In September 2002, the United States organized a symposium with more than 20 scholars from home and abroad on the topic "Why do they hate us so much?" ”
At the end of the seminar, American expert Paul Holland identified three manifestations of world anti-Americanism: first, antipathy to capitalism; second, it is an expression of nationalism; The third is resistance to modernization.
In fact, the study of the opposition of the world's people to the United States has become a long-standing topic in the United States. As early as the 20s of the 20th century, some experts in the United States began to study anti-Americanism in Latin American countries, but it seems that the study went in the wrong direction from the beginning.
At that time, American society believed that Latin America opposed American help because of the overall political, economic, and cultural backwardness of Latin America, and the fact that Catholicism was heretical, hierarchical, and authoritarian.
At one point, these views believed that Latin America's acceptance of Protestantism, political democracy, and liberal and egalitarian American leadership would cause some minor friction and discomfort.
This phenomenon of maladaptation is mainly due to the huge economic and political gap between Latin America and the United States, which leads to the inferiority complex of Latin Americans.
Therefore, it is a disease, an aestheophobia, which needs to be **. Americans have been bothered by this for almost 200 years, and I am sure they will be bothered for quite some time.
But at the end of the day, this distress comes from their deep-seated arrogance.
Originating from the Anglo-Saxon and Protestant culture, the United States advocated freedom and equality from the very beginning, and the vastness of the New World made the United States form a national character that loves adventure, is brave, and advocates freedom and equality.
Although in the early days of its founding, the United States had not yet reached the universal suffrage system of later generations, but it had become a "beacon of democracy" in the world, inspiring the democratic revolution of the old road and the independence movement in Latin America.
The Cuban revolutionary pioneer José Martí rejoiced in the development of the United States, and even regarded the United States as his second home; Miranda, a Latin American independence leader who fought in the American Revolutionary War and the French Revolution, considered the prosperity and constitutional spirit of the United States to be the most advanced in the world, and even dreamed of building a great American state.
In 1823, the United States issued the Monroe Declaration, emphasizing the principles of "opposing the further colonization of European countries in the Americas", "non-intervention" and the "American system", which was welcomed by most Latin Americans.
However, this is not the case. Newly formed countries such as Brazil and Colombia tried to establish friendly relations with the United States, but the United States did not respond.
With the passage of time and the advancement of the westward expansion of the United States, the aggressive intentions of the United States began to emerge, and they continued to encroach on Latin America, such as illegally occupying Mexican territory, waging an open war of aggression against Mexico, and carrying out economic infiltration into other Latin American countries.
Some prophets are beginning to realize the threat that the United States poses to Latin American countries. Bolívar, the leader of Latin American independence, has made it clear that the Monroe Doctrine is a precursor to American expansionism, while José Martí, the pioneer of Cuban independence, pointedly pointed out: "The country we need to know more deeply is the United States, and this greedy neighbor is undoubtedly playing against our ideas." ”
The perception of these independent Latin American leaders led to anti-American sentiment in later Latin American societies to a certain extent, and around the 20th century, with the expansion of American aggression and invasion, this sentiment became more pronounced.
In general, the greatest tragedy of Latin American countries is that they are "too far from heaven and too close to the United States." ”
In 1894, the industrial output value of the United States was already the first in the world, which shows that the United States has made remarkable progress in the second industrial revolution and has become an important force that cannot be ignored in the world.
Because the United States has long regarded Latin America as its "backyard," the Latin American region has suffered serious economic and political aggression.
From the economic roots, this is due to the need for expansion of the monopoly capital organization in the United States; On the other hand, there are deep cultural roots.
Americans have always believed that they have a "natural calling," and this belief is seen as "altruism" in diplomacy, and they believe that they have a responsibility to uphold "democracy, freedom, and human rights" around the world.
American scholar Dennis Bostedrov points out: "This mission myth derives from our Puritan ancestors, who considered themselves God's chosen people.
According to this myth, the United States has a moral obligation to serve other countries as a global model to encourage global freedom. ”
Henry Commaje, an American historian, deftly stated: "Americans were deeply influenced by the New World, which was blessed with abundant resources and was blessed with such a pride that they developed a proud belief that the United States was the best country in the world."
Every immigrant who crosses the Atlantic to the United States identifies with this universal fact in their imagination. For Americans, the vast wilderness is their paradise, and their attitude towards other nations and peoples can almost be described as arrogant and impudent. ”
In 1858, James Buchanan of the United States openly stated in Congress: "The law of our nation's survival is expansion, and even if we want to disobey him, it is impossible." ”
The United States' religious beliefs, racial superiority, political self-confidence, and expansionist mentality all contributed to their aggressive policy toward Latin America.
U.S. control over Latin America is diverse, from direct political and military intervention to economic exploitation. At the beginning of the 20th century, with the victory of the Spanish-American War, the United States mastered a large number of Spanish colonies in the Americas, and even promoted the independence of many Latin American countries, but also made the military regime rampant in Latin America.
The military aggression of the U.S. Marine Corps spread to every corner of Latin America, triggering a series of wars known as the "Banana Wars". Among them, the Sandinista uprising in Nicaragua is a typical example.
Sandinista was a national hero who stood up to the US-backed military *** and resolutely opposed the aggression of US imperialism.
"US imperialism is our worst enemy, and they seek to destroy the dignity of our race and the freedom of our people through conquest," he proposed. "However, the Sandinista uprising ultimately failed due to the division and cannibalization of the United States.
The second strategy is economic aggression. American multinationals invested heavily in Latin America, especially in 1914, when the export of American capital to Latin America reached 46%.
This has allowed American multinationals to control major economic resources in Latin American countries, with Mexico being the case in point, with American multinationals controlling 78 percent of the country's mines, 72 percent of its metallurgical industry, 58 percent of its oil industry, and 68 percent of its rubber enterprises.
When a country's economic lifeline is controlled by multinational corporations, economic sovereignty is impossible, and it is difficult to establish authority.
The Rise of Anti-Americanism in Latin America Ariel is the beginning of an anti-Americanism in Latin American literature, originating from the "Arielism" of the twenties and thirties of the twentieth century.
In the long essay "Ariel", Rhodo compares Ariel and Caliban in Shakespeare's play "The Tempest" to Latin America and the United States, in order to criticize the spread of American "deformed" spiritual values in Latin America, and argues that the positivist and utilitarian spirit of the United States leads to moral degradation.
Despite its admirable spirit of innovation, sense of purpose, and other good qualities, the arrogance of America's nouveau riche class is always reminiscent of the decline of the Roman Empire.
Ariel's work has been selected for use in primary and secondary school textbooks in Latin America, enabling students to absorb American values on a critical basis, rather than just blindly accepting them.
From the beginning of literary anti-Americanism, it slowly evolved into the political realm. After the advent of the Cold War, Latin America began to seek an independent development path.
Castro's path to socialism and Peron's third way are among the most representative ideas in Latin America. In the field of energy and resources, Latin American countries have actively pursued nationalization policies, such as Venezuela's oil diplomacy and the recovery of sovereignty over the Panama Canal.
In addition, Latin American countries have formed various political organizations that seek independence beyond American influence. However, Latin American countries have encountered many difficulties in their pursuit of independence.
The United States is trying to create a left-wing that represents the interests of the Latin American people by exporting democracy. Haiti and Venezuela are prime examples.
With U.S. intervention, Haiti supported the tyrant Duvalier, while Venezuela's democratically elected Chávez was severely repressed by the U.S. By funding reactionaries inside Venezuela, the United States portrays Chávez as an "axis" and a "problem country."
This different policy toward Haiti and Venezuela embodies the double standards of the United States, and behind it is the promotion of American national interests.
In the 90s, Latin American society was in extreme distress due to the economic crisis. In addition, the collapse of the Soviet Union called into question the original socialist path, and the disadvantages of nationalization could not be solved, which led to a boom of "economic liberalization and privatization" in Latin American society.
While these reforms have been met with some basic consensus, known as the "Washington Consensus," Latin American countries have also reinvented their countries according to this consensus.
However, in fact, the use of neoliberalism to transform the original country has only made multinational corporations led by the United States run rampant in Latin American countries more unscrupulously, compressed the living space of national capital, and caused Latin American countries to generally lose their economic autonomy after the 90s, resulting in widespread dissatisfaction among the middle and lower strata of society.
Venezuelan Chávez** has sparked strong anti-American sentiment in Latin American society. Many Americans** call him a "leader" because of his efforts to protect national capital, nationalize energy, and work to help the middle and lower class poor.
The attitude of the American press** can reflect which country is most criticized by Americans, considered "the least human rights" and "the least democratic" place.
Once the U.S. takes control of these places, even military men who came to power through a military coup can get U.S. support.
Generations of Latin Americans have worked tirelessly to break free from the influence of the United States and achieve independent development, but this process will take a long time.