Scan barcode
shksprsis's review against another edition
3.0
Latin American idiocy, as described in the forward to the “Guide to the Perfect Latin American Idiot,” is not peculiar to Latin America; this type of idiocy exists where ever someone abdicates “the ability to think for oneself, to compare the words with the facts they claim to describe, to question the rhetoric that replaces thought.” This type of idiocy is consciously adopted because of “intellectual laziness, ethical sluggishness and social opportunism.” The Latin American is an idiot because he blames his problems on others when the real problem is with him. He will stick to the idea that others have wronged him despite the lack of proof and despite the fact that keeping to such an ideology is harmful to him. Sitting on the opposite end of the spectrum from Galeano’s book, the authors argue that, rather than take responsibility for their lives, Latin Americans have spent far too much time finding scapegoats for whatever has gone wrong in Latin American history. While Galeano wrote with poetry, Mendoza, et. al., write with a sometimes scathing wit and sense of satire.
While the authors serve up a refreshing change of perspective, much of Latin American history actually was dominated by issues of domination. Whether reading about Spain and Portugal’s domination of the continent in Graham’s book, or U.S. domination from Gilderhus, there is a long history of intervention, meddling and domination that might frustrate any Latin American citizen into feeling like a victim. When Wright discusses the emergence of revolutions in Latin America, the viciousness of leftist regimes did not excuse the horrors of the outgoing regimes. Issues pervaded both sides.
The forward identifies the authors as neoliberals and Skidmore, et. al., discussed the issues of neoliberal and capitalist development in Latin America, describing the difficulties in adaptation there. The authors state that neoliberalism failed in countries like Mexico because the groundwork Juarez had established was dismantled before its time. It could be argued that they succumb to the same sins they accuse others of committing. However, this book is no more biased than Galeano’s and even Galeano stated in his PBS interview that it was time for Latin Americans to become actors in their own history and not victims. One imagines that the authors would welcome the discussion either way.
While the authors serve up a refreshing change of perspective, much of Latin American history actually was dominated by issues of domination. Whether reading about Spain and Portugal’s domination of the continent in Graham’s book, or U.S. domination from Gilderhus, there is a long history of intervention, meddling and domination that might frustrate any Latin American citizen into feeling like a victim. When Wright discusses the emergence of revolutions in Latin America, the viciousness of leftist regimes did not excuse the horrors of the outgoing regimes. Issues pervaded both sides.
The forward identifies the authors as neoliberals and Skidmore, et. al., discussed the issues of neoliberal and capitalist development in Latin America, describing the difficulties in adaptation there. The authors state that neoliberalism failed in countries like Mexico because the groundwork Juarez had established was dismantled before its time. It could be argued that they succumb to the same sins they accuse others of committing. However, this book is no more biased than Galeano’s and even Galeano stated in his PBS interview that it was time for Latin Americans to become actors in their own history and not victims. One imagines that the authors would welcome the discussion either way.
More...