US Hegemony in Latin America and Beyond

REVIEW BY DENNIS CHAPMAN

Department of Politics and International Studies, University of Hull, United Kingdom

Geopolitics and the Post-Colonial: Rethinking North–South Relations. By David Slater.Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2004. 296 pp., $69.95 cloth (ISBN: 0-6312-1452-6),$34.95 paper (ISBN: 0-63121453-4).

Is globalization merely US imperialism masked as the philanthropic diffusion ofneoliberalism into the Third World? In Geopolitics and the Post-Colonial: RethinkingNorth-South Relations, David SlaterFdrawing primarily from the deconstructionmethodology of James Derrida (1992), the critical theory of Michel Foucault (1979,1980), the structural theory of World Systems Theory (although Wallerstein is notcited), and the postcolonial perspectives of a myriad of Latin American schol-arsFargues that it is. More specifically, Slater asserts that the United States (withthe aid of such neoliberal organizations as the International Monetary Fund, theWorld Bank, and the World Trade Organization) has sought to liberate the ThirdWorld from its indigence for the purpose of establishing a Southern hemisphere of‘‘quasi-sovereignties’’ (see Jackson 1996:60) that can be easily manipulated polit-ically. Slater argues that the neoliberal order creates an asymmetry of structure thatfacilitates the dominance of the North over the South in ‘‘a conscious and oftenviolent intervention on the part of [the US] government which impose[s] marketorganization on society for non-economic ends’’ (p. 93). In short, the United Statesseeks to use the neoliberal economic order to achieve its political goal of geopoliticalimperialism.

Drawing on dependency theory, Slater explains that the neoliberal project inLatin America helps sustain the wealth of the United States by importing rawmaterials from the South and exporting processed goods from the NorthFarelationship that clearly favors the North. This argument is not a new one (seeWallerstein 1974). Nonetheless, as Slater argues, it is one that has been largelyabandoned with the discursive hegemony of neoliberal theory. Neoliberals take forgranted the inherent goodness of the free market, which, by virtue of being reg-ulated only by market forces, is seen as fair for everyone. Yet, aside from theeconomies of Southeast Asia, which Slater treats as an anomaly, the neoliberalpromise of wealth for all has largely failed. But does this mean that Latin Americais a total failure? According to Slater, the answer is ‘‘no.’’ On the other hand, the‘‘shadow’’ neoliberal project of eliminating political opposition to Occidental-ismFwhether in the form of governmental regimes (for example, Fidel Castro)or the campaign of postmodern guerilla warfare (for example, the Zapatistas inMexico)Fhas succeeded in maintaining US dominance over Latin America.

So, why cloak imperialist ambitions in neoliberal reformation? The reason is thatthe United States wishes to maintain a legitimate empire. Although imperialism a laCaesar and Napoleon is rejected by the United Nations, imperialism a la RonaldReagan (that is, ‘‘neoimperialism’’) is tolerated because any activity that supportsthe free market is assumed to be legitimate. Therefore, the discursive power ofWestern institutions diffused into the South (what Slater calls ‘‘conceptual fram-ings’’) produces consensual exploitation. As Slater writes, ‘‘[t]he discursive power[of the United States] entails putting into place a regime of truth that subaltern

r 2005 International Studies Review.PublishedbyBlackwellPublishing,350MainStreet,Malden,MA02148,USA,and9600GarsingtonRoad,OxfordOX42DQ,UK.

International Studies Review (2005) 7, 317–319

nations are encouraged, persuaded and induced to adopt and put into practice’’(p. 148). The tragedy for the South, according to Slater, is that, even though itsacceptance of neoliberal economics is presumably removed from any politicalagenda, in the final analysis it is the political agenda of US hegemony that motivatesthe neoliberalization of the South.

Geopolitics and the Post-Colonial contributes to the study of US foreign policy to-ward Third World nations. Even though Slater focuses on Latin America, this bookis emblematic of geopolitics seen from a post-structural (as opposed to post-mod-ern) perspective. By putting Latin American scholars at the heart of a study of LatinAmerica, Slater sacrifices a comprehensive literature review of scholars who reg-ularly weigh in on neoliberalism, such as Robert Keohane (2001) (see also Keohaneand Ostrom 1994), Stephen Krasner (1978, 1999), Robert Jackson (1996), andeven, as stated above, Imannuel Wallerstein (1974), an author who should havebeen included if only because World Systems Theory is in harmony with the post-Marxist theory that Slater advances. Although Latin American scholars hardly needbuttressing by a Western canon of literature, it can be useful to compare the two ifonly to highlight in what specific ways Northern and Southern scholars agree anddisagree. That said, by leaving out the recognizable names, more room is availablefor previously marginalized scholars, such as the Argentinian Sergio Bagu (1992),who, from an ‘‘inside’’ perspective, criticizes not only the aggressive penetration ofUS institutions into the South but also writes about the failings of the United Statesin its own society. For Bagu, too little attention is paid to seeing how well the UnitedStates lives up to its own standards. Such is Derrida’s ‘‘ ‘nocturnal face’ of Westernsociety’’ (p. 144). For example, the phenomena of robber barons, organized crime,and corruptionFthings associated most with Third World nationsFare so prev-alent in some US cities that Latin American academics consider Los Angeles ‘‘thecapital of the Third World’’ (p. 7).

The strengths of Geopolitics and the Post-Colonial are its post-positivist methodol-ogy, disregard for discursive borders, thorough literature review of Latin Americanscholars who were previously marginalized in the West, solid self-critique of meth-odology and theory, clarity of language, and ambition to challenge not only themainstream discourse and politico-economic ideology of the West, but also thepostmodern discourses from which Slater partly draws inspiration. Postmodernism,Slater writes, is inadequate for understanding the geopolitical realities of LatinAmerica. A North–South divide really exists, Slater argues, and even though po-litical borders are reinforced by acknowledging them, and even though using theexpression ‘‘Third World’’ partly legitimates the historic oppression of ‘‘the Other,’’the expression ‘‘Third World’’ can also be rethought in ways that recognize thosewho have been subjected to its widespread acceptance as representative of theirlives in totality.

One would be hard-pressed to find a political agenda in Slater’s work beyondmaking the voices of Latin American scholars and activists more salient in the studyof Latin America. Drawing from Edward Said’s (2003) observation that ‘‘knowledgeof ’’ and ‘‘power over’’ a given society are interdependent, Slater attempts to conveyknowledge from South America without participating in the imperialism that hecritiques. Slater digs a new canal of knowledge that flows from the South to theNorth. He even suggests that ‘‘we’’ might have more to learn from ‘‘them’’ than‘‘they’’ have to learn from ‘‘us.’’ What happens if the periphery is seen as the coreand vice versa? Is the failure of the neoliberal model in Latin America the des-tination at which the United States will ultimately arrive? These are the types ofquestions Slater poses and answers.

If one is looking for an empirically based analysis of the ways in which LatinAmerica has succeeded and failed economically and politically, then one will bedisappointed with Geopolitics and the Post-Colonial. This is not a book for socioeco-nomic engineers hoping to save the Third World from itself. This book will not

US Hegemony in Latin America and Beyond318

appeal to those desiring a prognosis for the diseases of the South and an appro-priate prescription. After all, as Slater argues, Third World countries are only un-derdeveloped insofar as development is defined by neoliberal standards. However,what the reader will find is a persuasive rethinking of our assumptions about LatinAmerica, especially the tendency of ‘‘geopolitical amnesia,’’ which, as Slater argues,‘‘erases the fact of conquest and represses the history of domination’’ (p. 148).

Geopolitics and the Post-Colonial can certainly serve as a springboard for futureresearch into geopolitical relationships across and between ‘‘First’’ and ‘‘Third’’World nations. For example, future research could study how regionalization anddevolution in Western nations serve to increase, not decrease, political power at thecenter of government. For undergraduates seeking a candid introduction to USpolicy toward Latin America or for senior scholars dissatisfied with the dominantview of Latin America as needing ‘‘our’’ help to survive, this book is recommended.Without a doubt, Slater certainly achieves a rethinking of North–South relations,and for that reason alone Geopolitics and the Post-Colonial could become a seminalpost-structural work in the discourses of geopolitics and international relations.

References

BAGU, SERGIO. (1992) Economia de la sociedad colonial. Mexico, DF: Editorial Grijalbo.DERRIDA, JACQUES. (1992) The Other Heading: Reflections on Today’s Europe. Bloomington: Indiana

University Press.FOUCAULT, MICHEL. (1979) Discipline and Punish. Harmondsworth: Peregrine Books.FOUCAULT, MICHEL. (1980) The History of Sexuality. Vol. 1: An Introduction. New York: Vintage Books.JACKSON, ROBERT. (1996) Beyond the Sovereignty Dilemma: Quasi-States as Social Construct. In State

Sovereignty as Social Construct, edited by Thomas J. Biersteker and Cynthia Weber. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

KEOHANE, ROBERT O. (2001) Governance in a Partially Globalized World? American Political ScienceReview 95:1–13.

KEOHANE, ROBERT O., AND ELINOR OSTROM, ED. (1994) Local Commons and Global Interdependence:Heterogeneity and Cooperation in Two Domains. LONDON: SAGE PUBLISHERS.

KRASNER, STEPHEN. (1978) Defending the National Interest: Raw Materials, Investments, and U.S. ForeignPolicy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

KRASNER, STEPHEN. (1999) Globalization and Sovereignty. In States and Sovereignty in the Global Econ-omy, edited by David Smith, Dorothy Solinger, and Steven Topik. New York: Routledge.

SAID, EDWARD. (2003) Orientalism. London: Penguin Books.WALLERSTEIN, IMMANUEL. (1974) The Modern World System: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the

European World Economy in the Sixteenth Century. New York: Academic Press.

DENNIS CHAPMAN 319