Neighbor Policy,” (history.state.gov)which sought to lay the foundation for a good relationship with Central and South America. Though it wasn’t an outright NAFTA-like program, it still helped the conceptualization of such a trade agreement. The US has always had a complex to “protect” Latin America from other imperial cores. However, this complex is rooted in the “White Man’s Burden,” which solidifies the idea that White men must save the savages from their state of nature, it also turns the racial other into a child-like ontological being incapable of rational thought. This philosophical idea is rooted in the social contract theories of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke, who argued that without a sovereign, society would exist in a state of nature—Hobbes saw this as a state of perpetual war, while Locke believed that some individuals might act morally, though the absence of a state would leave society vulnerable to those who act selfishly or violently; it’s hard to know the potentiality of the human ontological existence to Locke, but that inclusion of a state ensures a safety net. Locke and Hobbes' theories were also used to racialize Indigenous and non-European peoples, portraying them as being in a perpetual state of nature—incapable of rational thought and thus in need of external governance or control. This idea helped justify European imperialism, as it framed colonization as a civilizing mission. Furthermore, the notion of private property from Locke solidifies the notion of imperialism, it states that if the land isn’t being “improved” it should fall into another hands, who will improve the land. This is how the imperialist justified their actions, that they were just improving the land, and using the resources in a way that would benefit them. However, the capitalists just wanted to accumulate capital with no regard for the land in which they were exploiting. These policies all cumulated into what would be later known as neoliberalism, which since then has devastated Latin America, stealing resources, worker exploitation, environmental devastation, and the genocide of mainly the indigenous population.
Neoliberalism started in Chile with the coup of 1973 and the implementation of the liberal autocrat General Augusto Pinochet to power. He instituted a harsh brutal regime in which he targeted those he deemed dissidents, mainly communists and socialists, and their sympathizers. Natalia Segura, in her article: How neoliberalism vandalized Latin America, mentions, “In addition to the U.S.-backed coup in Chile, the “Chicago Boys” — a group of Chilean economists who were trained in neoliberal economic policies at the University of Chicago — returned to Latin America, where they took high positions in the government under Pinochet.” The policies implemented were disastrous, as inflation in 1973 reached 400 percent, and in 1974 after price controls were removed, it reached 600 percent (Caputo and Saravia, 2). The Chilean economy recovered after the regime ended, from 1991 to 2017 marking the beginning of a disinflation process that was never reverted and was unprecedented in Chile (Caputo and Saravia, 3). However, despite this, the US continued its helping hand in implementing neoliberal puppets to states in the region. One such state, Mexico, has been economically dependent on the US state for a long time. However, the addition of NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement), has only made that dependence more prevalent. Defenders of NAFTA have mentioned, "The agreement has boosted foreign direct investment, trade volume, GDP, and GDP per capita, and also appears to have enlarged the middle class. Infrastructure projects financed by the NADBank have improved the environmental quality and health in the northern borderlands.” (Staudt, 48) However, at what cost could these benefits be considered great when the working class has only suffered under the agreement? The rates of diabetes have gone up in the region around 16% and even more so in the south of Mexico, in Chiapas. The reason for this lies in Coca-Cola gaining a foothold in the region with its cultural imperialist notions of what it means to be Mexican, and neoliberal policies.
Coca-Cola has led to Mexico's destabilization, creating a situation in which the people's health has only gotten worse. Interestingly enough, the former president of Mexico, Vicente Fox, worked from 1965 to 1979 at Coca-Cola, becoming the president of the Latin American division. During his term as president of Mexico, he tried to build a closer relationship with the US, however only made the Mexican state suffer, as the war on drugs just kept getting worse and the expansion of NAFTA under his presidency. The expansion of NAFTA allowed for US corporations like Coca-Cola to set up shop in the region. Coca-Cola has extracted the water from the region to use for its drinks and then to top it off they resell the water along with the Coke, and the funny thing is that they sell the water at a higher cost than the Coke. This is deliberate as the addictive nature of sugar hooks the people; just like any other drug, it gets the consumer to return for the product, and since water is slightly more costly the people choose Coke instead of water; only reinforcing the addiction, which aids in the rates of diabetes. This is only a tactic that has re-occurred in Latin America, a corporation comes in and destabilizes the region. Although Juan Gonzalez has not talked at length about this issue, he has brought up colonialism and neocolonialism. His work has let others know of how much Latin America has been decimated by the global north, and they have then gone on to say that Latin America can’t get their shit together; if only the corporations could leave the region alone, it would prosper. There have been attempts by the Mexican state –and other Latin American states– to nationalize their industries, but there have been power narratives that point to socialism being the big bad wolf, and not the states trying to “get their shit together,” and be self-reliant. The only way this issue can be resolved is by having the people in Latin America elect their leaders so that they can punish the corporations exploiting their workers and land. This would also require the US to let the states do their own thing. One way to ensure that this can happen is through us the citizens of the US electing politicians that will help the cause, and through critical praxis–action, reflection, and theory.
In conclusion, Latin America has deviated from its existence as a postcolonial entity, and the US has pretended to be the benevolent entity in the region, however, they have only made the issue worse by overthrowing those who have gone against their power narratives and installing those who would implement policies that they can work with. Latin America has also been the playing ground for neoliberalism, which has led to the normalization of the devastation, by power narratives that say that anything but neoliberalism will only further devastate the region and that only through further progress could they find salvation. The neo-liberalization of Mexico has led to Coca-Cola gaining a foothold in the region, making the rates of diabetes skyrocket, and more so in the Chiapas region. Authors like Juan Gonzalez have showcased the issue to a wider audience, and although he hasn’t explicitly talked about Coca-Cola; he still helped highlight the neocolonial aspect. If we, the US, leave the region alone, it would allow the people in Latin America to democratically elect leaders, who’ll punish corporations destabilizing the region; this would allow the region to prosper, and create an eventual society free from the chains of capitalist exploitation.
Works Cited
Fern. “How Coca-Cola Is Killing Mexico.” YouTube, 21 September 2023, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pr4ll48MU_k. Accessed 17 October 2024.
Fox, Vicente. “Vicente Fox.” Wikipedia, https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vicente_Fox. Accessed 24 October 2024.
“Home > Monroe Doctrine (1823).” National Archives, 10 May 2022, https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/monroe-doctrine. Accessed 23 October 2024.
“Milestones in the History of U.S. Foreign Relations.” Milestones in the History of U.S. Foreign Relations - Office of the Historian, https://history.state.gov/milestones/1921-1936/good-neighbor. Accessed 23 October 2024.
Milton, John. “Big Stick policy | Definition & Examples.” Britannica, 11 October 2024, https://www.britannica.com/event/Big-Stick-policy. Accessed 23 October 2024.
Morris, Stephen D. “Corruption and the Mexican Political System: Continuity and Change.” Third World Quarterly, vol. 20, no. 3, 1999, pp. 623–43. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/3993325. Accessed 17 Oct 2024.
a partial perspective. “Coca Colonization of Latin America | How Coca Cola Changes Culture.” YouTube, 31 July 2017, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tKUNvRgO6k. Accessed 17 October 2024.
Segura, Natalia. “How neoliberalism vandalized Latin America | SocialistWorker.org.” Socialist Worker, 21 November 2018, https://socialistworker.org/2018/11/21/how-neoliberalism-vandalized-latin-america. Accessed 17 October 2024.
Staudt, Kathleen. “How NAFTA Has Changed Mexico.” Current History, vol. 117, no. 796, 2018, pp. 43–48. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/48614319. Accessed 17 Oct 2024.
chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://bfi.uchicago.edu/wp-content/uploads/The-Case-of-Chile.pdf [couldn’t find a way to cite this properly]
chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://scholar.smu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1824&context=lbra [nor this one]
