Pan-Regionalism among
Latin American Children

... there are two simultaneous demands governing the proper name which one must not be too quick to separate from each other; on the one hand, a requirement of untranslatability and unreadability, as if the proper name were nothing but pure reference, lying outside of signification and language; on the other hand, a requirement of translatability and readability, as if the proper name were assailable to the common noun, to any word that is caught up in a linguistic and genealogical network where meaning already contaminates non-meaning and where the proper name is absorbed and expropriated by the common noun.

On the political level, this undecidable double postulation of the particular and the universal is translated in the form of a contradictory opposition between, for example, nationalism and universalism.  Derrida writes in "Living On: Borderlines": "What this institution [the university] cannot bear is for anyone to tamper with language, meaning both the national language and, paradoxically, an ideal of translatability that neutralises this national language.  Nationalism and universalism.  What this institution cannot bear is a transformation that leaves intact neither of these complementary poles."

Claude Lévesque:  The Ear of the Other

When one refers to Latin America, one is typically referring to the twenty countries that speak the Latin-derived languages of Spanish and Portuguese in the Americas: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay and Venezuela.  (For completeness, we should include Puerto Rico, the Malvinas, and possibly other places as well).  A Latin American is a person who is an inhabitant of Latin America.

In practice, the term "Latin American" involves and implies much more than a geography-based classification, as different people invest different meanings into the term.  Of course, such ambiguity is not restricted to just the term of "Latin American" only, but may be virtually extended to all proper names in any language.  

The term "Latin American" is a classificatory tool whereby a certain group of people are joined into one group.  In itself, this is neither good nor bad.  After all, classification is a pervasive and essential human activity applied in all levels of daily life, without which people probably cannot function effectively and consistently.   Such classification occurs at many different levels:  for example, a person may be classified according to family name, nuclear family, extended family, clan, school, education, literacy, linguistic skills, employer, military service, occupation, affluence, possessions, street block, village, town, city, province, nation, region, race, ethnicity, appearance, biological species, physical stature, health status, and so on. 

Whether one likes it or not, one is being classified by others all the time.  If one is indifferent to a classification, one may just ignore it.  If one feels being insulted or disadvantaged by a classification, one may protest or take some other forms of action.  Sometimes, one may even introduce a new classification because of some perceived advantages that may accrue.

If one asks a "Latin American" what he/she is, it is unlikely that the answer will be "Latin American."  More likely, the person is going to identify himself/herself by nationality (e.g. Brazilian) or region (e.g. a Paulista (from São Paulo) or Carioca (from Rio de Janeiro)).  Historically, the term "Latin American" is used more often by outsiders than by the so-called Latin American themselves.

Of course, things do change.  In a globalized economy, the idea of a pan-regional Latin American trade bloc with 500 million consumers and producers suddenly becomes terribly appealing and important.  Nevertheless, a pan-Latin American trade bloc will not arrive overnight.  Linguistic commonality and geographic proximity are not sufficient; after all, those elements have been there already for a long time.  The signing of trade agreements and ratification by the signing nations are not sufficient either, since they can only provide the framework for trade.  What is required eventually would be a willingness to cooperate among the "Latin Americans."

We will now cite some survey data about how the children of Latin America know about other countries.  This information comes from the Pan-Latin American Kids Study of children between the ages of 7 and 11 years old in 18 Latin American countries (note: not including Cuba).  The relevant summary data are:

• 78% agreed with the statement "I want to know about other cultures and countries"

• 70% agreed with the statement "I am interested in other children in Latin America"

• 74% agreed with the statement "I am interested in other children in the world"

These are relatively high levels of affirmation, implying at least a willingness to be interested in and to find out about people outside their national boundaries.  The next table shows the breakdown by geographical region and socio-economic level.  Geographically, the lowest interests are exhibited by the children down south (Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Ecuador, Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay).

Of course, being merely interested in other nationals is still a long way from the attainment of a common Latin American identity.  Nevertheless, this is the first step.  When compared to the diversity and complexities of the languages, cultures and histories of Europe, the vision of pan-Latin American regionalism may be a lot easier to realize.

(posted by Roland Soong, 7/16/2001)

(Return to Zona Latina's Home Page)