Part of the problem, I think, is that
there isn't a great emphasis on what Latin Americans have contributed
to the world, especially North American society. If you take a course
on Western history, you'll study the legacies to our language,
institutions, arts, legal and moral customs from the Greeks, Romans,
and the Jewish tradition. However, Latin Americans have made an
equally strong contribution, and this is usually only described if
you take specific courses in Latin American history. But as Galeano
describes in Las Venas Abiertas de América Latina,
“Indian” and “Black”
slavery built the North American and European empires we know today
as “developed” and wealthy. In essence, it
provided, through subjugation to wealthy bankers and conquerors,
resources like timber, diamonds, gold, silver, and other metals, and
later finished products from industrialization for use in these
nations. This made
them prosperous and able to advance themselves.
In fact, as he argues, the industrial revolution itself would not
have been possible without the work of Latin American slaves and
peasants in providing the
materials necessary for those great machines. Moreover,
Latin America continues to be the source of wealth for many countries
through the resources and work of people in plantations, mines,
and sweat-shops.
Latin
Americans also continue to contribute de facto gender
equality, which Canada and the US still have yet to achieve. For
instance, although the stereotype of the macho Latin American male
oppressing the innocent female still flourishes, many countries in
Latin America have elected women presidents, something which Canada
and the US have never done (save Kim Campbell from Canada). A few examples are for instance: Dilma Rousseff, President of Brazil since 2010; Laura Chinchilla, President of Costa Rica in 2010; Cristina
Fernandez de Kirchner, President of Argentina in 2007; Michelle
Bachelet, President of Chile from
2006-2010; Mireya Moscoso, President of Panama in 1999-2004; Rosalia
Arteaga, Interim President of Ecuador in
1997; Violeta Chamorro,
President of Nicaragua from 1990-1997; Lidia Gueiler Tejada, President of
Bolivia from 1979-1980; Isabel Peron, President of Argentina from
1974-1976. Though
certainly their politics are not always desirable, admittedly that's
at least nine
women presidents compared to one in North America. Of course, I
don't mean to give the impression that gender equality in other
sectors of society is not an issue, only that Latin Americans have
and are contributing.
Latin
America is not completely unknown to Nobel Peace Prizes either.
A few winners include Carlos Saavedra Lamas in 1936 for
mediation in war between Paraguay and Bolivia;
Adolfo Pérez
Esquivel in 1980 for his
leadership in human rights;
Alfonso García
Robles from México
in 1982 for his work in
disarmament negotiations in the UN;
Óscar Arias from Costa Rica in 1987 for
his work in helping Guatemala sign a peace accord;
Miguel Ángel Asturias from Guatemala (awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1967) for his work Hombres de Maiz; and my favorite, Rigoberta
Menchú in 1992 from Guatemala for
contributing to the respect and rights of indigenous people.
You may not like the
recipients, but nevertheless, they are highly
intelligent, capable Latin American people. Yet this very
generalization never seems
to predominate
in the minds of popular culture, nor does it enter into descriptions
as pivotal in Western history. At
best, they're moments in Latin
American history.
Again, if
there's reason to believe that Latin Americans aren't really that
ridiculous, why then is a
Hispanic
character with a thick Spanish accent so laughable? Why is Latin
American culture not also like other cultures well-respected by
Canadians?
I
think another major reason is that Latin America has issues concerning
great inequalities of wealth, which many see as a kind of
inferiority. I'm no economist or world traveler, but I think that if
you visit Latin America, you will see extreme poverty alongside great
opulence, and to people who have never had to worry about much in
Canada or the United States, daily issues involving hunger, illness,
or simply lack of money are shocking. Latin America also
has a long history of
violence and war. In Guatemala, for instance, a civil war between
guerrillas and government lasted for roughly 50 years, causing
displacement, violence, and poverty.
All of this makes Latin America seem rather troubled, “undeveloped,”
tragic, an entire group of countries filled with people who are not
like the sophisticated, developed, opulent persons supposedly living
in Canada or the United States. In fact, I'm most certain that even
Latin Americans in Latin America have this view. In terms of “El
Tabador,” I think they're cleverly making recourse to these
stereotypes generated by these circumstances, because they know it
will sell. It doesn't matter if the situation is actually about
injustice or exploitation, what matters is that other people will buy
products, and it doesn't matter how you do it.
The
last reason, I think, is that people in North America see Latin
America as their playground. It's where they go to vacation in their
beaches, hike in dense mountains and jungles, speak
that cool Spanish language, drink
margaritas and
cuba libres while
learning
to dance salsa, merengue, or tango in their rugged bars and
night-clubs. Best of all,
it's cheap, unlike similar
vacations in United States
or Canda. Fun
is what defines Latin America. It's not its great literature,
universities, or incredible humanity. Telus
knows how people think, and it has no problem cheapening
entire societies of people
to sell phone services.
I
think some might find this
is a terribly unfair
characterization of Canadian or North American culture. But
if that's true, I'm left wondering why if
you're an open-minded
person, understand Latin American culture quite well and have
some reverence for it, you're not infuriated with
Koodo's portrayal of an entire peoples. Worst
of all, I'm left wondering why people are buying from
Telus without
saying a single word.
