power to compel obedience. Meanwhile, nations must have grown immensely more interdependent, their mutual interests must have devised a multiplicity of new institutions of international coöperation, they must have repeatedly signified their willingness to accommodate their minor selfinterests to their larger and permanent ones by mutual compromise, and they must at the same time have developed a much greater attachment to those symbols of internationalism which must displace the symbols of nationalism. If we look forward seriously to the development of the international mind, then we must set seriously to work to transmute the powerful sentiment of national patriotism into an automatic and ultimate regulator of popular emotions and imaginations by a new set of symbols and a new and stirring ritual to arouse the deep-seated instincts and emotions of man to unquestioned devotion to the cause of humanity rather than the cause of tribe or nation. LITERARY YANKEEPHOBIA IN HISPANIC AMERICA By J. Fred Rippy, Ph.D., in charge of Latin American History, University of Chicago (Concluded) 6. Carlos Pereyra Professor Carlos Pereyra has devoted a great deal of time to the presentation of the North American peril and most of his works have had to do with the Monroe Doctrine and Anglo-American imperialism.x From these The Monroe Doctrine, Manifest Destiny, and Imperialism, and The Legend of Monroe may be taken as illustrating his attitude.48 In the former he declares that the Monroe Doctrine is not an obligatory law for the United States, but the personal opinion of the president in a particular case; that its true meaning was revealed by the refusal of the government of the United States to become an unreserved participator in the Congress of Panama (1826) and its assertion at the time that it preferred to see Cuba and Porto Rico remain subject to Spain;49 that the doctrine has served only as the handmaid of manifest destiny, having been invoked only when the prospect of national aggrandizement was apparent;50 that the Big Stick policy of Roosevelt, in effect, divided the states of Hispanic America into three categories: those which are capable of maintaining order, and which, accordingly, are not likely to be interfered with in the immediate future; those which are incapable of leading an autonomous and progressive life and which must therefore 48 La Doctrina de Monroe, el Destino Manifesto y el Imperialismo (Mexico, J. Ballescá y Cía., 1908); El Mito de Monroe (Madrid, EditorialAmérica [1914?]. 49 Pages 35-36. 50 Pages 56-118. accept the tutelage of the United States; and those "which unfortunately possess territory coveted by the United States."51 In The Legend of Monroe, Pereyra develops much more fully the topics outlined in his earlier work and presents new evidence. For present purposes the general tendency and scope of this book may be illustrated by a few brief quotations and a statement of its grand divisions and some of its chapter headings. The author begins by the assertion that there is not one Monroe Doctrine, but at least three: . The first is that which the Secretary of State, John Quincy Adams wrote and which, incorporated by Monroe in his message of December 2, 1823, was immediately buried in the most complete forgetfulness, if not in its terms, at least in its original significance, and which is only known as a relic laboriously restored by certain investigators for a small group of the curious. The second is that which, as a legendary and popular transformation, has advanced from the text of Monroe to a species of diffuse dogma and of glorification of the United States, to take final form in the report presented to President Grant by Secretary of State Fish, July 14, 1870; in the report of Secretary of State Bayard, dated January 20, 1887, and in the instructions of Secretary of State Olney to the Ambassador in London, Bayard, of June 20, 1895. The third Monroe Doctrine is that which, taking as a foundation the affirmations of these public men and their brazen falsifications of the original doctrine of Monroe, seeks to represent the foreign policy of the United States as an ideal derivation from the original Monroeism. This last form of Monroeism, which, unlike the previous one, is indeed not a falsification but a superimpregnation, has as authors the representatives of the imperialist movement, McKinley, Roosevelt, and Lodge; the representative of dollar diplomacy, Taft; and the representative of the tutelar, imperialistic, financial, biblical mission, Wilson."2 Pereyra declares that the Monroe Doctrine is the American diplomatic superstition which must be studied as one studies the superstitions of Polynesia, for instance. Or better, since the words of Monroe have been made to constitute a "formula of mystic value for conjuring interna 51 Page 118 ff. 52 El Mito de Monroe, pp. 11-12. tional dangers more or less imaginary," it may be considered a sort of taboo.53 Having thus presented his thesis, the Mexican professor proceeds to develop it under four main heads: The Initial Historical Error, Partial and Total Eclipses of Monroe, In the Paths of Imposture, Monroeism Running and Grinding at all Events. In the first division of his work he employs such catchy chapter headings as "Monroeism considered as a superfluity by Monroe himself," "The Holy Alliance Monroeist before Monroe," "Monroe says his money is counterfeit, and no one believes him," "Calhoun removes the curtain of mysticism from Monroe," in order to set forth his opinion that the promulgation of the Monroe Doctrine did not prevent the Holy Alliance from interfering in South America for the simple reason that this alliance had already decided not to intervene before December 2, 1823; and that there was nothing benevolent or unselfish about the Monroe declaration, 54 In the second main division of his work the author cites twenty-one instances where the doctrine was applied, or should have been applied, and concludes that the taboo is only invoked when the selfish interests of the United States can be served thereby.55 Under the heading of "In the Paths of Imposture," he calls Fish, Bayard, Olney, and Blaine the "four apostles of the two cardinal virtues of Monroeism, i.e., hypocrisy and apprehensiveness;" dwells upon Captain Mahan's arguments in favor of North American imperialism; and declares that the British navy is at the service of Monroeism as Monroeism is at the service of British commerce.56 The last division of Pereyra's book is devoted to a study of the recent imperialistic career of the United States (1895- ), and here again appear such interesting titles as "35,000 square kilometers of Monroeism at the mouths of the Orinoco," "The scalp of Doctor Drago," "President Wilson adds the 53 Pages 13-20. salt of Monroeism to the Lodge Resolution," "Mr. J. Pierpont Morgan coins money with the effigy of Monroe," "The Master work of Mr. Knox."57 7. Gonzalo G. Travesí The attitude and labors of the numerous authors of lesser caliber may be illustrated by the productions of the Mexican journalist, Gonzalo G. Travesí; of the Central American student and author, Salvador R. Merlos; and of the prolific Colombian littérateur and radical, José Maria Vargas Vila. Travesí declares in his The Mexican Revolution and Yankee Imperialism that the Monroe Doctrine has resulted in great misfortunes for Hispanic America because it has served as a pretext to cloak imperialistic designs. Whenever the North American republic has desired to enlarge its boundaries and influence, it has pretended that in the republics to the south neutrality was being infringed, intervention, open or dissimulated, was being threatened, or armed attack was impending. Cuba, Porto Rico, Santo Domingo, Venezuela, Central America, Mexico, and the Philippines ought to be faithful witnesses to the varied constructions to which it has been possible to subject the doctrine. Mexico owes to the doctrine, among other things, the loss of Texas, the disastrous war which followed, the fall of Lerdo de Tejada and of Porfirio Diaz, and the anarchy which has recently afflicted the republic.58 * Travesí believes that Yankee imperialism has grown up under the shadow of the Monroe Doctrine and that the United States will continue to be imperialistic so long as it is under the control of the oligarchy of big business. And so long as this condition continues, Mexico will be in danger-Mexico will be in danger because Anglo-American big business desires to exploit her magnificent natural resources.59 X 57 Pages 240-463. 58 La Revolución de Mexico y el Imperialismo Yanqui (Barcelona, Casa Editorial Maucci, 1914), pp. 162-165. 59 Pages 211 ff. THE JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, VOL. 12. NO. 4, 1922 |