The role of the American university in the diffusion of ideologies of development to Latin America: A case study of the University of California at Los Angeles

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content THE ROLE OF THE AMERICAN UNIVERSITY IN THE DIFFUSION OF
IDEOLOGIES OF DEVELOPMENT TO LATIN AMERICA: A CASE
STUDY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
AT LOS ANGELES
by
Miryan Zuniga-Escobar '
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
(Education)
November 1977
UMI Number: DP24627
All rights reserved
INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
Dissertation Publishing
UMI DP24627
Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author.
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
ProQuest'
ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
T H E G R A D U A T E S C H O O L
U N IV E R S IT Y P A R K
LO S A N G E L E S . C A L IF O R N IA 9 0 0 0 7
This dissertation, w ritten by
Miryan Zuniga-Escobar
under the direction of h^.K.... Dissertation C o m
mittee, and approved by a ll its members, has
been presented to and accepted by The Graduate
School, in p a rtia l fu lfillm e n t of requirements of
the degree of
D 0 C T O R O F P H I L O S O P H Y
Dean
Date.
January 19, 1978
DISSERTATION COMMITTEE
5 -
tL c\
>78
7 ^
DEDICATION
To Pablo y Josefina
Jane and Andy
ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I wish to acknowledge my indebtedness and sincere appreciation
to Dr. Audrey J. Schwartz, Professor Alberto Guerreiro-Ramos, and Dr.
William M. Rideout, members of my dissertation committee for their
assistance and cooperation in the completion of this study.
For the valuable assistance in the collection of information, I
am indebted to Dr. Elwin V. Svenson, Vice Chancellor of the University
of California at Los Angeles, Dr. Ludwing Laverhass and Mr. Philip
Gillete, staff members of the Latin American Center at UCLA; Ms. Janet
Bardin, administrative coordinator of the cooperative program between
the University of Chile and the University of California; and Ms. Helyn
Bebermayer administrative coordinator of the exchange program between
the Institute Politecnico Nacional de Mejico and the University of
California, whose help and cooperation were critical to this study. I
’/also wish to express appreciation to the faculty members and adminis
trative personnel of UCLA who were interviewed for this study and who
generously provided information for the accomplishment of the purposes
of this dissertation.
I would especially like to express my appreciation to the Alpha
Association of Phi Beta Kappa Alumni in Southern California for its
financial assistance to this research.
A special vote of thanks to Ms. Helen Jones for her patience,
careful editing, and typing of the dissertation.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
DEDICATION 11
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 111
LIST OF TABLES VI
Chapter
I. INTRODUCTION 1
Background of the Problem
Statement of the Problem
Delimitations of the Study
Significance of the Study
Basic Assumptions
Definitions of Terms
Organization of the Remainder of the Study
The Role of American Foreign Policies in World Affairs
The United States and Latin America
The Ideologies of Development
The Role of American Universities in World Affairs
Summary of the Chapter
II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE 25
III. METHODOLOGY 86
Selection of Primary Sources of Data
Research Instrument
Pretest of the Instrument
Analysis of the Data
IV
Chapter Page
IV. THE IDEOLOGY OF AMERICAN FOREIGN ASSISTANCE POLICIES. . . 95
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961
President Kennedy's Address at the White House Reception
for Latin American Diplomats and Members of Congress,
March 13, 1961
President Kennedy's 1962 Special Message to the Congress
on Foreign Aid
The Foreign Assistance Act of 1963
President Johnson's 1964 Special Message to the Congress
Transmitting Report on Foreign Assistance Programs
The Foreign Assistance Act of 1965
President Johnson's 1966 Message to the Congress on the
Foreign Aid Program
The Foreign Assistance Act of 1967
President Johnson's 1968 Special Message to the Congress
\ on the Foreign Assistance Programs: "To Build the
Peace"
The Foreign Assistance Act of 1969
President Nixon's 1970 Special Message to the Congress
Proposing Reform of the Foreign Assistance Program
The Foreign Assistance Act of 1971
President Nixon's 1973 Special Message to the Congress
Transmitting Proposed Legislation for Funding of
Foreign Assistance Programs in Fiscal Year 1974
The Foreign Assistance Act of 1974
V. THE IDEOLOGY OF UCLA'S TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS
The University of California at Los Angeles
The Brazil Program
The Peru Program
The Peru and Bolivia Program
The Ecuador Program
The Mexico Program
The Chile Program
Analyses of the Six Programs
IN LATIN AMERICA 127
VI. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 153
Summary
Conclusions
Recommendations
REFERENCE LIST 169
v
LIST OF TABLES
T able Page
1. Percentage of Developmentalist and Dependency Concepts
About Development in Fourteen Selected Documents on
the United States Foreign Assistance Policies ...... 119
2. Percentage of a Sample of United States Documents on
Foreign Assistance Policies Including Developmentalist
and Dependency Concepts About Development .............. 120
3. Percentage of Developmentalist and Dependency Concepts
About Development in Reports of UCLA's Technical
Assistance Programs in Latin America.......................146
4. Percentage of UCLA's Documents on Technical Assistance
Programs in Latin America Including Developmentalist
and Dependency Concepts About Development .............. 147
5. Percentage of Documents on the United States Foreign
Assistance Policies and UCLA's Technical Assistance
Programs Including Developmentalist Concepts...............131
vi
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
This study explores the possibility of ideological discrepancy
between the official American policies of foreign assistance and the
technical assistance programs administered by the University of
California at Los Angeles (UCLA) in Latin America. These programs
include planned activities whose purpose is to aid in the educational and
manpower development of other countries. Therefore, technical assistance
programs are aimed at promoting social change abroad. As such they
embody ideals about society and development which explain and justify
their activities and comprise the ideological background.
The focus of this study on ideology issbased on the premise that it
guides political action and therefore the establishment of foreign assis
tance policies. The success of these policies largely depends on the
extent to which they are translated into technical assistance programs
embodied with the policies' ideology. Hence, the social changes pursued
by the United States government abroad, expressed in its foreign assis
tance policies, have higher possibilities of being attained when the
technical assistance programs administered by the university are
ideologically compatible with the government policies.
Since a common ideology is one of the elements which holds a
society together, and the universities are a subsystem of the total
American system, it is possible that American universities in general,
and UCLA in particular, share with the United States government the
1
same ideas, beliefs and assumptions about assistance for development of
foreign countries. However, there is also the possibility of
ideological discrepancy between the government and the university
because while the government's policies may be concerned with the
implementation of socially acceptable beliefs about social change and
development, the university is committed to the search for scientific
knowledge and the design and implementation of scientific models of
development.
This study is concerned then with the ideological background of
American foreign assistance policies and UCLA technical assistance
programs in Latin America, as expressed in the United States Foreign
Assistance Acts, the annual Presidential messages to the Congress on
Foreign Aid, and UCLA reports on its technical assistance programs in
Latin America.
In order to identify the ideology to which foreign assistance
policies and technical assistance programs subscribe, the two paradigms
of development most suggested in the literature as being permeated by
ideological overtones are used as points of reference; they are the
developmentalist and the dependency paradigms. These paradigms have
opposite views about issues related to development. In addition, each
paradigm has been basically delineated in different socioeconomic
context; the developmentalist is largely the creation of American
social scientists while the dependency has been basically advanced by
Latin American social scientists.
2
Background of the Problem
The problem concerning this study springs from the following
interrelated themes:
1. The role of both the United States and Latin America in the
international system.
2. The role of the universities in American society.
3. The role of competing ideologies of development in the
international system.
The United States and Latin America
in the International System
The nations of the world have been classified into different
categories such as developed, underdeveloped, and developing; rich and
poor; northern and southern; and modern and traditional. These
classifications group nations of similar conditions together but fail
to describe the relationships between nations and groups. It was
Prebisch (1930) Executive Secretary of the United Nations Economic
Commission for Latin America (ECLA), who first conceptualized the
international system as consisting of center and peripheral nations.
He postulated that peripheral nations were influenced by center nations,
and that there was asymmetry in the relations between the center and
the periphery of the international system. This asymmetry was
expressed in the unequal distribution of gains from trade between
center and peripheral nations and in the peripheral nations' higher
percentage of expenditure on imports from center nations. Building on
Prebisch's theory, Galtung (1971) postulated that each nation had its
3
own center and peripheral sectors of which the former controls the
latter. Galtung also affirmed that center nations dominate peripheral
nations by establishing bridgeheads between their own center sectors
and the central sectors of peripheral nations for the joint benefit of
both centers.
The United States is considered to be a center nation which
exercises leadership in the international system. The United States
began extending its influence to Latin America since the last century
when the Monroe Doctrine (1823) declared that the United States was
opposed to any attempt to extend alien European political systems to
the Western Hemisphere. Since its promulgation, the Monroe Doctrine
was invoked on numerous occasions to intervene in Latin American
countries (Chilcote & Edelstein, 1974).
The emergence of the United States as a World Power, according
to Historian Richard W. Leopold (1962), dates back to the First World
War as a result of its contribution to the military victory of the
Allies, its industrial and commercial development, and its financial
strength. Since then, the United States has continuously been involved
in world affairs in a leadership position.
A particular feature of American foreign policy is its
assistance programs for other countries. Gerassi (1973) reports that
in 1938, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt set up the Interdepart
mental Committee of Cooperation with American Republics which became in
effect the precursor of today's technical assistance programs; he also
informs that during the Second World War the U.S. Department of
Agriculture began helping Latin American nations to cope with soil
4
conservation problems, and that by 1945 there were 90 American research
teams in Latin America. Gerassi contends that under this policy the
United States encouraged American investments in Latin America to
develop sources of raw materials for American industries (Gerassi,
1973).
After the Second World War, the United States assisted in
strengthening Western Europe economically and politically through the
Marshal plan. Little and Clifford (1965) contend that from that the
idea of aid for development became fully accepted. Later, President
Truman created the International Cooperation Administration Office (ICA]
in charge of implementing assistance programs for the so-called
underdeveloped countries. ICA initiated a system of contracts with
American colleges and universities to assist the development of foreign
countries. In 1961 the Agency for International Development (AID) was
created to supersede ICA. This agency continued contracting with
American colleges and universities for work in foreign countries. In
this manner and in addition to its economic transactions, the presence
of the United States as a center nation has been felt around the world.
Dos Santos (1973) contends that through aid to friendly governments
considered in difficulty, commercial agreements, and military and
technical assistance, the United States has been able to affect the
international system and become a leading power.
Latin American countries, in turn, are considered as peripheral
nations within the international system. Prebisch (1950) demonstrated,
with data from ECLA's economic surveys of Latin America, that these
countries are a part of the periphery of the world in charge of the
5
production of food and raw materials for the industrial center nations.
Alba (1969) further explained that Latin American countries had slowly
fallen under the influence of the United States through financial and
political transactions.
In conclusion, the United States as a center nation has been
able to affect peripheral nations such as its neighboring Latin
American countries. Since the governments of those countries have been
highly concerned with achieving development, the United States
government may ha>^e diffused to Latin America its own basic ideology of
development through its assistance programs for those countries.
The Role of the Universities in
American Society
The participation of the universities in technical assistance
programs follows the American pattern of involving the educational
system in the handling of social problems. The school in American
society is one of the most dominant social institutions. It has
permeated every aspect of American life to the point that Americans
have typically come to look to the educational establishment for
answers to many of their problems. According to sociologist Holger R.
Stub the schools provided this country with a literate population for
its burgeoning industrialization; they Americanized millions of
immigrants, prepared new professionals and technical experts for the
emerging post-industrial age, and are currently attempting to integrate
all ethnic groups for a culturally pluralistic society (Stub, 1975).
The contemporary reliance on the school as a focus of technical
assistance programs abroad is a logical extension of the important
6
functions that American schools have performed. Since the late 1940s
American concern for world affairs education took shape at the higher
education level. Historian B. Freeman Butts reports that academic
organizations and private foundations began to put pressure on
universities and colleges to study international affairs and provide
reliable information about the world. The reason for this concern is
so expressed by Butts:
At the heart of this movement was the growing belief
that the resources of the scholarly disciplines of knowledge
should be brought to bear upon the most critical problems
of international affairs, upon America's role in the work,
and upon understanding the basic dynamics of life, thought,
and behavior of the people who inhabited the major areas of
the world. (Butts, 1966, p. 17)
The government's and universities' concern for enlarging
knowledge about the world accelerated from the mid 1950s to the end of
the 1960s. The United States Congress responded quickly to the
spectacular success of the Soviet Union in launching Sputnik I in 1957,
providing federal funds to stimulate instruction and research about
foreign countries in colleges and universities (Butts, 1966).
Besides producing knowledge at home about the world, American
universities have become what Butts called "educational emissaries"
abroad. He contended that the principal bearers of Western civiliza
tion during the eighteenth and nineteenth century have been four types
of emissaries: the agent of the churches 'wash the missionary, the
agent of commercial and business enterprises was the proprietary, the
agent of the army was the military. During the twentieth century
appeared the newest and most important international agent of them
all— the "educationary." Butts considers that the mission of the
7
"educationary" is "to promote the process of modernization by advancing
the cause of knowledge and increasing regard for human welfare among
the peoples of the world" (Butts, 1966, p. 35).
The international mission of American universities has been
operationalized through their participation in technical assistance
programs abroad. Richardson (1969) reported that during the period
1949-1953, the meetings of the Association of Land Grant Colleges and
Universities were used as a forum by government officials to state
general ideas regarding the university participation in programs for
development of foreign countries. This process culminated in the
establishment of university contracts with government agencies for work
abroad. In this way, the universities became partners with the
American government in promoting development abroad (Richardson, 1969).
This partnership is expressed in the fact that by 1966 for instance,
AID had 1,308 technical contracts with American universities for work
in 70 countries (AID, 1966). Through these programs, beliefs and
assumptions about development may be transmitted to foreign countries.
In fact, schools have been considered to be important agencies for the
transmission of the dominant values, beliefs, and ideology of society.
The studies conducted by Carnoy (1974), Coleman (1959), Dreeben (1967),
Inkeles (1966), Parsons (1959) and Schwartz (1975) have demonstrated
this transmission function of the educational establishment.
The Role of Competing Ideologies of Develop
ment in the International System
The increasing interest for the promotion of development in
peripheral nations has resulted in the elaboration of models which
attempt to explain "underdevelopment” and give guidelines for the
attainment of development. Some of these models are very sensitive to
particular interests and foster goals and processes which are based on
ideological commitments rather than on scientific findings.
Bodenheimer (1969) contended that theories about Latin America reflect
concrete interests of particular groups which condition the scientific
process. She reported that there were two contending paradigms which
attempt to explain the socioeconomic situation of Latin American
countries. Both paradigms claim to be scientific and each charge the
other with ideological overtones. They are called by Bodenheimer the
"ideology of developmentalism" and the "dependency model."
Each of the two paradigms, developmentalist and dependency,
reflects the interests of the two opposing socioeconomic systems:
capitalism and communism. Both paradigms have historically developed
in a dialectical manner. That is, each proceeds from different
socioeconomic conditions to which they respond, and each has developed
its views about development and social change*; in reaction to the
other's— what one paradigm affirms, the other negates. However, as
Chilcote and Edelstein (1974) contended dependency theorists have been
less concerned with offering alternatives for development than on
formulating a theoretical framework for critiquing the developmentalist
paradigm. Therefore, most of the propositions of the dependency
paradigm-, are basically rebuttals of .the propositions of the develop
mentalist paradigm. It is in this sense that both paradigms are
conceived to be in dialectical relation; they are the two opposing
elements of a contradiction whose contentions are in interaction. Some
9
of these contentions could be tested against the social reality and
their predictions could be verified by events. However, as a whole,
and according to Selinger's conceptualization of ideology, the set of
propositions of these paradigms tend to lean in the direction of
wishful ends. The problem is, as Selinger also contended, that "it is
certainly not easy to determine where ideology leaves off and science
begins (Selinger, 1976, p. 156). But as Althusser (1971) elaborates,
scientific theories may spring from the background of earlier
ideological formations.
The developmentalist paradigm. The basic elements of this
paradigm have been delineated by Bodenheimer--(1969) as an heuristic
construct which she calls the "paradigm-surrogate." Frank (1972) along
with Chilcote and Edelstein (1974) has contributed to the sketching of
this paradigm, called the "diffusion model." Paulston (1976) has
focused on the educational aspects of what he calls the two basic
social change paradigms, the equilibrium and the conflict, corres
ponding respectively to the developmentalist and the dependency mode of
conceptualization.
The following are the most salient concepts of the develop
mentalist paradigm:
1. Social change is an orderly and stable process which proceeds
in a continuous linear progression through predetermined
stages. This process begins in "traditionalism" and ends in
"modernization." Bodenheimer describes the concept of
continuum as follows:
10
The continuum, starting from its definition of develop
ment in terms of an irreversible process toward some
determinate end-point, retains the two abstract ideal types
— traditional and modern— as the two ends of the development
spectrum, while adding an in-between "transitional" stage,
and continues to analyze underdevelopment in terms of the
absence of certain "typical characteristics" of the developed
society. (Bodenheimer, 1969, p. 14)
Closely linked to the cumulative view of development is the
pre-occupation with stable and orderly change. Bodenheimer expresses
this concern as follows:
The prevailing model takes as both desirable and
necessary change that is non-disruptive of the existing
order and permits continuity with the past and the present.
(Bodenheimer? 1969, p. 16)
Bodenheimer indicates that the extreme example of this tendency
is the structural functional school which conceptualizes functionality
in terms of systems maintenance and adaptation and whose goal is the
attainment of a system in equilibrium (Bodenheimer, 1969).
2. Modernization brings about consensus-directed politics in
replacement of the ideological politics which have made
instability chronic in Latin America. Bodenheimer reports that
"according to the basic assumption political consensus or
'agreement on fundamentals' is a function of increasing
equalization of material living standards" (Bodenheimer, 1969,
p. 18).
3. Development is diffused from advanced to backward areas. In
the words of Chilcote and Edelstein:
Progress will come about through the spread of modernism
to backward, archaic, and traditional areas. Through the
diffusion of technology and capital, these areas will
inescapably evolve from traditional toward modern stage.
(Chilcote & Edelstein, 1974, p. 3)
11
Consequently, foreign investment as well as the transference
of institutions and values from advanced societies to the less
developed are encouraged. Thus, today's developed countries are taken
as referent societies whose institutions and values serve as models for
traditional societies. It is then recommended that traditional
societies develop the following traits of developed societies: a
flexible social class structure oriented toward the middle class;
distribution of social, economic and^political roles according to
specific, universalistic and achievement oriented norms; a political
pluralistic system of competing pressure groups whose respective
interests could be accommodated by compromise; a market oriented
production; progressive use of capital intensive technologies in the
production process; achievement of universal education; and encourage
ment of technical and vocational instruction to meet the manpower needs
of the socioeconomic system.
4. Development is basically measured in terms of per capita gross
national product. In Chilcote and Edelstein's words:
Within the diffusion model, underdevelopment is signified
by either a per capita gross national product below $300
or $400 as single criterion or together with other characteristics
including illiteracy, political instability, inequality,
hierarchy and lack of social mobility, and an economy
characterized by the dominance of one or two agricultural
or mineral products and by a low level of technology and
productivity. (Chilcote & Edelstein, 1974, p. 4)
3. The function of the educational system is to prepare the
manpower needed for the attainment of development goals. In
Paulston's words:
The theory's critical concern with the rate of return
to human capital places a primary responsibility on education
12
in schools, on non-formal educational programs, and on the
family to contribute toward human-resource , development.
The task of educational reform is, accordingly, to
facilitate investment in personal development and to
produce "better" workers within the context of the existing
educational and social system. (Paulston, 1976, p. 18)
In this manner, Paulston contends, the educational system
stimulates economic development and helps societies pass from
traditionalism to modernism.
The dependency paradigm. This paradigm is largely the creation
of Latin American social scientists, although some North Americans have
lately become interested in it. According to Chilcote and Edelstein:
The dependency model evolved essentially from two
schools of thought: one nationalist and sometimes anti-
imperialist but non-Marxist whose analysis emanated from
economists grouped around the Argentine Raul Prebisch, in
the Economic Commission for Latin America (ECLA); and the
other anti-imperialist and Marxist in orientation whose
ideas stemmed from imperialist theory generated by analysis
of European expansion during the late 19th century.
(Chilcote & Edelstein, 1974, p. 41)
The ECLA school considered the world divided into industrial
center nations and primary producing peripheral nations both of which
should benefit from the maximizing of production and consumption; but
unrestrained competition resulted in appropriation to the center of
most of the benefits. Hence, the ECLA analysis linked Latin American
underdevelopment to the international economic system of which center
nations obtained most of the increment in the world income.
The Marxist school of dependency emerged from the general
dissatisfaction with the ECLA model, specifically for the following
reasons expressed by Chilcote and Edelstein (1974):
It fails, for example, to examine the conscious policies
and specific needs of the nations of the center; it
13
mistakenly attributes Latin America's backwardness largely
to traditional or feudal oligarchies; it inappropriately
assumes that development would be promoted by a progressive,
nationalist bourgeosie, an assumption thus far negated by
historical experience; and its stress on import substitution
has led to greater dependence on the international system
and to economic stagnation. (p. 41)
The Marxist model of dependency was promoted through the works
of Latin American social scientists associated with the United Nations'
Latin American Social and Economic Planning Institute located in
Santiago de Chile. Its basic propositions have been elaborated by
Bodenheimer (1969), Cardoso (1967), Carnoy (1974), Chilcote and
Edelstein (1974), Dos Santos (1968), and Frank (1969).
The following are the most important propositions of the
dependency paradigm:
1. Social change in Latin America will come about through a
radical disruption of the existing socioeconomic order in which
Latin American countries are dependent. Dependency is defined
by Dos Santos (1970) as follows:
By dependence we mean a situation in which the economy
of certain countries is conditioned by the development and
expansion of another economy to which the former is subjected.
The relation of interdependence between two or more economies
and between these and world trade, assumes the form of
dependence when some countries (the dominant ones) can expand
and can be self-sustaining, while other countries (the
dependent ones) can do this only as a reflection of that
expansion, which can have either a positive or negative
effect on their immediate development. (p. 231)
Based on the foregoing conceptualization of dependency,
Bodenheimer contends that Latin America's development has been limited
or conditioned by the needs of the dominant economies within the world
market. She further explains that growth in dependent nations is
14
geared toward the needs of the dominant, foreign economies. In
Bodenheimer's analysis Latin American dependency, within the inter
national system, began in the Spanish conquest and has been shaped by
the global expansion of the capitalistic system and by their own
integration into that system. Hence, she prescribes:
In order to rupture the chains of dependency Latin
Nations cannot merely sever their ties to the international
system; they must simultaneously— as a precondition for
lasting autonomy from that system— implant a profound anti
capitalist, socialist transformation of their economic
order. (Bodenheimer, 1969, p. 39)
2. Unlike the developmentalist, the dependency paradigm does not
search for order and stability. Instead, Bodenheimer (1969)
contends that the dependency paradigm
Proceeds from the deep-rooted existing conflicts and
attempts to isolate the structural roots of those conflicts
in the existing socioeconomic order. The resolution of
those conflicts, by implication, will not necessarily be
conducive to short range stability in Latin America. (pp*
39-40)
3. The introduction of capital, technology and instititions to less
developed societies aggravates their underdevelopment and their
condition of dependency. Bodenheimer contends that the develop
ment of the United States and Western European countries as
well as Latin American underdevelopment are products of the
global expansion of capitalism. In the words of Chilcote and
Edelstein: "Latin America is underdeveloped because it has
supported the development of Western Europe and the United
States" (Chilcote & Edelstein, 1974, p. 27). In addition, the
diffusion of technology and capital have deepened Latin
American dependency. Chilcote and Edelstein (1974) state:
13
A higher level of technology and a greater economic power
are rewarded with higher prices for foreign imports while
the prices of Latin American exports follow a long term
downward trend. Capital is drained through repatriated
profits, interest payments on loans and fees for royalties,
insurance and shipping. (p. 45)
4. Development is assessed in terms of economic and cultural
sovereignty. That is after the chains of dependency are cut,
the new society should be able to establish its own socio
economic system independently of the influence of foreign
countries, and gain autonomy to make its own decisions. This
new society could then relate to other countries as equals.
Chilcote and Edelstein (1974) define development as follows:
Economic development includes the establishment of
economic sovereignty (which does not imply isolation) and
a level of productivity and a pattern of distribution which
adequately provide for the basic (culturally determined)
needs of the entire population, generating a surplus for
investment in continued national development. (p. 28)
5. The goal of education is the continuing enrichment of people,
an all around development of all facets of humanity. Schools,
then should be concerned with the formation of the new
"socialist person," that is, a person involved in everyday
affairs who can deal with theoretical problems and labor in
practical matters (Chilcote & Edelstein, 1974).
As stated before both paradigms, developmentalist and
dependency, have been considered to be ideological constructs. In fact,
Bodenheimer contends that the developmentalist paradigm fits both
Marxist and non-Marxist characterizations of ideology. In her words:
It is deeply rooted in the political economy of mid
twentieth century America. It gives expression to dominant
interest within the American social order— interest which
16
also plays a determinative role in shaping United States
policy toward Latin America. It serves on the one hand to
justify and perpetuate the historical pattern of domination-
dependency relationship between the United States and Latin
America, as manifested primarily in United States policy,
and on the other hand to idealize and thereby mask that reality,
to project particular interests as universal. The specific
content of this ideology is not, therefore, an accidental
convergence of ideas; it performs essential functions in
preserving a given international order. (Bodenheimer, 1969,
p. 34)
On the other hand, Correa-Weffort (1971) states that the
dependency paradigm could be manipulated as an ideological construct.
The concept of dependency, he argues, could merely become a substitute
for inadequate conceptualizations of underdevelopment and imperialist
theory. In a detailed rebuttal Cardoso (1971) argues that dependency
theory reassesses Lenin's imperialist theory to describe and explain
the present forms of capital accumulation and external expansion. The
fact is that some of the basic postulates of the dependency paradigm
remain to be validated empirically and therefore, they could be
subjected to ideological manipulation.
The question concerning this study is twofold: (1) On which
side of the developmentalist-dependency ideological continuum can
UCLA's technical assistance programs in Latin America be placed? and
(2) Is there congruence between the ideological position of UCLA's
technical assistance programs and the United States official foreign
assistance policies?
This investigation is pursued as a case study of the technical
assistance programs for Latin America administered by UCLA from 1960 to
1976. That university was selected as the focus of this study because
of the following two reasons:
17
1. UCLA is one of the largest and most important universities
of the United States; a nationwide survey for quality of graduate
instruction conducted in 1970 found that twelve UCLA departments ranked
among the top ten nationally and that additional seventeen departments
ranked among the top twenty; by 1973 UCLA had the nation's second
highest graduate enrollment on a single state university campus; in
1974 UCLA was second in the nation in federal grants for research;
UCLA has the third highest number of faculty members serving on
government commissions (UCLA Information, 1976); a nationwide survey
conducted by the East-West Center of the University of Hawaii found
that UCLA was one of the three American universities engaged in the
largest number of international programs (Hawaii University, 1966).
2. Practical considerations suggested UCLA as the best site
for this study.
Statement of the Problem
The general problem investigated in this study was the
congruence or lack of congruence between the ideology of American
foreign assistance policies and the ideology of the technical
assistance programs administered by American universities. More
specifically, this study analyzes the ideologies expressed by UCLA's
reports on its technical assistance programs in Latin America, the
United States Foreign Assistance Acts, and the Annual Presidential
Messages to the Congress of Foreign Aid and searches for discrepancies
among them.
18
Delimitations of the Study
This study is restricted by the following delimitations:
1. The problem is approached from the perspective of a single case
study. As such, the findings may not be generalizable to other
American universities.
2. The analysis covers only the period between 1960 and 1976.
3. Although the United States foreign assistance affairs include
economic, military, and technical programs, the study deals
only with technical assistance programs.
4. It is only concerned with those technical assistance programs
for Latin America administered by UCLA.
3. This study is solely based on analysis of available documents
corresponding to reports of UCLA's technical assistance programs
in Latin America, U.S. Foreign Assistance Acts, and Annual
Presidential Messages to the Congress on Foreign Aid.
Significance of the Study
The economic, technological, and political prominence achieved
by the United States.has given this country the opportunity to assist
other countries in their process of development. The United States
has, then, established foreign assistance policies which are aimed at
promoting or facilitating social changes in foreign countries. As
such, these policies include ideas about the process of change those
societies should follow and the type of society they could become.
These ideas largely spring from ideological commitments.
19
According to official documents of foreign assistance policies,
which are further discussed in Chapter IV, the United States government
is interested in safeguarding the security of this country, extending
the American socioeconomic system to other countries, and helping other
peoples achieve the standards of living Americans have achieved. From
the standpoint of the American government these are desirable goals
which should be attained.
To achieve these goals, corresponding assistance programs
should be guided by an ideology compatible with that of foreign
assistance policies. This study provides information about the
ideology that guides foreign assistance policies and technical
assistance programs and establishes comparisons between them. If it is
found that both policies and programs shared the same ideology, the
university which administers the programs could be considered reliable
for communicating to foreign countries the ideology which permits the
attainment of the goals set by the United States government.
Conversely, if the ideology of the university administered programs is
found to be different from that of foreign assistance policies,
attempts could be made to change one or both policies and programs.
By identifying the ideological content of American technical
assistance programs in Latin America, this study provides information
which may aid Latin Americans in assessing the value of these programs
in the light of their own goals and possibilities. From this assessment
of assistance to recipient countries, decisions could be made to
improve, change, or end these programs.
20
From the standpoint of social sciences, this study points out
the ideological dimension of technical assistance programs. These
programs are sometimes thought to be ideologically neutral because of
their technical character and because by and large they are
administered by academic institutions. However, they usually carry
ideas and beliefs about development which are based on ideological
assumptions. This ideological impingement on the treatment of social
issued is one of the problems of social science. Parsons (1951)
recognized that the social conditions under which social science is
developing were such that the presence of an ideological penumbra seems
to be inevitable. In addition, Bourdeau, Chamboredom and Passeron
(1968) contend that the ideological stand of research-granting
institutions influences social research, especially if research
findings are to be implemented in social programs. The fact is that
ideology unconsciously permeates all human activities and governs
attitudes toward nature, social relations and life in general. Hence
assumptions about social change, reform and revolution draw upon
ideologies which link people's perception of today's world with their
projections of what the world might be in the future (Althusser, 1971).
Scholars working on technical assistance programs are exposed to these
conditions; they become involved in the social process they are dealing
with, and thus their own ideology may lead them to select or design
models of development which are sensitive to their ideological
position. These models may also be responsive to the ideology of the
agencies which provide the funds for the programs. In other words,
this study draws attention to the possibility of influence of the
21
social system and its dominant ideology upon social research.
Basic Assumptions
This study holds the following assumptions:
1. Foreign assistance policies and programs are led by
identifiable ideologies.
2. Ideas, beliefs and assumptions about development are
revealed in documents pertaining to foreign assistance policies and
programs.
3. American universities are a part of the dominant capitalist
system of the United States. Capitalism refers to a particular system
of ownership and operation of the productive process. It prevails when
capital is owned by individuals or business corporations. They utilize
their capital for those purposes and in those ways which appear most
advantageous to themselves. However, societies have set up laws to
restrict the use of privately owned goods.
. . . despite the number and importance of these social
controls the major power to make decisions as to the use
of things privately owned still remains in the hands of
owners or their agents. It is private property that sets
the basic pattern of the decision-making power in our
capitalist economy. It is still the existence of private
property that creates the chief incentives for the accumula
tion and conservation of wealth. As long as this situation
continues, private property will prevail as a fundamental
institution of capitalism. (Loucks, 1937, p. 29)
4. All social systems are subject to basic instabilities and
internal conflict, In fact, the system’s development is promoted by
the process of interaction between contradictory forces in society.
22
Definitions of Terms
The following definitions are used in this study:
Ideology: It is a system of related ideas, beliefs, principles,
and assumptions held by a social group. According to this set of ideas
people explain and justify ends and means of social action irrespective
of whether such action is aimed at preserving or changing a given
social order (Selinger, 1976).
The ideas, beliefs and assumptions which comprise an ideology
are representations of reality which spring from both the socioeconomic
conditions people live in and their cultural tradition. These common
representations serve to link people together and to develop loyalties
to their social system (Althusser, 1971). Parsons (1951) considers
that ideology serves to legitimize the value-orientation patterns of
society which are the established beliefs of the social system. As
such these beliefs may respond to interests of particular groups of
society. Hence, there is a tendency to ideological distortion of the
reality in the direction of wishful elements. However, not all that is
ideological is distorted; ideology includes some elements of factual
knowledge.
Methaphorically, ideology has been described as a crystal
through which people see social reality, and as a computer program
which gives guidelines to process information. In fact, ideology
functions unconsciously at the individual level under forms that may be
more or less diffused or systematized (Althusser, 1971).
23
Ideology is linked to politics because it guides political
action and justifies policies. Ideology requires politics as its mode
if implementation and politics requires ideology to motivate individ
uals to give full commitment to the political organization; it gives
the individuals a set of rational ideas with which to carry out
political actions (Schrumann, 1973).
Ideology is expressed in value sentences, appeal sentences, and
explanatory statements which refer to moral and technical norms and are
related to descriptive and analytical statements of fact. The views
expressed by an ideology are not entirely self-consistent, not fully
verified or verifiable, and relate in the main to human relationships
(Selinger, 1976).
Policy: It is a course of action conceived or adopted after a
review of possible alternatives.
Technical Assistance Programs: These are planned activities
whose principal stated purpose is to aid in the educational and
manpower development of other countries.
Organization of the Remainder of the Study
Literature related to this study is reviewed in Chapter II.
The research methodology is described in Chapter III. The ideology of
American foreign policies on foreign assistance is described in Chapter
IV, and the ideology of UCLA's technical assistance programs in Latin
America is described in Chapter V. The summary, conclusions, and
recommendations of this study are presented in Chapter VI. The study
concludes with an extensive list of references.
24
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
This chapter deals with the literature related to the context
within which the data collected in this study are analyzed. Thus, the
following areas of literature are reviewed: (1) the role of American
foreign policies in world affairs, (2) the relations between the United
States and Latin America, (3) the ideologies of development, and (4)
the role of American universities in world affairs.
The Role of American Foreign Policies in World Affairs
This section.reviews the literature about the United States
foreign policies corresponding to different historical periods, the
function of foreign aid in American foreign affairs, and the function
of different government agencies in the making of foreign policies.
Since the purpose of this section is to highlight the historical
process of American involvement in world affairs and the role of its
foreign policies in the delineation of the international system, not all
the literature relating to this topic is reviewed, However, it includes
studies considered to be classic in the field of political science such
as those of Thomas A. Bailey (1944), Henry A. Kissinger (1969), and
Temple Wanamaker (1969); books recommended for graduate studies such as
those of Nelson M. Blake and Oscar T. Barck (1960), Donald Brandon
23
(1966), and Richard W. Leopold (1962); official publications of the
State Department; and studies conducted by foreign observers of
American foreign policies such as Theotonio Dos Santos (1973), and
Tibor Mende (1973) among others.
The American Foreign Policies from
1776 to 1913
Thirteen years before the French Revolution, the American
colonies broke their colonial ties with England and enunciated what was
up until then the most revolutionary doctrine in history. The United
States was the first nation founded openly on the right of revolution.
The principles propounded by the Founding Fathers were at that time
explosive: all men are created equal, all men have a right to liberty,
and the people are sovereign to set up their own government. The
message of the American Declaration of Independence represented the
most humane and advanced thinking of the 18th century. Other countries
since then have taken those principles as the basis on which their new
societies were to be formed (Greene, 1971).
Historian Richard W. Leopold (1962) states that the cardinal
principle undergirding the foreign policy of the young Republic was
isolationism. It required the avoidance of involvement in the
diplomatic affairs of other continents. Internally, however, the
country sought for continental expansion at the expense of the Indians,
the French, the Mexicans, the Spanish, and the British. This expansion
is seen by Leopold as the expression of Americans' sense of destiny,
desire for growth and economic benefits, faith in progress, and need
for security. Bailey (1944) rather saw this expansion as due to the
26
manifest determination of the American people to achieve their
physiographic destiny coupled with the weakness of Spain.
Brandon (1966) agreed with Leopold in qualifying the foreign
policy of the young republic as isolationist. He contended that from
1826 to 1898 the nation was almost exclusively concerned with its
internal affairs, although it had had commercial contacts with the
Hiddle and Far East since the eighteenth century. Blake and Barck
(1960) contended that the young republic was not isolationist, and that
it rather entered into fateful contacts with other governments; this
was due to the assertive American nationalism, the frontiersman's
appetite for new lands, and the merchant's ambitions for more trade.
Leopold considered that the guidelines for American foreign
policy before 1889 were established in the Monroe Doctrine which sought
to restrict the operations of European countries in the new world by
declaring the principles of neutrality, non-intervention in the
domestic affairs of other countries, recognition of established
governments, respect for treaty obligations, and peaceful settlement of
international disputes (Leopold, 1962).
From 1889 to 1905, the United States began its overseas empire.
Leopold found the roots of American imperialism in strategic, economic,
religious, and emotional reasons. First of all, the establishment of
military bases in Cuba, the Isthmus of Panama, the Philippines, and
Hawaii was very important for the security of the United States.
Second, American growing industry needed markets and raw materials from
foreign countries. Third, American Christian missionaries had
established centers in the Pacific and the Orient, and, finally,
27
Leopold saw the roots of American imperialism in the desire for
adventure, the Anglo-Saxon racial pride, and the American feeling of
institutional superiority (Leopold, 1962).
The greatest attention of the U.S. until 1914 was on the
Caribbean. During this time the U.S. built the Panama Canal and began
the protectorate policy in the Caribbean. Under this policy, the Unitec
States had the right to intervene in other countries for the
preservation of order. Cuba, Panama, the Dominican Republic, and
Nicaragua became American protectorates between 1903 and 1911 (Leopold,
1962).
American Foreign Policies from
World War 1 to the Cold War
During World War I, the American sentiment was overwhelmingly
non-interventionist. The Allies, however, depended on American exports,
loans, and sale of munitions between 1914 and 1917. In April 1917, the
United States declared war on Germany in response to Germany's decision
to resume unrestricted submarine operations in the Atlantic. The
entrance of the United States contributed to the military victory of
the Allies. The war ended on November 11, 1918 when Germany accepted
the conditions stated by President Wilson of the United States. As a
result of the war, the United States was acknowledged as a world power
and as a result of the wartime financing, it became the world's
creditor as well (Leopold, 1962).
Between 1920 and 1939 the United States dealt with its European
debtors, Great Britain, France, Italy, and Belgium, which were very
reluctant to meet their obligations. Then, the Department of State
28
adopted the policy of frowning upon private loans to countries in
default; this loan policy acted as a powerful persuader. In 1922 the
United States signed with China the Open Door Policy which granted four
conditions for American trade in that country. In order to control the
possession of war weapons and to avoid a possible international war,
the United States signed treaties of arms restrictions with Great
Britain, Japan, France, and Italy; thus the United States became a
moderator. During the Italo-Ethiopian crises of 1935 which threatened
to precipitate a world conflict, Americans expressed desire to escape
a war; thus the Congress passed the Neutrality Act of May 1, 1937 by
which restrictions to export and transport arms and munitions to
belligerent countries were established (Bailey, 1944). This policy,
again, was aimed at restraining the impetus for war.
World War II (1939-1945) began in September when Great Britain
and France declared war on Germany which had invaded Poland. President
Roosevelt of the United States promptly proclaimed his government's
neutrality and publicly promised to remain at peace. However, when the
invasion of England by Germany appeared imminent, because Hitler had
already invaded Denmark, Norway, Belgium, Holland, Luxemburg, and
France, the United States and Great Britain signed the Destroyers-Bases
Agreement of September 2, 1940. This agreement established that in
return for the immediate transfer of 50 destroyers and certain weapons,
Great Britain would lease to the United States without charge and for
99 years six sites in the Caribbean suitable for military stations;
such stations were considered to be vital for the security of the
United States (Bailey, 1944).
29
After the German-Italian-Japanese treaty of 1940, the United
States committed itself to defend non-American lands in Asia and to
manufacture any defense article for the government of any country whose
defense the President of the United States considered vital to the
defense of the U.S. By this time, the interests of the United States
in South East Asia conflicted with the expansionist purposes of Japan
in that area (Blake & Barck, 1960).
Japan attacked Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, and the United
States entered into war. The combined forces of the United States,
Great Britain, and Russia, defeated Germany in May 1945. In the East,
China, Great Britain, and the United States fought against Japan, which
was defeated in August 1945 when the United States detonated the atomic
bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Americans helped to end the fighting
in a very short time, but they also inaugurated the Atomic Age
(Leopold, 1962).
The United Nations (UN) was created in July 1945 in San
Francisco as an outgrowth of the international conflict. Fifty nations
subscribed to the idea of an international organization whose purposes
were to maintain peace and security, to take collective measures for
preventing war and aggression, to settle disputes among nations, to
develop friendly relations based on the principle of equal rights and
self-determination, and to promote cooperation in dealing with
international problems. By joining the United Nations and becoming a
permanent member of the Security Council, the American government
became automatically a member of the new international tribunal
(Leopold, 1962).
30
The Soviet-American relations steadily worsened between 1945
and 1947 because of the dominion of the Soviet Union in Eastern Europe,
disagreement between the two countries about new membership at the
United Nations, and the Berlin Blockade. The United States attempted
to contain the Soviet Union in Europe through the Truman Doctrine, the
Marshall Plan, the North Atlantic Treaty and economic assistance and
security programs in foreign countries. The Truman Doctrine granted
assistance to "free" peoples who were resisting attempted subjugation
by armed minorities or by outside pressures. The Marshall Plan granted
economic aid for the recovery of Europe after the war (Leopold, 1962).
According to Brandon (1966) one of the most significant effects
of World War II was the emergence of two great powers on the inter
national stage: the United States and the Soviet Union. Brandon
points out that post-war U.S. policy was partially initiated by the
utopian assumptions that a successful containment of the Soviet Union
would lead to the liberalization or even the disintegration of communist,
control in East Europe and that underdeveloped countries would evolve
into peace loving democracies.
American foreign policy between 1950 and 1960 dealt with the
Cold War in which competing political philosophies and rival economic
systems had developed a conflict between the forces of capitalism and
communism. The front was everywhere: in Eastern Europe, in the Middle
East, in Northern Africa, the Suez Canal, Congo, China, Korea,
Indochina, and at the United Nations. The approach used to deal with
international problems was summit diplomacy between foreign ministers
and negotiations at the United Nations Security Council. During this
31
period, the United States lost its monopoly of both fission and
fussion bombs and the communists made sensational progress in rockets.
The aim of international diplomacy was focused on finding an effective
system of inspection to control new weapons (Leopold, 1962).
Assessing American foreign policy at the beginning of the
decade of the 1960s, Leopold concluded that the principles of
isolationism, neutrality, and the Monroe Doctrine which determined the
course of American diplomacy in its early years had disappeared.
Isolationism had been eroded by changes in technology, communication
and warfare; rather the nation had joined the United Nations and
participated in a number of collective defense arrangements such as the
Organization of American States (OAS), the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO), the Australia-New Zealand-United States Treaty
(ANZU), the South East Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) and the Central
Treaty Organization (CENTO). Neutrality had been abandoned because
every victory of communism in any country seemed to threaten the
national interests (Leopold, 1962).
American Foreign Policies Since 1960
A cardinal feature of American diplomacy in the 1950s and 1960s
was mutual security, often called foreign aid. Leopold reported that
from 1945 to 1960 the United States spent abroad a total of
$84,090,800,000 in economic grants and defense assistance. In 1960, it
spent $3,226,000,000 for military equipment and training in nearly 50
countries, economic support of 12 nations (Nationalist China and South
Vietnam among them) whose own resources did not permit them to keep a
32
strong defense; technical cooperation with several countries;
development programs abroad; and contributions to the United Nations
Children's Fund and Emergency Force (Leopold, 1962).
According to Brandon, there are moral, economic, and strategic
reasons underlying United States and Western concern with the
technically backward areas. First, the "have" countries of the free
world are under a moral obligation to help the "have not" countries.
Second, the United States, Western Europe and Japan are increasingly
dependent upon the raw materials of underdeveloped countries. Third,
modernization of the underdeveloped countries could open a vast new
market for Western products. The United States has spent more than one
hundred billion dollars in military and economic assistance to other
countries since 1945. In the 1950s, American economic and technical
assistance programs were a mixture of emergency measures and efforts to
win allies for military purposes. Economic aid was often used as an
instrument in the Cold War to win friends and influence people (Brandon
1966).
Because the Soviet Union and China have aid programs in under
developed nations to further their influence and help to pave the way
for their ultimate control, many Westerners have suggested the
implementation of a vast plan similar to the Marshall Plan in those
areas. However, Brandon thinks that the Marshall Plan was designed to
assist in the reconstruction of already developed Western Europe, and
that the nature of the task is different in today's underdeveloped
countries "handicapped by differences in cultural, political traditions
between the advanced and most of the technically backward countries"
(Brandon, 1966, p. 212). 33
Analyzing world affairs during the 1960s, Henry A. Kissinger
(1969) pointed out that for the first time in world history foreign
policy had become global. He considered that first of all the number
of participants in the international system has increased and
technology has multiplied the resources for the handling of inter
national relations. Secondly, Kissinger considers that ideological
differences no longer coincide with political boundaries and that
conflicts among nations merge within divisions within nations making
very diffuse the dividing line between domestic and foreign policy.
Thirdly, Kissinger believes that the military bipolarity of the
international system in which the U.S. and the Soviet Union are the
opposing poles is a source of rigidity in foreign policy. However,
Kissinger thinks that military bipolarity has encouraged political
multipolarity because "new nations feel protected by the rivalry of the
superpowers and their nationalism leads to ever bolder assertions of
self-will" (Kissinger, 1969, p. 56).
Stupak (1976) qualifies the role of United States foreign
policy in the 1950s and 1960s as that of "world policeman." He states:
The United States in the 1950s and 1960s had been
participating in the affairs of other nation-states in the
international system at an ever increasing rate of multi
dimensional levels and with a vast multitude of instru
mentalities, all the way from foreign aid to direct military
involvement. (p. 121)
The "world policeman" period of American foreign policy is
considered by Stupak as the vulgarization of the traditional American
philosophical principles manifested in the over-commitment of the
United States to the Vietnam conflict. This period could be charted in
34
a downward progression, says Stupak, from Truman’s containment, to
Eisenhower's rhetorical crusade, and from Kennedy's activistic
"machismo" to Johnson's paranoic personalism (Stupak, 1976).
During this period American policymakers were anticipating
direct Communist involvements in the less developed nations, and judged
it necessary to design strategies to forestall such attempts. Hence,
American involvement in the affairs of other nations rested upon the
premise of aid for maintaining stability. The acceptance of this
premise led to intervention and over-commitment in Vietnam which
created tremendous internal stress in the U.S. and set the stage for
the Nixon Doctrine of 1969 (Stupak, 1976).
The Nixon Doctrine stated that the Cold War was over and that
the United States must partially disengage from world conflicts. The
United States must search for a new balance of power compatible with
the following new facts: (1) American allies are stronger, (2) there
is parity at the nuclear level with the Soviet Union, and (3) the
international communist unity had been shattered by the Sino-Soviet
conflict (Stupak, 1976).
The new policies of the United States included an approach to
the People's Republic of China, agreements with the Soviet Union,
control of the arms race, development of a more constructive approach
to economic aid to the poorer nations, and building of a stable world
peace.
Dos Santos (1973) assesses the role of the U.S. in world
affairs from the standpoint of the economic development of capitalism
in the world. He describes how the U.S. replaced the British economic
33
dominance in the world and became an international power. After the
war, when Great Britain recuperated its 1929 level of economic
production, the United States had doubled its 1929 production. Besides,
the United States' national income accounted for 50 percent of the
national income of all capitalist countries, its commerce accounted for
47 percent of the world trade, and its reserves accounted for 70
percent of world reserves. American dollars then became the inter
national currency (Dos Santos, 1973).
According to Dos Santos several factors facilitated the
American economic dominance in the world. First, the war industry
granted full employment and increased American national production.
Second, due to the large size of the country, American industries had
their own large market. Third, technological and organizational
advances facilitated the creation of large units of production which
increased the national productivity. Fourth, since the beginning of
the twentieth century, the United States had achieved a large
concentration of capital which provided the financial and administra
tive basis for American economic leadership among capitalist countries.
Fifth, the threat of communism stimulated the alliance of capitalist
countries around the military and economic power of the United States.
Lastly, the political and economic conditions of the United States
attracted monetary and human resources from other countries which
increased American scientific and technological development (Dos
Santos, 1973).
The concentration and expansion of capital has reached a point
where 180 American corporations control 80 percent of the foreign
36
investments of the United States. These corporations and a smaller
number of European and Japanese national enterprises produce one-sixth
of the international gross product (Dos Santos, 1973).
The Making of American Foreign Policies
Briggs (1968) emphatically states that, "in the United States,
the President makes and the President executes foreign policy" (p. 14).
However, the executive does not possess exclusive jurisdiction over
foreign affairs, he continues. The Constitution has divided the
responsibility between the President and the Congress which has
generated what Briggs calls a tug-of-war that is as old as the Republic
The power of the President in foreign affairs comes from his
functions as Chief Executive, Commander-in-Chief, Treaty-Maker, and
Arbiter of Personnel as well as from the facts: (1) the President is
better informed than the Congress about foreign events, and (2) the
greater involvement of the United States in world affairs has forced
the President to become more active in these matters.
To facilitate his foreign policy operations, the President has
the assistance of: (1) The National Security Council which advises the
President on domestic, foreign, and military matters relating to
national security; (2) The State Department headed by the Secretary of
State, who is the Adviser and Executive Agent of the President as well
as the negotiator of important issues at home and abroad; (3) The
American Foreign Service in charge of diplomatic and consular services
abroad; and (4) The President’s Special Assistant for Foreign Affairs
(Briggs, 1968).
37
The cere of the State Department is made up ef Bureaus
corresponding to geographical areas such as Europe, Far East, Near
East, South Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Each Bureau is headed by
an Assistant Secretary of State and each Bureau is segmented by the
Country Director. The Country Director is the primary liaison official
between the State Department and the Embassy of the country of his
responsibility. Other important offices of the State Department are
the Bureau of Economic Affairs, the Congressional Relations Bureau, and
the Legal Advisor Office.
Collaborating closely with the State Department are the
following agencies named by Briggs "Peripheral Performers":
1. The United States Information Agency (USIA) which is
responsible for propaganda and cultural information abroad.
2. The Agency for International Development (AID), responsible
for development projects in the less developed countries.
3. The Peace Corps (PC), a junior-league foreign aid program.
4. The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in charge of overt
and clandestine operations having to do with the collection and
interpretation of information.
The USIA, AID, and PC operate under the State Department
jurisdiction or policy guidance, while the CIA operates under the
National Security Council (Briggs, 1968).
The rationale behind these four agencies, according to Briggs,
is that the United States needs action programs in order to influence
the institutions of foreign countries, which include influencing
ideology in ways favorable to American purposes (Briggs, 1968).
38
According to Wanamaker (1969), former Director of the Office
of Public Services in the Department of State the tools that the United
States uses in working toward its foreign affairs objectives are:
1. Negotiation which is efficient if both parties really want a
solution.
2. Threats such as President Kennedy's of October 1962, when
Soviet missile sites were discovered in Cuba.
3. Alliances by which an attack upon one member is regarded as an
attack upon all members of the alliance.
4. The United Nations at which the United States and all
protesting nations can air their views and opinions such as in
1968 when several nations denounced the Soviet invasion of
Czechoslovakia.
5. Trade— in some cases the United States has imposed total
embargo on trade such as to Communist China, North Korea, North
Vietnam, and Cuba.
6. Retaliation such as when the Soviet Union restricted the
movements of Americans in its territory, then the United States
imposed similar restrictions to Soviet citizens.
7. Reaching people directly through broadcasts, information
programs, student exchanges, and cultural presentations.
8. Foreign Aid for the purpose of assisting countries to maintain
their independence and to become self-supporting.
39
The Function of Foreign Aid in
American Foreign Affairs
A study prepared by the University of Chicago at the request of
the Foreign Aid Committee of the United States Senate (1957) concludes
that there are three major motives for American foreign aid: (1) the
humanitarian sentiment among the American people, (2) the United States
economy can gain from a high level of real income and economic growth
of other countries, and (3) American security requires the collabora
tion of friendly nations that are still uncommitted in relation to the
Soviet-United States race for power in the world (University of Chicago,
1957).
A publication from the State Department dealing with criticisms
of the United States foreign aid program states that:
1. Without the United States aid program all of Europe and many
other countries could have gone communist.
2. Most of United States aid funds are spent to buy goods made in
the U.S. The idea is that a well-developed country makes the
best customer for American exports.
3. The United States program amounts to less than one percent of
the total output of United States goods and services.
4. Foreign aid is an investment in United States security, world
stability, and economic progress.
5. Most United States foreign aid programs directly benefit the
poor of foreign countries rather than the wealthy.
6. The purpose of the United States foreign aid is not to support
dictatorships in foreign countries, but to work with various
40
governments in affairs of mutual interest. In granting aid,
the United States considers whether it promotes United States
security, not the form of government of the foreign country.
7. A major goal of the United States foreign aid programs is to
help create situations in which private enterprise can flourish
in the less developed countries (Department of State, 1961).
In spite of the foregoing commercial, strategic, and moral
arguments for foreign aid, Mende (1973) notes that in the past few years
aid appropriations have declined more sharply in the United States than
in other countries. He also points out that the real cost of aid is
overestimated in nominal figures because it includes loans which have
to be repaid with interest, and restrictions which tie aid to buying
from the donor country (Mende, 1973).
In 1960, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a
resolution calling on the rich countries to devote one percent of their
national income to aid. But, Mende reports, most donor countries have
not yet specified when they plan to reach such a goal and instead aid
has been shrinking. In fact, Russet (1973) found that the U.S.
economic aid as a proportion of gross national product had fallen from
a peak of 1.6 percent in the Marshall Plan years to less than .2 percent
in 1973.
However, technical assistance programs, which facilitate the
acquisition of new knowledge and specialized skills, have been growing
faster than aid as a whole. Mende concludes that technical assistance
plays a very important role in the overall aid policies of the United
States, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom. The United States for
41
instance has devoted one-seventh of all its official aid to technical
assistance programs, while France has spent one half (Mende, 1973).
An analysis of the opinion of the American public about foreign
aid conducted by Russet (1975) concludes that there was a marked shift
away from acceptance of the political responsibility of the U.S. as a
world power toward political isolationism and a recognition of growing
economic interdependence throughout the world. Moreover, Russet
concludes from his analysis of the percentages of the President's
Annual Messages devoted to foreign affairs that it has been substan
tially reduced: during the 1970s between 20 and 30 percent of the
messages were about foreign politics in contrast to the 1960s 45
percent, and the 60 percent of the 1940s (Russet, 1975).
The implications of these shifts, according to Russet, are a
renewed effort for detente with the communists and a reassessment of
the relations with the poor countries. Russet fears the frustration of
poor countries which, because of modern communications, know how well
people live in rich countries. He concludes that the tragedy is that
nothing very much is coming to replace the United States foreign aid
program (Russet, 1975).
The following conclusions from the preceding review of
literature are of relevance to this study:
1. Although the early cardinal principles of the U.S. foreign
policies were isolationist, Americans began establishing military bases
and commercial contacts abroad since the last century. After World War
I the U.S. emerged as a world power because of its financial and
military strength. Since then, American foreign policies, guided by
42
economic and security interests, have been very influential in world
affairs. Because of this power, the U.S. has assumed a leadership
position among the center nations of the international system of
nations.
2. One of the most important tools of American diplomacy is
foreign aid. This includes military, economic, and technical
assistance programs used to further the goals of American foreign
policy.
3. Although there are many institutions involved in the making
of foreign policy in the U.S. the greatest responsibility is given to
the President and the Congress.
The United States and Latin America
Latin America represents the diversity embodied in many
nations, composed of peoples of all races, living at different levels of
education and socioeconomic conditions. Yet, Latin America reveals a
kind of unity which grows from living in the Western Hemisphere,
sharing a common colonial past and a Catholic tradition, having similar
languages, and confronting common problems. In fact, Alba (1969)
contends that:
While the Latin American does not exist subjectively—
very few see themselves as Latin Americans— there does exist
a Latin American type of society that unites its component
members and gives them a fundamental uniformity. (pp* 17-18)
Alba supports his assertion saying that there is a common
denominator among Latin Americans in terms of their reactions, customs,
scale of values, aspirations, and above all there is identity in the
43
social structure of nearly all Latin American countries. As a
consequence, there is a tradition among social scientists of dealing
with this group of nations as a unity. In fact, Stuart and Tigner
(1975) assert that:
Latin America has traditionally occupied a special place
in the foreign relations of the United States, a relationship
based on geographic proximity, long historic association,
and many similarities in origins. (p. 1)
However, they recognized that at the same time these relations
have shown considerable fluctuations both in the last century and in
the present century. Those fluctuations could be broken down into four
periods: (1) 1810-1895: Latin American Independence and the Monroe
Doctrine; (2) 1896-1932: Imperialism and Panamericanism; (3) 1933-1945:
the Good Neighbor Policy; (4) 1946-1976: The Cold War and the Alliance
for Progress (Stuart & Tigner, 1975).
Latin American Independence and
the Monroe Doctrine
During the first period (1810-1895), the United States adopted
the No-Transfer Resolution of 1811 which reflected the American concern
that Spain might transfer Florida to Great Britain which would be
against the security interests of the United States. The American
attitude toward the Latin American struggles for independence was
sympathetic and pragmatic; the United States wanted to see the European
powers ejected from the Western Hemisphere (Bailey, 1944).
The Monroe Doctrine, stated by President Monroe in his message
to the Congress in December 1823, asserted:
We owe it, therefore, to candor and to amicable relations
existing between the United States and those [European] powers
44
to declare that we should consider any attempt on their part
to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere
as dangerous to our peace and safety. (Stuart & Tigner,
1975, p. 2)
Although this doctrine served notice to Europe that the Western
Hemisphere was closed to colonization, the U.S. itself took over about
one half of Mexican territory in 1848. The Monroe Doctrine was invoked
against Great Britain in Central America, against Spain in Santo
Domingo and Peru, and against France in Mexico. However, far more than
70 years after Latin American independence from Spain, Great Britain
was the paramount power in Iberio-America which became a source of raw
materials and a major outlet for British exports and investments
(Stuart & Tigner, 1975).
Imperialism and Panamericanism
The period 1896-1932 began with the Pan American Conference and
according to Stuart and Tigner (1975) "saw our first and only burst of
extra-continental imperialism" (p. 3). During this period, American
government officials considered the United States as being practically
sovereign in this continent. In this expansive mood, the United States
began the "splendid little war" with Spain and assumed a police role in
Latin America focusing its attention in the Caribbean. The United
States had been especially interested in Cuba; the value of its trade
with Cuba had increased $470,000,000 from 1895 to 1923, and its
investments in the island had grown from $50,000,000 to $1,360,000,000
during the same period. Then through the Platt Amendment (1901) to the
Cuban Constitution, Cuba became a protectorate of the United States
which then had the right to intervene in Cuban affairs for the
45
preservation of Cuban independence (Rippy, 1928).
In 1903, the U.S. stimulated the independence of Panama from
Columbia, became the first country to recognize the new Republic of
Panama, and signed a treaty which granted American sovereignty over the
Canal Zone (Blake & Barck, 1960).
President Roosevelt's actions in regard to Cuba (1901), the
Panama Canal (1903) and the taking over of the finances of the
Dominican Republic (1904) aroused suspicion among Latin Americans.
Then, in order to dissipate apprehension, President Roosevelt announced
what was considered "the Roosevelt Corollary of the Monroe Doctrine" in
his annual message of 1904. He stated:
Chronic wrong doing, or impotence which results in a
general loosening of the ties of civilized society, may
finally require intervention by some civilized nation, and
in the Western Hemisphere, the United States cannot ignore
this duty. (Stuart & Tigner, 1973, p. 5)
According to this Corollary, reports Tulchin (1973), the United
States assumed the role of policeman of the hemisphere. He contends
that despite this role, Latin American countries did not end their
fiscal irresponsibilities. Thep, President Taft proposed to replace
the policy of intervention in Latin America for the use of dollars as a
means to stabilize the economic affairs of those countries; this was
called the Dollar Diplomacy. Nevertheless the United States continued
intervening in Latin America (Tulchin, 1973).
Gerassi (1973) explains that the Roosevelt Corollary served the
United States in intervention, before 1933, some 60 times in the
affairs of Latin America. Rippy (1928) reported that by 1924 the United
States had used military force on four occasions to intervene in Cuba;
46
it had occupied almost continuously the Dominican Republic from 1914 to
1924; it had made six marine interventions in Nicaragua; and it had
invaded Costa Rica, Mexico, and El Salvador. He contends that the
United States had important commercial dealings with those countries,
and that some of those interventions were used to collect debts. He
concludes that "the political life of the Central American republics
virtually has been dominated by the United States since 1907" (Rippy,
1928, p. 246).
The rationale behind the Monroe Doctrine and the Roosevelt
Corollary was the security of the United States. The Caribbean and
Panama were important posts in the defense of the United States. But
American interventions in the Central American countries had also
financial reasons; the United States was interested in restoring the
economic order of those countries and in creating political stability
to expand American business there.
The First World War gave the United States the opportunity to
replace Great Britain as the leading trader in Latin America. Rippy
reports that in 1913 the value of American trade in Latin America was
greater than that of England and surpassed the total commerce of
Germany and France combined, and that in 1923 it was considerably
greater than that of all three of these nations. The investments of
the United States in Latin America had risen comparatively to those of
European countries to the point that Rippy said, "in short the United
States and its citizens virtually dominate the economic and political
life of the majority of the republics South of the Rio Grande" (Rippy,
1928, p. 243).
A significant extension of American influence came in 1917
with the purchase of the Danish West Indies, renamed the Virgin Islands.
Their strategic value in the Caribbean was very important for the
security of the United States (Blake & Barck, 1960).
The Good Neighbor Policy
President Franklin D. Roosevelt inaugurated the third period of
U.S.-Latin American relations (1933-1945) expressing the Good Neighbor
Policy in his inaugural address of March 1933. This policy sought
mutual understanding and the maintenance of the Monroe Doctrine to
protect the western hemisphere from control by any non-American power.
During this third period the American government achieved the
following objectives: (1) the breaking down of tariff barriers through
trade agreements with the American Republics, thus instituting the new
liberal commercial policy which proved to be very effective for the
rehabilitation of the U.S. economy of the 1930s; (2) the coordination
of the inter-American peace machinery by sending military missions to
all Latin American countries that requested them, and by reaffirming
the principle of continental solidarity and defense at the eighth
Panamerican Conference; (3) the acceptance of the principle of non
intervention by the American Republics; and (4) the establishment of
the Inter-American Financial and Economic Advisory Committee (1939)
whose function was to promote the cooperation of the American Republics
in order to protect their economic structures (Stuart & Tigner, 1975).
The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor (1941) was a severe test
for the Good Neighbor Policy. The response of Latin America was
48
positive for American interests. Of the twenty Latin American
republics eight declared war on the Axis, five severed relations with
Germany, and seven remained neutral; Brazil and Cuba sent combat units
overseas, and all Latin American nations except Argentina permitted the
United States to punish pro-Axis business, and deal with saboteurs and
spies in their territory. In addition, two neutral countries, Mexico
and Chile, furnished the Allies commodities essential to the conduct of
the war.
The Cold War and the Alliance
for Progress
The major events of this period were as follows:
President Truman's administration. President Truman attained
the inclusion of the twenty Latin American countries as members of the
United Nations, signed the Rio treaty of mutual defense with the
American Republics, and signed the Charter of Organization of American
States (Stuart & Tigner, 1975).
According to Chilcote and Edelstein (1974), the Panamerican
system with headquarters in Washington, D.C. emerged to insure United
Stated domination in Latin America. Examples of the American influence
in the OAS were: (1) The March 1954 vote in favor of the American
proposal of endorsing a declaration against Guatemala whose government
had expropriated banana holdings of the United Fruit Company, (2) the
expulsion of Cuba from the OAS: Six countries abstained, but the
others fell into line through economic and political pressure from the
United States, and (3) a two-thirds vote endorsing the United States
proposal for establishing an inter-American peace force after the
49
United States had sent soldiers and marines to the Dominican Republic
in 1965 without prior OAS consultation.
President Eisenhower's administration. In the 1950s the U.S.
pushed projects to increase productivity in Latin America through
financial aid. Besides, military assistance was generously provided
to Latin American countries to build defenses against communism. Blake
and Barck (1960) reported that Latin Americans charged that the
American Department of. State of manipulating such economic and military
aid to strengthen the position of certain Latin American dictators.
The anti-American hostility of Latin Americans was openly displayed
during Vice President Nixon's trip to South America.
The military regime of Fulgencio Batista in Cuba was overthrown
by Fidel Castro in 1959. The Castro revolution nationalized and
confiscated large properties, among which were those belonging to many
Americans, which were distributed to peasant cooperatives. In
retaliation, President Eisenhower cut all trade with Cuba, which then
turned progressively to Russia and China. After proclaiming that the
United States was planning to invade Cuba, Castro demanded in 1961 the
reduction of the personnel of the American Embassy in Havana. Sixteen
days before the inauguration of the new President of the United States,
Kennedy, President Eisenhower broke off diplomatic and consular
relations with Cuba (Stuart & Tigner, 1975).
President Kennedy's administration. President Kennedy inherited
from the previous administration a plan to invade Cuba. The invaders
landed at the Bahia Cochinos on April 17, 1961 and were defeated by
Castro's forces. From then on the U.S. policy was to treat Cuba as an
50
outlaw in the hemispheric system. In 1962 Cuba was excluded from the
OAS (Gerassi, 1973).
President Kennedy began his administration by launching the
Alliance for Progress with the American Republics in 1961. The main
features of this program followed a proposal elaborated by Brazilian
President Jucelino Kubitschek in 1938 (Alba, 1969). Through the
Alliance for Progress, Latin American countries agreed to undertake
economic and social reforms and the United States promised to provide
$20 billion to supplement the Latin American efforts. The United
States financial aid was only a fraction of Latin America's investment.
Thus between 1962-1969, Latin America., invested $130 billion in its own
development while the United States invested $7.7 billion of which
about four billion were loans. Latin America had paid back $2.7
billion and $750 million of interest in 1969 (Stuart & Tigner, 1975).
Morray (1968), former naval attache of the United States
Embassies in Spain and Paraguay and professor at Berkeley, contends
that the Alliance was not aimed at financing the economic development
of Latin America but at promoting American exports to those countries
by means of purchases and loans. Further, he contends that the
Alliance was an Alliance against Cuba, since it was stated that no aid
would be given to any country that allowed its ships or aircraft to
carry equipment, materials, or commodities to Cuba so long as it was
under Castro's regime (Morray, 1968).
An assessment of the Alliance made in 1963 by two former
Presidents, Jucelino Kubitschek of Brazil and Alberto Lleras Camargo of
Colombia, concluded that Latin American governments were not carrying
51
out the reforms they had promised. Alba contends that after this
assessment the Alliance slowly changed from a collaborative enterprise
to a plan for bilateral agreements of simple measures for aid (Alba,
1969).
The establishment of the Peace Corps in March 1961 was another
major program of the Kennedy Administration directed toward developing
countries. The Peace Corps was designed to stimulate understanding of
the American way of life abroad and self-help and community initiative
in the less developed countries.
President Johnson's administration. President Johnson
continued the Alliance for Progress, but focused on tangible
accomplishments such as buildings, roads, and bridges. His administra
tion recognized with little delay the military regimes of Brazil (1964)
and Argentina (1966), and in 1965 carried out armed intervention in the
Dominican Republic. The Johnson's administration provided military
supplies and assistance to the government of Bolivia for fighting
against the guerrilla movement led by Major Ernesto "Che" Guevara
(1967), and withheld aid to Peru (1968) because the Peruvian government
had seized the International Petroleum Company (Stuart & Tigner, 1975).
President Nixon's administration. Latin America did not rank
high in Nixon's list of priorities. He made it clear from the
beginning of his administration that he expected to design his own
Latin American program. During this administration Latin Americans
condemned the policy of "tied loans" which obligated recipient countries
to use the money for buying American goods.
There were other complaints about the United States’ Latin
American policy shared by American officials. United States 52
Senator Frank Church, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations
Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere Affairs, agreed that American
companies operating in Latin America had withdrawn two dollars in
dividends for every dollar they invested, provoking capital outflow
from these countries. Governor Rockefeller also noted that Latin
American countries were going deeper into debt as they received more
aid. He reported, for instance, that in 1969 Brazil was paying off
$500 million to the United States in debts: $300 million on the
principal and $200 million in interest. Besides, 75 percent of the
bank funds for Latin America were being used to pay off old loans.
Latin Americans sought increased aid with fewer conditions attached,
aid from different countries of the world, and preferential treatment
in the United States market (Stuart & Tigner, 1975).
Other sources of irritation in the United States-Latin Americar
relations faced by the Nixon administration included the water claims
of Ecuador and Peru (1971); the nationalization of Americans' property
in Peru (1968), Bolivia (1969) and Chile (1970); the kidnapping of
diplomats; and the hijacking of planes. In addition, the balance of
trade between Latin America and the United States was unfavorable to
the former; while Latin America accounted for 15 percent of total
United States imports in 1970, the United States absorbed 34 percent of
Latin American sales and supplied 40 percent of Latin American imports
(Stuart & Tigner, 1975).
After reviewing the literature about the United States policy
toward Latin America, Lowenthal (1975) concluded that analyses of
inter-American relations tend to adopt either a liberal or a radical
53
perspective. The liberal approach assumes an essential compatibility
of interest between the United States and Latin America as well as the
existence of a national interest in those countries different and
superior to the private interests of American business firms. In
contrast, the radical approach assumes that American foreign policies
primarily serve the expansive interests of American capitalism.
According to Lowenthal, the difficulties between the United
States and Latin America are interpreted by the liberals as temporary
confusions of private American interests with national interests,
neglect of Latin America, and pervasive and serious misunderstanding.
Radicals see these difficulties as the designs of American officials
sided with private interests.
The following statements summarize the findings of the review
of literature corresponding to this section:
1. Latin America is treated as a sociohistorical unit. In
addition, some important U.S. foreign platforms such as the Monroe
Doctrine, the Roosevelt Corollary, the Good Neighbor Policy, and the
Alliance for Progress deal with Latin American countries as a unit.
2. Because of commercial and security interests, the U.S. has
been engaged in the affairs of Latin American since the early
nineteenth century. American policies toward Latin America have had a
custodial character; they have attempted to monitor the development of
free-enterprise economics and to forestall communism in Latin America.
3. The U.S. concern for security has been greater than its
concern for the political freedom of Latin Americans. This has created
anxiety among democratic forces in both the U.S. and Latin America.
54
4. The U.S. foreign aid program, which includes financial,
military, and technical assistance, has had little success in changing
Latin American social structures. It has been used with more success
for exercising political control in this hemisphere.
3. Latin American countries have become peripheral nations
which function around the U.S. as a center nation within the inter
national system of nations.
The Ideologies of Development
The review of literature in this section deals with the
following three issues: (1) the concept of ideology; (2) the relation
ship between scientific theorizing and ideology, and (3) the
developmentalist and the dependency ideological paradigms.
The Concept of Ideology
The concept of ideology is one of the most ambiguous in the
social sciences. This ambiguity is reflected in the wide variety of
definitions and in the lack of agreement about the basic properties of
ideology.
Plamenatz (1970) reports that the word "ideology” was
popularized in France where it meant the study of ideas, and was used
to refer to a philosophy whose exponents prided themselves on not being
methaphysicians. They explained all ideas as deriving from sensations.
The most famous French thinker of this school was Condillac and the
designation of ideologist was applied to his disciples. The equation
of ideological with unrealistic occurred when Napole0n confused the
33
endeavor of the ideologists to explain the formation of ideas, and the
ideologists' opposition to him on the grounds of their liberal ideals
(Selinger, 1976).
The early meaning of ideology has been forgotten, and there
have appeared almost as many definitions of ideology as there are
authors concerned with this concept. The Marxist conceptualization of
ideology, as expressed by Marx and Engels, has had perhaps the greatest
continuing influence in social sciences. Ideology for Marx and Engels
is a part of the superstructure of society. This superstructure which
also contains the legal and political structure of society is deter
mined by its own economic structure. However, the superstructure is not
a mechanical reflection of the economic base. This is to say (1) that
the economic structure fixes the limits of the superstructure, but it
does not faithfully conform to a given superstructure, and (2) that the
ideological structure of society has a relative autonomy regarding the
economic structure; it has its own content and laws (Harnecker, 1971).
Marx and Engels distinguish different ideological regions
within the ideological structure of society. These regions focus on
different issues such as politics, art, religion, etc., and have
relative autonomy. Thus, there are different dominant ideological
regions in different societies. Marx and Engels, for instance, point
out the dominant influence of the religious ideology in the European
peasant movements of the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth
centuries (Harnecker, 1971).
The ideological regions of a given superstructure are not
directly determined by its own economic base. These regions carry on
56
the ideological legacy of the previous historical period. Therefore,
the ideological structure of a given society is influenced by both its
own historical development and the existing economic base. It is in
this sense that the ideological structure has relative autonomy from
the economic structure (Harnecker, 1971).
Regarding the laws of ideology, the Marxist Theory holds that
there are different systems of social ideas and representations in a
society, as there are different social classes. However, the ideology
of the dominant class of society becomes the dominant ideology of
society. The social class that has the means of material production,
also has the means of intellectual production and therefore can control
the thoughts of those who do not have means of production. The
function of the dominant ideology is to condition all members of
society to accept their role in society and to maintain the existing
economic structure. The ideology of the dominant class of society
gives to the dominated classes an illusory or distorted world-view;
therefore, they acquire what Marx calls false consciousness
(Konstantinov, 1966).
Marx and Engels' association of ideology with falseness,
illusion, and deception has persisted in the literature. Thus, where
Marxists speak of "ideology,1" Pareto speaks of "derivations" meaning a
closely related set of beliefs that people accept, regardless of its
truth, because it serves to justify their activities. However, Pareto
did not think of these "derivations" as a pursuit of class interests
(Plamenatz, 1970).
57
Building on Marx's thesis that it is the condition of men's
social existence which tend to determine their social consciousness,
Mannheim (1929) traces the specific connection between interest groups
and the ideas and models of thought which they expose. He shows that
ideologies, or those ideas which lead toward the maintenance of the
existing social order, and utopia, or those ideas which lead toward
changing the prevailing order, deflect thought from the object of
observation and serve to focus on aspects of the situation which
otherwise would be obscure. For Mannheim both ideological thought and
utopia are determined in the sense that each reflects the different
conditions of existence of rulers and ruled. All the values of the
rulers, ideology, are repudiated in the counter-values, utopia, of the
ruled.
There are other conceptualizations of ideology which do not
consider it as a distorted view of the world such as Mullins (1972)
did. He consider-- that ideology incorporates a type of historical
consciousness in which a high degree of social change is recognized.
Compared to ideology, utopia conceptualizes time as non-historical.
First because utopia presents a world without sin or human frailty, as
a social ideal the utopia is a static society. Second, the utopia is
non-historical because it neither expects that the ideal will ever be
realized nor presents any program for its attainment. However,
ideologies often contain "utopian ideals of justice of the good society,
but they are not presented as aesthetically balanced models of
perfection" (Mullins, 1972).
58
Selinger (1976) considers that definitions of ideology can be
divided into two categories. The first is the restrictive conception
of ideology and compromises the definitions which confine the term to
specific belief systems. The other is the inclusive conception of
ideology which comprises .those definitions which apply the term ideology
to all political belief systems.
There is a variety of restrictive conceptions of ideology.
Among them, Daniel Bell identifies ideology with millenarian and
apocalyptic thinking which commit people's intellect to the exhausted
ideologies of the last century, especially to Marxism. He uses the
expression "the end of ideology" to invite revolt against ideology or
utopianism and its visions in order to achieve individual freedom
(Selinger, 1976). Giovani Sartory's conception of ideology is
restrictive. He considers that the expression "end of ideology" calls
for a transformation of an ideological belief system into a pragmatic
belief system. A person's belief-disbelief system is a political-
religious-philosophical-scientific-et cetera system or a total diffuse
framework. In this context, ideology indicates only the political part
of the system. Ideology as compared with pragmatism is "a belief
system based on (i) fixed elements, characterized by (ii) strong affect
and (iii) closed cognitive structure." Conversely, pragmatism is "a
belief system based on (1) flexible elements characterized by (2) weak
affect and (3) open cognitive structure" (Sartory, 1969, p. 403).
Almond and Coleman (1960) also subscribe to the restrictive concept of
ideology and consider that only absolute-value oriented parties are
ideological. Reacting to this conceptualization of ideology, La
59
Palombara (1966) asserts that an ideology may or may not be dogmatic
and utopian, and that it also may or may not be pragmatic.
Lipset (I960) restricts the concept of ideology to "the
passionate" attachment to working class doctrines.
Mills (1960) appraised the "end of ideology" standpoint of Bell,
Lipset and others as ideological. He considers that any political
thought of possible public significance is ideological. Parsons (1951),
like Mills, defines ideology inclusively and speaks of it as a system
of empirical evaluative beliefs held in common by the members of a
collectivity.
Also inclusive is Preston King's definition of ideology cited
in Selinger (1976) as "a coherent system of ideas of whatever kind
involving some understanding of man and the world and which attempts to
relate this understanding to a program of political action" (p. 59).
King, therefore, considers that any ideology can be revolutionary,
conservative or reactionary.
Selinger's (1976) own conception of ideology is inclusive and
entails the following propositions:
1. Ideology and politics are inter-related. Politics is the mode
of implementing ideology, and political decisions are based on
ideological principles.
2. Ideology includes factual knowledge, tolerable rational
justification and prescriptions.
3. Ideologies are not totally opposed to or different from each
other; there is overlapping between ideologies.
60
4. Ideology is action-oriented thought; it guides political
action. All policies are executed in relation to ideals that
embody moral judgments in favor of the justification,
emendation or condemnation of a given order.
In order to operationalize ideology as a variable, Selinger
contends that all political decisions result from end-means calcula
tions in terms of moral and technical norms. Both kinds of norms take
the form of prescriptions of different kinds of facts. Both technical
and moral prescriptions are essential interacting components in
ideology. In addition, ideology bifurcates in everyday life into the
fundamental and the operative dimensions. These two dimensions differ
in that deduction prevails over evidence, doctrine over practice,
principle over precedent, and ends over means, and perceptions tend to
be indirect in the fundamental dimension, whereas in the operative
dimension evidence prevails over deduction, practice over doctrine,
precedent over principle, and means over ends, and perceptions tend to
be more direct (Selinger, 1976).
The Relationship Between Scientific
Theorizing and Ideology
Besides being fundamental and operative, ideology exists under
forms which could be more or less diffuse or more or less systematic.
That is, ideology could be expressed in the form of likings, attitudes,
and customs as well as in the form of theories. In fact, Althusser
(1971) contends that ideology is to some extent the laboratory of
theory and that it is an heuristic principle for regulating theory.
In this, he follows Lenin who talks about scientific ideology,
61
religious ideology, etc. (Lenin, 1973). Similarly, Parsons (1931)
contends that what was the science of yesterday becomes the common
sense of today.
Opposing Lenin, Horowitz (1961) separates science from
ideology. He states that while ideology seeks to convince by its
appeal to a group of people who have common social aims, science
strives for a universal validation of its claims. Nevertheless, he
accepts that the prescriptive forces of scientific statements are
conditioned and constrained by the political and cultural climate of
the community.
Dealing with social science and the problem of values Furfey
(1939) contends that it is impossible to develop a social science
without making certain value judgments and that currently such
decisions are very often made implicitly or without full awareness.
Mills (1960) considers that social research is increasingly
used for bureaucratic and ideological purposes, and advises social
scientists to uncover their own views on the nature of historical
change and social life and to practice the politics of truth.
Polanyi points out that Positivism has made us regard human
beliefs as arbitrary personal manifestations which must be discarded to
achieve a proper scientific detachment. But he asserts that the part
played by personal knowledge in science suggests that the science of
man should rely on greatly extended uses of personal knowing (Schwartz,
1974).
The ultimate relationship between human beliefs and ideology
and the special conditions under which social scientists work, make
62
very diffuse the boundaries between ideology and scientific theories.
As Blume (1974) points out, the social structure of science cannot be
understood without recognizing the importance of its links with poli
tics and, therefore, with ideology. He contends that modern society
has created a host of political functions for the scientists ranging
from advisory positions in the government to those allying themselves
with pressure groups. One very subtle but very pervasive social
pressure on social research comes from what Furfey calls "the climate
of opinion." In every age, he contends, certain principles are
accepted as self-evident and certain types of evidence are accepted
unquestioningly. That is, people living at different times are
convinced by different arguments (Furfey, 1959).
Another particular condition in the production of science is
that, as Kuhn (1962) describes, scientists form closed communities with
intellectual and normative traditions. The members of these
communities are essentially concerned with the search for solutions to
determined problems consensually. Then in their problem-solving
activities, scientists develop their own methods, theories, and
traditions which Kuhn refers to as a "paradigm."
Rudner (1954) proposes that since value judgments impinge on
the process of validating scientific theories, scientists should become
precise about what value judgments are being made in a given inquiry.
The Developmentalist and the Dependency
Ideological Paradigms
Most of the literature concerning social change and development
presents a tendency to contrast opposite theories or paradigms of
63
development. Thus, Bodenheimer (1969) contrasts the developmentalist
paradigm-surrogate with the dependency paradigm; Guerreiro-Ramos (1970)
postulates that theories of development can be placed on a continuum
whose poles are theory N, or theory of necessity, and theory P, or
theory of possibilities; Frank (1972) compares the diffusionist with
the dependency model; Chilcote and Edelstein (1974) oppose the
diffusion to the dependency model; and Paulston (1976) classifies
educational theories of social change into the equilibrium and the
conflict paradigms of social change.
The Developmentalist Paradigm, The main postulates of
Bodenheimer's paradigm-surrogate, Guerreiro-Ramos' Theory N, Frank's
diffusionist approach, Chilcote and Edelstein's diffusion model, and
Paulston's equilibrium paradigm are alike. In fact, the influence of
Parsons and the structural-functional school on the paradigm-surrogate,
theory N, the diffusionist approach, the diffusion model, and the
equilibrium paradigm, is recognized by the mentioned authors. They
also agree in pointing out ideological overtones in the construct they
are describing. In fact, Bodenheimer contends that the paradigm-
surrogate may be seen as an ideology because the substantive content of
its propositions reflects American interests which seek to maintain the
basic social order both domestically and abroad. Further, Bodenheimer
explains that the dominant theories employed by American social
scientists to analyze Latin America are not universally valid, but
rather specific to certain American interests in Latin America, and thus
are more accurately characterized as expression of an ideology than as
solid foundation of scientific knowledge.
64
The basic postulates of the developmentalist paradigm are:
1. Progress will come about through the diffusion of capital,
technology, and values.
2. Underdevelopment is a condition that all countries have
experienced at some time.
3. Foreign investment can bring modern technology and organization
to underdeveloped countries.
4. Economic progress requires political stability.
3. Progress requires the existence of modernizing elites, middle
classes, or military groups.
6. Development is measured in terms of per capita gross national
product and the degree of modernity.
7. Modernization in education occurs when traditional societies
look to the advanced nations for assistance in technological
and educational development.
8. The educational system has the function of preparing skilled
manpower, innovators, entrepreneurs, and the like for the
modern industries (Chilcote & Edelstein, 1974; Paulston, 1976).
The Dependency Paradigm. The main postulates of this paradigm
are also found in Bodenheimer, Frank, Chilcote and Edelstein's
dependency model, and in Paulston*s conflict paradigm of social change.
Guerreiro-Ramos’ Possibility model goes beyond the perspectives of the
dependency model in that it does not prescribe determined lines of
action for development; instead it considers that any nation contains
its own possibilities of development, and that the understanding of each
nation demands dialectical contextualism or a qualified participation in
63
the development process (Guerreiro-Ramos, 1970).
The basic postulates of the dependency paradigm as summarized
by Chilcote and Edelstein are:
1. The now developed countries were never underdeveloped, but
contemporary underdevelopment has been created by the structure
of dependency.
2. Latin American condition of dependency has deepened through
greater foreign corporate governmental and foundation penetra
tion of banking, industry, communications, advertising, and
education.
3. Capital is drained out of Latin America through repatriated
profits, interest payments on loans, fees for royalties,
insurances, and shipping.
4. The introduction of new technology increases the dependency on
foreign knowledge, produces unemployment, and eliminates
domestic competition.
5. Development is measured in terms of economic and cultural
sovereignty.
6. Both capitalist development and underdevelopment are the result
of the international expansion of capitalism.
7. Given the subordinate conditions of Latin America, the market
system intensifies underdevelopment (Chilcote & Edelstein,
1974).
Paulston adds the following postulates applicable specifically
to the field of education:
66
1. Schools are a part of the ideological structure controlled by
the ruling class.
2. Schools should be concerned with the integrated education of
workers, that is the new "socialist person" rather than with
the training of specialized technicians (Paulston, 1976).
The main conceptual elements of the dependency model are
summarized in the studies conducted by Bodenheimer (1969), Cardoso
(1972), Cockcroft, Frank, and Johnson (1972), Corradi (1971), Dos
Santos (1970), Mufga (1971), and Sunkel (1972).
Chilcote and Edelstein (1974) assert that dependency theory
remains to be validated empirically in spite of the existence of data
provided by case studies on dependence. However, they "identify
capitalist imperialism as the principal enemy of dependent Latin
American nations and have tried to relate this imperialism to the
ruling classes within those nations" (p. 46).
The following statements summarize the findings of the review
of literature in this section:
1. Ideology, as a part of the superstructure of society, is in
dialectical relationship with both the socioeconomic structure of
society, and precedent ideological formations.
2. There are restrictive and inclusive conceptions of ideology.
The restrictive conception of ideology confines the term to specific
belief systems, while the inclusive includes those definitions which
apply the term ideology to all political belief systems regardless of
how utopian they may be.
67
3. The boundaries between scientific theorizing and ideology
are very diffuse. Some theories considered scientific are projections
of ideological systems. This is the case of some theories of develop
ment which are rather conceptualized as ideological paradigms. Two
ideological paradigms persistently appear in the literature and are
used in this study as points of reference under the names of the'
developmentalist and the dependency paradigms. Their views about
social change and development are opposed.
The Role of American Universities in World Affairs
The purpose of this section is to review the literature about
the following issues: (1) the historical development of the
universities' participation in world affairs; (2) financing the
universities' international programs; (3) the focus of the universities'
international programs; and (4) the rationale for the universities'
involvement in world affairs.
Historical Development of the Universities'
Participation in World Affairs
Since the beginning of this century American foreign aid
policies have included educational strategies to promote development
abroad. Philip H. Coombs, Assistant Secretary of State for Education
and Cultural Affairs during President Kennedy's administration, stated
the importance of this strategy as follows:
Only by a massive educational effort can the developing
nations develop their human resources, and only by developing
their human resources can they achieve economic growth and
social advancement. (Coombs, 1963, p. 1)
68
Under this guiding principle the United States has been
committed to the promotion and implementation of educational reforms
and innovations abroad. In 1965 Coombs assessed the impact of American
education abroad in the following terms:
Anyone who travels the world these days with his eyes
and ears alert can find abundant evidence of the good that
American education has done in many forms and places.
(Coombs, 1965, p. 5)
Historian R. Freeman Butts traces back to the 1930s the
government's purposive efforts to internationalize the curriculum of
American schools and to increase the international involvement of
American colleges and universities. Butts reports that in response to
the Axis propaganda invasion of Latin America, the Department of State
set up the Division of Cultural Relations in 1938. The purpose of this
agency was to encourage programs of cultural exchange and educational
assistance as a matter of government policy and to implement President
Roosevelt's Good Neighbor Policy in Latin America (Butts, 1966).
Later, in 1946, President Truman signed the Fulbright Act which
provided that funds derived from sales abroad of war surplus property
might be used, under terms of mutual agreements with the purchasing
countries, to finance studies, research instruction, and other
educational activities. Thus, the network of Fulbright Commissions all
over the world became a major means to bring foreign scholars to study
in American institutions of higher education and to send American
scholars abroad to conduct research and participate in technical
assistance programs (Butts, 1966).
69
In 1948, the Smith-Mundt Act authorized the Department of State
to enlarge the range of countries that could engage in educational and
cultural exchanges with the United States. But according to Butts, it
was President Truman who inaugurated the bold new programs of technical
assistance. President Truman's Inaugural Address of 1949 included the
pronouncement of a Point Four Program whose goal was to make available
to all peoples the benefits of American technical knowledge in order to
assist them in their development. As a consequence, there was a series:
of legislative and executive acts which created the International
Cooperation Administration Office (ICA).
Butts contends that with the creation of ICA, the government
finally put education at the very heart of technical assistance
programs, although these programs were financially only a "drop in the
bucket" compared to military and economic assistance. To accomplish
its goals, ICA designed a system of contracts with American univer
sities which then became largely involved in projects or programs of
technical assistance. Thus, Butts reports that in 1968, 67 American
universities held 148‘contracts with the AID, created under President
Kennedy, for technical assistance programs involving 40 countries. The
goals of these kinds of programs is thus expressed by Humphrey (1967):
The objectives are the development of human resources,
the basic capital of the underdeveloped area, and the building
of institutions. Our contributions to these ends have stemmed
from the essentially pragmatic character of our educational
philosophy. Though serious overestimates may have been or
may still be made in assuming a necessary causal relationship
between technical and economic assistance, on the one hand
and the achievement of desirable political results on the
other, the development of those resources and building of
those institutions seem to me surely to have been opposite
to the problem. Given time and wisdom, proceeding through
70
international education in these directions promises a really
major contribution to the national interest. (p. 10)
In 1961, the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act,
known as the Fulbright-Hays Act was passed by the Congress. This Act
enabled the government of the United States to assist in the develop
ment of friendly, sympathetic and peaceful relations between the United
States and the rest of the world. The International Education Act of
1966 further authorized grants to American colleges and universities
to develop and improve undergraduate instruction in International
Education because knowledge of other countries was considered important
in promoting mutual understanding and cooperation between nations.
Thus, American higher education was considered as an inevitable partner
in the international enterprise of the 20th century.
The partnership of American universities and the government was
studied by Richardson (1969). He traced the evolution of relevant
policies and practices of the relationship between the government aid
agency and the universities engaged in technical assistance programs
abroad. This process according to Richardson includes the following
periods:
1. Genesis (1949-1953). During this time the university-contract
program was conceived. The projects were exclusively oriented
toward rural development.
2. Proliferation (1953-1955). The university-contract program
expanded under a single goverment agency: the Foreign
Operations Administration (FOA).
3. Retrenchment (1955-1957). During this time the Agency-
University relations deteriorated mainly because of the new
71
legal and administrative procedures of the agency then called
International Cooperation Administration (ICA). As a
consequence, the expansion of the universities' participation
in technical assistance programs was halted.
4. Inertia (1957-1961). During this period there was little
improvement in the Agency-University relations.
5. Interregnum (1961-1962). During this period President Kennedy
inaugurated his administration and created the Agency for
International Development (AID).
Harmony (1962-1966). During this period, university participa
tion in technical assistance programs expanded (Richardson,
1969).
Richardson points out that the basic divisive issues of the
university-contract program were: (1) the equal participation of the
universities and the Agency in decisions about the problem, (2) the
kinds of decisions for which each party should be responsible, or
university autonomy versus Agency control problems, (3) the type of
legal instruments most appropriate to formalize and institutionalize
the contract, (4) decisions about the length of the programs, and (5)
personnel clearance and the selection of program team members
(Richardson, 1969).
Humphrey, Director of the Commission on International Education
of the American Council on Education, considers that the university-
contract program was organized to work on "evolutionizing" revolutions
around the underdeveloped world. The issue, Humphrey contends, is not
why the universities participate in government programs abroad, but how
72
to improve the university-government communication (Humphrey, 1967).
Melvin (1970) reports that some scholars feel uneasy about the
universities' participation in international programs because of their
political implications. He considers that to avoid this problem, all
political decisions should be made by AID, Washington, and the U.S.
ambassador in the host country.
Charles Frankel, former Secretary of State for Education and
Cultural Affairs, considers that American universities should be an
instrument of cultural exchange, and that the government should inter
vene in the universities' programs only to supplement or direct the
natural flow of educational exchange. He further contends that the
best way to conduct the universities' international programs is "to
get government behind the effort, but get it out of the way" (Michie,
1967, p. 40).
Lynton K. Caldwell, from Indiana University, considers that the
university-government relationship has been occasionally in conflict
but that it has been strengthened by the government understanding of
the universities' long-term plans (Humphrey, 1967).
The idea that the function of the university in assistance
programs is "technical" seems to be so widespread that its political
implications have not been questioned lately.
Financing the Universities'
International Programs
The universities' international programs are financed by the
federal government and philanthropic foundations.
73
An inventory of federally funded programs concerned with
improved international understanding made by the United States
Department of Health, Education and Welfare shows that in 1968:
(1) Thirty-three American universities were involved in
technical assistance programs in 17 Latin American
countries.
(2) Twenty-two American universities were conducting
programs in 6 East-South Asian countries.
(3) Thirteen African countries were hosting,programs
conducted by 33 American universities.
(4) Eight American universities had programs in 3 East Asian
countries.
(3) Four American universities were involved in technical
assistance programs in Vietnam. (Health, Education,
and Welfare Department, 1969, p. 2)
Philanthropic foundations such as Ford, Rockefeller, and
Carnegie, have also sponsored programs for international development
through American universities since 1930.
The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace began to explore
the interrelationship between American higher education and the conduct
of modern world affairs in 1950. In that year, nine American univer
sities undertook, at the Endowment's request, the task of making self
inventories of their activities, resources and possibilities as related
to foreign policy. In 1951, a report was published on this exploratory
experience. This publication stimulated the organization of regional
conferences about international education between 1951 and 1953.
The Ford Foundation allocated $138,000,000 between 1952 and
1964 for grants "designed to improve American competence to deal with
international problems" (Gumperez, 1970, p. 29). Half of these funds
were used on university programs.
In 1962, the Council of Education and World Affairs was created
under the sponsorship of the Ford Foundation and the Carnegie
74
Corporation. The purposes of this organization were "to study, analyze,
and strengthen the international teaching, research, and service
dimensions of the United States colleges and universities" (Michie,
1967, p. 11).
The Carnegie and the Ford Foundations also sponsored the
creation of the Council of Higher Education in the American Republics,
CHEAR. The goal of this Council was to bring together the universities
of this continent for the purpose of cooperation. Through this Council
several American universities have assisted Latin American institutions
of higher education in their development plans.
Financing university programs abroad has been one of the most
controversial issues among American scholars. A few of them are
suspicious of the interest of philanthropic foundations connected with
big capital. Some others feel that what is good for those corporations
is good for the United States and for the world.
The role of philanthropic foundations in the promotion of
university involvement in world affairs has been very decisive. Wilson
and Wilson (1963) so described the international development of some
American universities, pointing out the influence exercised by private
foundations:
1. Harvard University: After World War II, Harvard developed
an MA program in international relations. Then a group of professors
with experiences in cultural analysis and propaganda influences like
Professor Kluckhom and Professor Allport, promoted the establishment of
the Department of Social Relations, concerned with the relations of
peoples of different cultures. Kluckhom Anthropological Studies were
75
animated by the national frustration in negotiating with the Soviet
Union.
The Harvard Center for Latin American studies was funded by the
Rockefeller Foundation and has sponsored several studies among which
Lipset's have been very influential in fostering guidelines for the
development of Latin American countries.
2. Columbia University: President Nicholas Murray Butler
introduced Columbia University into "the international mind." Thus,
after World War I Columbia initiated study programs in international
law and comparative education. Then, the School of International
Affairs was established in 1945; The Russian Institute began with a
grant from the Rockefeller Foundation in 1946; the European Institute
was established in 1949 under the aid of the Carnegie Corporation; in
1952, the Near and Middle East Institute was created; and this was
followed in 1962 by a Latin American Institute. Programs for African
studies and East Central Europe have also been set up. The first
function of these regional institutes is that of training personnel for
management and administration of international activities. The overall
organization of Columbia University's international programs was
established under the pressure of the Ford Foundation which in 1960
decided to make grants to universities that had determined priorities
for international education.
3. Michigan State University: Michigan State's experiences in
land grant programs in agriculture and community development drew
federal grants for agricultural programs in underdeveloped countries.
Besides, academic studies of international affairs were established.
76
The Carnegie Foundation funded a program for the analysis of the role
of the university in international programs; this program led to the
elaboration of a proposal for the study of "The International
Dimensions of Michigan State University." The Ford Foundation granted
financial aid for the study. The study recommends the avoidance of
twin dangers: excess isolation of international programs carried on by
individual scholars, and over-diffusiveness in relation to goals and
Coordination of programs. The final report calls for the establishment
of a center for international studies which coordinates the inter
national programs of Michigan State University. A campus-wide
committee, including representatives from the various colleges and
other academic units of the university has been established as advisory
to the Dean of International Programs. This committee serves as a
policy-making and coordinating agency. Under this structure Michigan
State University created programs of area studies, with centers in
Africa, Asia, and Latin America.
4. Chicago University: The Harris Foundation, designed to
explore questions on international relations, was established at
Chicago University. Public lectures, roundtable discussions and annual
conferences about international issues have been organized by the
committee in charge of the Foundation since 1926. The committee later
established a doctoral program for international relations. In 1950, a
Center for Comparative Studies in Education was organized, and also
programs about Far Eastern civilization. Then, a program about South
Asian culture was established in 1956. Slavic studies, Near Eastern
studies and African studies were organized later.
77
5. Stanford University: The University was a pioneer in Asian
studies; Far Eastern history was taught in 1936 which later was
incorporated into a program of international studies created in 1953.
The international concern of Stanford University was influenced by the
establishment there of the Hoover Institution of War, Revolution and
Peace, initiated by Mr. Hoover while he was serving as a Chairman of
the Commission for Relief in Belgium during World War I. By 1962,
Stanford had become a major center for the reception of foreign
students who developed as a phase of their extracurricular program, a
student Institute of International Relations.
A program for training management personnel which reached 17
countries was developed: This program is now conducting summer
programs in Iran, Ceylon, New Zealand, and Ethiopia. Engineering
programs are conducted in Australia, Switzerland, Argentina, and
Holland. During the 1950s, Stanford created off-campus centers in
France, Germany, Italy, Tokyo, and Taiwan. These activities developed
out of individual, small group, and departmental interests.
6. University of Southern California: Among the early
programs of foreign area studies in American universities, were those
at USC. The university began its involvement in international
education through an academic program for international relations.
This program received the impulse and support of President Rufus Von
Kleinsmid to the point that a library for world affairs was created
under his leadership. Later on, the Von Kleinsmid Center for Inter
national Affairs was created. Along with this center, USC established
programs of East Asian studies and Latin American studies.
78
The involvement of American universities in international
programs grew steadily during the 1960s. An inventory of international
programs of American universities conducted by the East-West Center of
the University of Hawaii in 1966 demonstrates that 395 American
Universities were involved in 1,314 international programs. These data
represent an increase of 115.2 percent of the number of American
universities participating in international programs between 1957 and
1965 (Hawaii University, 1966).
The Focus of the Universities'
International Programs
A study conducted by S. Deutsch (1970) concludes that American
colleges and universities have focused their interests on world affairs
along the following three lines:
1. Curricular innovations in order to prepare American
students for international understanding and for participating as
responsible citizens in debates about foreign policy.
2. Special programs for foreign students in order to train
them for leadership and technical positions in their own countries.
This program has steadily grown and the flow of foreign students to
American colleges and universities has increased as Deutsch reports in
the following lines:
In 1930, there were 9,643 foreign students in this
country. By 1953, the number had grown to 33,647, and by
1964-65 school year to 82,045. These figures represent an
increase of about 750% from 1930 to 1964. During the same
35 year period the total enrollment of colleges and
universities in the United States grew from 1,100,737 in
1920-30, to about 4,800,000 in 1964-65, an increase of 350%.
Thus, the increase of foreign student enrollment in the
United States has occurred at more than twice the rate of
79
total enrollment rise in American higher education. During
1964-65, the 82,045 foreign students in this country came
from 159 nations and territories to attend 1,858 different
institutions here .. . on the other hand, in 1964 American
institutions offered 150 undergraduate study-abroad programs;
by 1966, the number had doubled. (Deutsch, 1970, p. 49)
Most of the programs offered to foreign students were in
technical fields, education and public administration. It seems that
American universities are training the technical manpower and the
political leadership of underdeveloped countries.
3. Special assistance to foreign governments and institutions.
Regarding the question of how policies about international
involvement are made in American universities, Deutsch found:
1. In general, the administrators interviewed indicated that
their institutions did not have policies concerning international
aspects of education and exchange.
2. American students were interested in and supported inter
national education exchange and the majority aspired to travel abroad.
3. Professors were enthusiastic about international education
and strongly supported educational exchanges and university programs
overseas. They were not very involved in the institutional decision
making process concerning international programs, but believed that
they should have more participation in such processes.
4. The participation of the broader community in international
education is restricted to participation in discussions about the world
problems, operation of international students centers and cultural
programs, and hosting foreign students and visitors (Deutsch, 1970).
80
The Rationale for the Universities'
Involvement in International Affairs
Most university scholars and officials justify the participa
tion of the universities in international affairs by the following
three premises:
1. Intellectual communication with other nations brings about
international understanding and promotes democratic practices.
2. Educational assistance to less developed countries should be
geared toward manpower development as a prerequisite for
economic modernization': "countries are underdeveloped because
most of their people are underdeveloped" (Harbison & Meyer,
1964).
3. The greatest contribution that the developed world can make to
the less developed countries is to pass along its knowledge and
experience.
The following statements from selected American scholars
demonstrate the foregoing assumptions:
Howard E. Wilson, Dean of the School of Education at UCLA
stated:
>
The University has a stake in international affairs,
too, because world crisis affect the character of universities
themselves. The values of intellectual independence, of
freedom of inquiry, of untrammeled search for truth are at
stake in the conflict between democracy and the police state.
In totalitarian regimes there is no room for the free
university as we know it. To oppose totalitarianism is to
defend the essential birthright of the university. . . .
Freedom of inquiry and freedom of communication are essential
both for the advancement of knowledge and for the dissemination
of learning. Iron curtains which violate this freedom are a
threat to intellectual life and to the arts and sciences
in that they cut off areas of the world from the rich
stimulation of exchange. (Wilson, 1951, p. 5) R- ,
Walter Adams and John A. Garranty from Michigan State Univer
sity consider that:
□ur technical assistance programs can do the most good
by concentrating on building "human" rather than "physical"
capital. Without detracting from the importance of dams
and factories, the emphasis should be on improvement in
health, education and welfare; the development of new
knowledge, skills and aptitude; and the building of institu
tions like universities, research institutes, agricultural
experiment stations and extension services which will
accumulate and disseminate the needed knowledge. (Adams
& Garraty, 1960, p. 158)
In a symposium about National Development and the University,
programmed by CHEAR in 1963, Clark Kerr, President of the University of
California pointed out how the American higher education system was the
reason for the United States achievement in productivity. He
recommended that Latin American countries should concentrate on the
technical field in higher education and on the vocational at the
secondary level of education. He also pointed out the importance of
education for modifying consumption:
People change their desire for different products, they
want to get away from mass produced items, they want to have
more variety, and this means changes in jobs. As you get a
highly educatedn population, I think that jobs will also
have to be made more interesting. (CHEAR, 1964, p. 2)
Charles Frankel, Professor of Philosophy at Columbia University,
comments on the importance of education in world affairs:
It is a matter of urgent national safety that we know
more about the rest of the world. It is a matter of urgent
national safety to us if we wish to survive and maintain
our kind of civilization in peace and without the awful cost
of violence. If, heaven forbid, violence does come, then it
is a matter of national safety that we understand our enemy
and dream either pleasant or unpleasant thoughts about him.
I don't think it is nearly so important that nations like
one another, but that they understand one another truly and
accurately. Even if you approach it from a defense point
82
of view, we underestimate the importance of international
education. (Michie, 1967, p. 42)
Walter S. Laves, Professor at Indiana University, in discussing
the University leadership in transnational education, says that:
It is basic that American institutions of higher education
see themselves as integral part of the world's educational
and scholarly resources. The efforts we make to strengthen
these resources and to interrelate them need to be viewed
as part of a. worldwide effort undertaken not unilaterally,
but rather in association with other nations and their
educational institutions . . . American institutions must
increase their capabilities for giving continuing assistance
to developing nations by lending faculty for overseas
assignments and by providing specialized training in this
country to help develop faculties and other personnel of
foreign institutions. (Humphrey, 1967, p. 94)
The concept of education as a means to achieve the World Peace
is developed by Kenneth Melvin, Professor at Boston University. He
foresees a "Pax Pedagogica" brought about by the conscientious labor of
American institutions of education in developing countries. He feels
that schools can do what so far the military force has not been able to
do: to keep the nations of the world in peace (Melvin, 1970).
In conclusion, American scholars view their universities as
institutions whose missions include the diffusion of knowledge,
technology, and values to the rest of the world. However, American
universities do not have clear guidelines and policies for partici
pating in international programs. Their involvement in these programs
is largely based on the availability of grants from AID or private
foundations.
83
Summary of the Chapter
This chapter reviews the literature related to the role of
American foreign policies in world affairs, the United States and Latin
America relations, the ideologies of development, and the role of
American universities in world affairs. It was found that because of
its economic and military strength, the United States was acknowledged
as a world power after World War I. Since then, American foreign
policies, guided by economic and security interests, have been very
influential in the international system. It was also found that Latin
American countries have progressively developed under the influence of
the United States which has set up special programs of assistance for
these nations. Those assistance programs have been considered by the
State Department an investment in the United States' security, world
stability, and economic progress.
The President of the United States and the Congress were viewed
in the literature as having the highest responsibility in the design of
foreign policies. Therefore Congressional Acts on Foreign Assistance,
and Presidential Messages on Foreign Aid have been selected for
analysis. This material is presented in Chapter IV.
According to the literature, American universities consider
their mission to diffuse knowledge, technology and values to the rest
of the world. They have joined their government in the task of
providing assistance to foreign countries.
The literature also reveals the existence of two paradigms of
development, developmentalist and dependency, which are very sensitive
84
to ideological manipulations and prescribe different policies to
i
promote development. The basic postulates of each paradigm are used
in the design of the research instrument presented in Chapter III.
Thus, findings for this exploration in the literature support the
decisions made in the following chapter about the methodology of this
study.
85
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
The method of research utilized in this study was descriptive.
The focus of the study was on (1) the ideological content of the United
States foreign assistance policies to Latin America from 1960 to 1976,
and (2) the ideological content of UCLA technical assistance programs
for Latin America during the same period. The ideology of those
policies and programs were compared using the paradigms of develop-
mentalism and of dependency as frames of reference.
The basic research technique was qualitative content analysis
of documents. This technique was defined by George (1959) as a
procedure for making observations about content-descriptive character
istics or coding judgments. It is a flexible procedure which, contrary
to quantitative content analysis, may not specify the actual words or
word clusters which are to be regarded as individual occurrences of the
type of content with which one is concerned. Rather, the basic themes
of each ideology were inferred from the reading of each document. The
occurrence of a given theme was considered relevant criterion for
classification. Alexander states that the significance of explicit
propositions is not necessarily dependent upon how often they are
repeated by the speaker; rather it rests on the fact that such proposi
tions do or do not occur at all.
86
In order to facilitate the content analysis of documents, a
checklist containing the basic themes of the two contending ideologies
was designed. This instrument drew from the documents the data needed
for this study.
The research was carried out in the following steps: (1)
selection of the primary sources of data, (2) design of the instrument
of research, (3) pretest of the research instrument, (4) analysis of
the documents selected as primary sources of data according to the
items of the instrument, and (3) drawing of conclusions and presenta
tion of recommendations.
Selection of Primary Sources of Data
Based on the recognized facts that (1) by law, custom, and
tradition, the" President of the United States is the central figure in
the conduct of foreign policy (Stupak, 1976), and (2) the Constitution
of the United States gives the Congress power to establish policies on
foreign relations through the passage of acts, bills, and resolutions
(Wanamaker, 1969), the following documents were selected as primary
sources of data about the official United States ideology pertaining to
foreign assistance policies:
1. The annual Presidential messages to the Congress on Foreign Aid
corresponding to 1962, 1964, 1966, 1968, 1970, and 1973.
2. The United States Foreign Assistance Acts of 1961, 1963, 1965,
1967, 1969, 1971, and 1974.
3. President Kennedy's Address to Latin American Diplomats and
Members of Congress of March 13, 1961 pertaining to the
Alliance for Progress. 87
The foregoing sample of documents was designed to alternate
chronologically Congressional Acts and Presidential messages to the
Congress. In this manner, the official views of each President are
included, at least twice, in the analysis, and the chronological
sequence facilitates the understanding of the historical process.
In order to identify UCLA’s technical assistance programs in
Latin America, the available reports of the Presidents of the Univer
sity to the Board of Trustees since 1960 were read. In addition, the
following UCLA's officials were interviewed; the Vice Chancellor, two
faculty members of the Latin American Center, two members of the Office
of the Coordinator of Overseas Programs, the coordinator of the Office
for Education Abroad Program, and several faculty members of the
University. In this manner the following technical assistance programs
were identified: Brazil, Mexico, and Chile programs; and the Peace
Corps Training Programs for Peru, Bolivia, and Ecuador.
The following documents made available by University officials
were used for analysis:
1. "The Brazil Project. Feasibility Studies," 1962.
2. "Report on the Exchange Program between the Instituto
Politechnico Nacional de Mejico and the University of
California, Los Angeles," 1968.
3. "Reports of the Activities of the Convenio between the Univer
sity of Chile and the University of California," corresponding
to the following years: 1967, 1969-1970, 1971-1972, 1973-1974,
1974-1973 and 1973-1976.
88
4. Reports of UCLA Peace Corps Training Programs for: (a) Peru,
1963, (b) Peru and Bolivia, 1963, and (c) Ecuador, 1964.
Research Instrument
The basic postulates of the two paradigms, developmentalism and
dependency, as found in the review of literature, were enumerated in a
checklist of ten items. Each item has five mutually exclusive
categories. Category (a) corresponds to propositions held by develop
mentalism, and category (b) to propositions held by dependency.
Category (c) indicates that the document in analysis contains elements
of both paradigms; category (d) indicates that the document being
analyzed does not address itself to the items under consideration; and
category (e) is open for writing about other alternatives.
The following are the items and categories of the checklist.
1. Social change is basically conceived as:
a. An orderly and stable process
b. A radical disruption of the existing socioeconomic order
c. Both
d. Not applicable
e. Other: _________________________________________________
2. Development is a process:
a. Which unfolds through predetermined stages of continuous
linear progress from traditionalism to modernity
b. Which requires a profound anticapitalist-socialist-
transformation of the existing socioeconomic order as a
pre-condition for a lasting autonomy
c . Both
d . Not applicable
e . Other:
3. The emphasis of development programs is on:
a. Economic growth measured in annual increases of per
capita national income or product and modernity
b. Economic sovereignty and a level of productivity and a
pattern of distribution which adequately provide for
the basic needs of the entire population
c. Both
d. Not applicable
e . Other:
4. Economic production:
a . Is regulated by the demands of the market
b. Is planned according to social needs
c . Both
d . Not applicable
e . Other:
3. Private enterprise is:
a . Encouraged
b. Discouraged
c . Both
d . Not applicable
e. Other:
90
6. Foreign investment of industrial nations in underdeveloped
countries
a. Has a positive contribution to development
b. Generates dependency and hinders development
c. Both
d. Not applicable
e. Other:
7. The transference of institutions, values, and technology from
more advanced societies to underdeveloped countries is:
a. Encouraged
b. Discouraged
c. Both
d. Not applicable
e. Other:
8. Development programs emphasize technologies which require:
a. Intensive capital
b. Intensive labor
c. Both
d. Not applicable
e. Other:
9. In terms of development, universal education is:
a. A necessary requirement for economic growth
b. A force for human growth understood as the awakening
social consciousness of one's position in society and
the means for transforming it
c. Both
d. Not applicable
e. Other: ________________________________ ________________
10. The emphasis of educational programs is on:
a. Specialized technical and vocational education
b. General education integrating practical and theoretical
experiences
c. Both
d. Not applicable
e. Other:
Pretest of the Instrument
In order to test the reliability of the checklist, four
procedures were used:
1. Two graduate students from the University of Southern
California, who were considered to have different ideologies, were
selected to code the same document individually, using the checklist;
their responses were compared item by item, and as a result all items,
except one had the same responses. The item for which there was
disagreement was rephrased and tested again with positive results.
2. A document randomly selected was coded by the same coder at
two different times; the responses were identical, and thus the
92
instrument was considered to be reliable.
3. Since the investigator was in charge of the coding of all
the documents, her responses to a selected document were compared with
the responses of the two selected graduate students from USC. The
responses of the three coders were identical, thus further indicating
reliability.
4. Six persons from different backgrounds coded documents
already coded by the researcher. The responses were identical.
Since the statements of the checklist were phrased according to
the way the basic postulates of both paradigms were phrased in the
literature reviewed, the instrument was considered to be valid.
Analysis of the Data
The analysis involved three steps: (1) pre-reading of a
document, (2) content analysis of the document using the checklist, and
(3) tabulation of items and categories on summary data sheets.
Each document was read first entirely for the purpose of
becoming familiar with the content without interruption. This process
facilitated the accuracy of determination of the appropriateness of any
single classification.
Following the first reading, a second reading was made using
the checklist for classification of the content into items and
categories. Each document was taken as a unit for content analysis as
was suggested by de Sola Pool (1939). Therefore, each document had its
corresponding checklist.
93
All items and categories used in this study were placed on two
summary data sheets corresponding to (1) the ideological content of all
the documents concerning the United States foreign assistance policies,
and (2) the ideological content of all the documents pertaining to UCLA
technical assistance programs.
The data from each of the two summary data sheets were analyzed
individually and then compared to establish congruences and
discrepancies between policies and programs.
94
CHAPTER IV
THE IDEOLOGY OF AMERICAN FOREIGN ASSISTANCE POLICIES
To promote the security and welfare of the United States by
assisting foreign countries in their efforts toward development, the
Congress of the United States passed the Foreign Assistance Act of
1961— Public Law 87-195. This Act has been amended by the Foreign
Assistance Acts of the subsequent years.
The Foreign Assistance Acts of 1961, 1963, 1965, 1967, 1969,
1971, and 1974 were selected for this study, as well as the Annual
Presidential Messages to the Congress on Foreign Aid corresponding to
the years 1962, 1974, 1966, 1968, 1970, and 1973. President Kennedy's
Address of March 13, 1961 to Latin American Diplomats and Members of
the Congress is also included in this study because it is concerned
with the creation of the "Alliance for Progress" for the American
Republics.
The following is a description of these documents followed by
the report and discussion of findings.
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961
Part I of this Act is cited as the "Act for International
Development of 1961." Part II is the "International Peace and Security
Act of 1961." Part III includes general administrative provisions, and
Part IV amends the "Defense Base Act of 1951."
95
Chapter I of Part I states the following as a policy of the
United States:
1. To provide assistance to less developed friendly countries to
develop their resources and improve their living standards, and
.. . to help make an historical demonstration that economic
growth and political democracy can go hand in hand to the
end that an enlarged community of free, stable and self-
reliant countries can reduce world tension and insecurity.
(Section 102)
2. To encourage the development of free economic institutions and
the flow of private investment capital in friendly foreign
countries.
3. To support increased economic cooperation and trade among
countries and to help strengthen regional organizations of free
peoples for mutual assistance.
4. To encourage freedom of the press, information, and religion in
all countries.
3. To continue to make available to other free peoples assistance
to help maintain their freedom. Communism is recognized as a
threat to the security of the United States and the free world.
This Act authorized the President to establish the "Development
Loan Fund" to assist long-range development plans, and a Development
Loan Committee in charge of establishing the standards and criteria for
the lending operations of the Fund. The Act specified that loans
should be made to governments which show responsiveness to the concerns
of their people and demonstrate determination to take effective self-
help measures. It is also stated that loans for areas of production
with possible adverse effects upon the United States economy would be
restricted. 96
For the purposes of the Development Loan Fund, this Act
authorized the President to appropriate $1,200,000,000 for the fiscal
year 1962 and $1,500,000,000 for each of the next four succeeding
fiscal years. In order to promote the development of human resources
through technical assistance programs, this Act authorized the
President to appropriate no more than $380,000,000 for the fiscal year
1962. This amount was to remain available until expended.
This Act authorized the President to use funds for technical
assistance programs to sponsor schools and libraries abroad which would
"serve as study and demonstration centers for ideas and practices of
the United States" (Section 214).
In order to promote the improvement of agricultural methods and
the development of local programs of self-help and mutual cooperation,
this Act made available funds for loans which did not exceed $23,000 at
any one time.
To facilitate and increase the participation of private enter
prise in furthering the development of economic resources abroad, this
Act empowered the President to issue guaranties to American citizens or
corporations which had investments in less developed friendly countries.
These guaranties were extended to investments committed to pilot
housing projects in Latin America which facilitated private home
ownership in those countries.
The President was authorized by this Act to participate in the
financing of surveys of investment opportunities in less developed
friendly countries; to use funds to carry out programs of research into,
and evaluation of, the process of economic development, to make
voluntary contributions to international organizations concerned_____97
with promoting development; to furnish supporting assistance to
friendly countries, organizations and bodies engaged in the promotion
of economic or political stability; to establish a Contingency Fund of
not more than $300,000,000 for the fiscal year of 1962 for matters of
importance to the national interest; and to assist agrarian economies
of friendly countries in the establishment of indigenous cottage
industries and in the improvement of agricultural methods and
techniques.
Part II of this Act, the "International Peace and Security Act
of 1961" reaffirmed the policy of the United States to achieve inter
national peace and security through the United Nations and to exert
maximum efforts to achieve universal control of weapons and reduction
of armaments. The Congress recognized the threat of international
Communism and decided to help improve the ability of friendly countries
and international organizations to deter or if necessary defeat
Communism or Communist-supported aggression.
This Act authorized the President to appropriate for use
beginning in the fiscal year of 1962 and 1963 not more than
$1,700,000,000 for each such fiscal years, which sums were to remain
available until expended. Military assistance to any country was
furnished for internal security, for legitimate self-defense, and to
permit the recipient country to participate in regional or collective
arrangements necessary for the maintenance or restoration of inter
national peace and security. The President was authorized to furnish
defense articles from the stocks of the Department of Defense and
defense services to friendly countries and international organizations,
98
but payments were to be made in advance or within a period not to
exceed three years after the delivery of the articles and/or services.
Military aid to Latin America was restricted to a ceiling of
$57,500,000 for fiscal year of 1962.
This Act encouraged free enterprise and the participation of
private business, especially American small businesses, in the
furnishing of commodities, defense articles and services financed with
funds made available under this Act. It is stated in the Act:
Accordingly, it is declared to be the policy of the United
States to encourage the efforts of other countries to increase
the flow of international trade to foster private initiative
and competition, to encourage the development and use of
cooperatives, credit unions, and savings and loan associations,
to discourage monopolistic practices, to improve the technical
efficiency of the industry, agriculture, and commerce, and
to strengthen free labor unions. (Section 601)
The President was authorized to furnish assistance to Latin
American countries in accordance with the principles of the Act of
Bogota (1960) and to foster measures of agrarian reform to ensure a
more equitable distribution of land. Cuba and other countries
dominated or controlled by international Communism were considered not
eligible for United States assistance.
This Act stated that transportation of articles with funds made
available under this Act should be on United States flag vessels.
Besides, and insofar as practicable, agricultural commodities should be
purchased within the United States except when such commodities were
not available in the United States in rsufficient quantities to supply
emergency requirements of recipient countries under this Act. Patents
issued by the United States government were also protected under this
Act (U.S. Statutes at Large, 1961).
99
President Kennedy's Address at the White House
Reception for Latin American Diplomats and
Members of Congress, March 13, 1961
In this address, President Kennedy introduced the idea of the
Alliance for Progress as a large cooperative effort to satisfy the
basic needs of the American people for homes, work, land, health, and
schools.
President Kennedy elaborated on the following ten points of his
conception of the Alliance:
First, he proposed the American Republics to begin a ten-year
plan aimed at increasing the living standards of every American family,
by making basic education available to all, terminating hunger, and
creating a self-sustaining growth, whose fruits could be shared by all
classes of people. In this effort outside assistance would vitalize the
impetus for progress; however, Latin American countries were to do their
part and then the United States was to help provide resources to make
this plan a success.
Second, he invited Latin American countries to participate in a
ministerial meeting of the Inter-American Economic and Social Council,
at which the basic plan for the Alliance were to be drawn. He also
invited each Latin American nation to formulate its long-range plans
which established targets and priorities and set up the machinery for a
social change which stimulated private activity and initiative and laid
the foundations for economic and political stability.
Third, he reported a request for $500 million as a first step
for the large-scale effort to attack illiteracy, to improve
100
productivity and the use of land, to wipe out disease, to reform land-
tenure and tax structures, and to provide educational opportunities.
Fourth, he supported the economic integration of Central
America and free trade areas in South America , as "a genuine step towarc
larger markets and greater competitive opportunity."
Fifth, he promised to examine, case by case the commodity
market problems whose price changes injured the economies of many Latin
American countries.
Sixth, he promised to step up the United States Food-for-Peace
emergency program to help provide school lunches for children and
offer assistance in rural development.
Seventh, he invited Latin American scientists to work with
Americans in new projects in medicine, agriculture, etc., and to
strengthen cooperation between American universities and regional
research laboratories established in this hemisphere. He also announced
the expansion of the United States science-teacher training programs to
include Latin American instructors, and promised to make available
revolutionary teaching materials.
Eighth, in order to expand technical training programs
assistance to Latin American universities, graduate schools and
research institutes were to be provided. Besides the Peace Corps,
other services were also to be available.
Ninth,, the United States reaffirmed its commitment to the
defense of the continent through the collective security system of the
OAS. However, limitation of arms was needed.
101
Tenth, he invited Latin Americans "to contribute to the
enrichment of life and culture in the United States."
President Kennedy reaffirmed his belief that political freedom
must accompany the material progress sponsored by the Alliance and
expressed the United States’ friendship to the peoples of Cuba and the
Dominican Republic in the hope that "they will soon rejoin the society
of free men, uniting with us in our common effort" (Department of
State, 1965).
President Kennedy's 1962 Special Message to the
Congress on Foreign Aid
In this message President Kennedy reported that due to the new
United States foreign assistance policy for the "Decade of Development"
there had been significant changes in several countries. Recipient
countries such as India, Nigeria, Pakistan and Tanganika were improving
their planning mechanisms and developing long-range plans.
He stated that the new aid policy aimed at both strengthening
their political and economic independence of developing countries and
repelling Communism. Thus, foreign aid included economic as well as
military assistance programs. To carry out these programs, President
Kennedy informed that the United States was relying more heavily than
before on loans repayable in dollars. He indicated that other inter
national and private institutions had joined the United States in this
effort and he urged other industrialized countries to invest capital
in developing countries.
102
President Kennedy reported to the Congress that the government
continued to emphasize procurement within the United States for most
goods required by the foreign assistance programs.
The President contended in his message that the newly created
Alliance for Progress aimed at achieving "a peaceful revolution on a
Hemispheric scale." Then, he proposed an authorization of $3 billion
for the Alliance for Progress for the following four years. He
acknowledged Latin Americans' commitment to the goals and principles of
the Alliance and informed:
It is heartening, therefore, that the changes called for
by the Alliance for Progress have been the central issue in
several Latin American elections, demonstrating that its
effects will be deep and real. (Public Papers, 1963, p. 216)
He further reported that a number of Latin American countries
were engaged in land and tax reforms, educational improvement, rural
development, and in other activities required to give a sound basis for
economic growth.
The message ended with President Kennedy's statement of pride
because the United States was accomplishing its task, and "the turn
around has indeed begun."
The Foreign Assistance Act of 1963
This Act amended the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 in the
following aspects:
1. It declared that any distinction made by foreign nations
between American citizens because of race, color, or religion was
repugnant to American principles.
103
2. It stated that great attention and consideration was to be
given to those countries which shared the view of the United States on
world affairs.
3. It facilitated loans for small farms and business, the
purchase of homes, and for practical and vocational education.
However, no funds were to be made available for construction or
operation of any productive enterprise which would compete with
American enterprise unless the recipient country agreed to prevent the
exportation for consumption in the United States.
4. It urged other industrialized free world countries to
participate in foreign assistance programs.
5. It made funds available to conduct research in the problems
of population growth.
6. It included an additional title dealing with the Alliance
for Progress which promoted agrarian reforms, cooperatives, and private
enterprise in the American Republics. It was prescribed that not less
than 30 percent of the loan funds were to be made to encourage economic
development through private enterprise.
7. Military aid to African countries was restricted except for
internal security requirements.
8. It created an Advisory Committee on Private Enterprise in
Foreign Aid to encourage the growth of private business.
9. It restricted the use of funds available from this Act to
purchasing goods in the United States or at prices not higher than the
United States' prices.
104
10. It restricted assistance to communist countries, unless
such assistance was vital to the security of the United States.
Besides, assistance may be suspended if ownership or control of property
owned by any American citizen or corporation was nationalized or
expropriated (Department of State, 1963).
President Johnson's 1964 Special Message to the
Congress Transmitting Report on Foreign
Assistance Programs
In this message, President Johnson informed the Congress that
United States aid had become more selective in fiscal 1963. Thus, 80
percent of 1963 economic assistance funds were for only twenty
countries and 60 percent of all military assistance went to nine key
countries. He also pointed out that interest-bearing loans had
replaced grants as the main mechanism for assistance.
As a result of the provisions of the Foreign Assistance Act of
1961, President Johnson considered that American businesses had
increased their operations. Thus, United States businesses and
industry exported $833 million in AID-financed goods to developing
countries in 1963, and American shipping firms were paid about $80
million to carry AID-financed commodities to the less developed
countries. Besides, United States producers supplied 78 percent of all
AID-financed goods, and United States ships carried more than 80 percent
of the total AID-financed cargo.
The President underlined the fact that United States foreign
assistance program had encouraged the participation of private enter
prise and organizations. He informed that in 1963 more than 70 United
103
States' colleges and universities worked in 40 countries under AID
contracts, and that one-fourth of all technical assistance was carried
out by American institutions of higher education (Public Papers, 1965).
The Foreign Assistance Act of 1965
This act further amended the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.
It prescribed termination of aid to countries which: (a) permitted or
failed to prevent the damage or destruction by mob action of United
States property, (b) had failed to take appropriate steps to prevent
their ships or aircrafts from transporting goods to and from North
Vietnam.
This Act encouraged the development of cooperatives, free labor
unions, and savings and loans institutions in Latin America as part of
the Alliance for Progress. It also included provisions for special
assistance to the regional development of Africa and Southeast Asia
(Department of State, 1968).
President Johnson's 1966 Message to the Congress
on the Foreign Aid Program
In this message, President Johnson emphasized the supplemental
character of American aid to developing countries, and thus asserted
that "they must supply most of the capital, the know-how, and the will
to progress."
The President identified hunger, disease, population growth,
and education as the dominant problems of developing countries which
challenged American security. Then he recommended the following
106
measures which would accelerate their way to modernization: improve
farming techniques, land reforms, tax changes, construction of schools
and hospitals, development of critical industries, population planning,
and attraction of foreign investment. He recommended to the Congress
new legislation to redirect and strengthen the food-aid program,
educational projects, and public health companies abroad.
President Johnson considered that assistance in the field of
agriculture to developing countries should be increased to $500 million,
of which one third would finance imports of fertilizers from the United
States and the rest was to be spent on purchases of American farm
equipment and transfer of American farming techniques. He also
expressed the idea that increases of funds for aid were beneficial for
American businesses since "AID procurement policies have been tightened
to the point that, with minor and essential exceptions all funds
appropriated to AID must be spent in the United States for American
goods and services" (Public Papers, 1966, p. 123).
The President reported on the assistance program to Vietnam and
requested more funds for that program in order to help create a stable
economy in that country. His request was extensive to include programs
which favored political stability in Laos, Korea, and Thailand. He
also reported the success of the Alliance for Progress in Chile,
Brazil, Colombia, and Central America. In this last region, the Common
Market increased trade by 123 percent.
President Johnson recommended continuing collaboration with
international organizations engaged in promoting development, and
involvement of private initiative and enterprise in developing
107
countries. As for the military program, the President recommended a
shift from military aid programs to military sale without jeopardizing
American security interests. He made clear that military assistance
for Vietnam came directly from the Department of Defense.
The Foreign Assistance Act of 1967
This Act further amended the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and
emphasized the importance of this legislation for the security of the
United States. It stated that:
The Congress recognizes the threat to world peace posed
by aggression and subversion wherever they occur, and that
ignorance, want and dispair breed the extremism and violence
which lead to aggression and subversion. (Section 102)
It encouraged education by facilitating loans to improve
educational planning and research, train teachers and administrators,
develop educational institutions, and use modern technology. Loans
were also available for programs to combat malnutrition, eradicate
disease, clear slums, assist industrial development, increase food
production and use fish and other protein concentrates. Special
attention was given to research and development of voluntary family
planning programs.
This Act prescribed the use of democratic institutions in
development programs and suggested the use of indigenous institutions
in order to achieve more efficiently the stipulated goals. It also
suggested encouragement of civic education to facilitate the political
process and encouraged research to examine the political and social
obstacles to development.
108
Regional organizations of countries were encouraged and special
concern was given to the development of Southeast Asia. The President
was authorized to explore in the United Nations the possibility of
establishing a peacekeeping force (U.S. Statutes at Large, 1968).
President Johnson's 1968 Special Message to the
Congress on the Foreign Assistance Programs:
"To Build the Peace1 '
In this message, President Johnson proposed several programs
which he considered essential to the security of both developing
nations and the United States. These programs were based on the
concept of self-help, multilateral international efforts, regionalism,
priority of agriculture production and population planning, positive
balance of payments for the United States, efficient administration,
and partnership with private enterprise.
The President reported that the American Presidents met to
reaffirm their partnership in the Alliance for Progress. He presented
the following indicators of the success of the Alliance: (1) Latin
American countries had invested more than $115 billion compared with
$7.7 billion of United States aid, (2) the gross National Product of
Latin American countries had risen by 30 percent, (3) they have
welcomed modern technology for their industries, (4) the market in
Central America had grown by 450 percent in the six years of the
Alliance, and (5) the ordinary capital of the Inter-American Development
Bank had been bought by private enterprise and so not one dollar of the
guarantee fund facilitated by the United States had been spent. Then,
105
President Johnson requested the Congress to continue assisting Latin
America.
President Johnson also reported on the assistance programs in
India, Pakistan, Turkey, Laos, Thailand, Korea, Indonesia and Africa
and proposed the continuance of this program to solve problems of
hunger, expansion of market, industrial growth and political stability.
A special aid request was made to help the economy and to improve the
conditions of refugees in Vietnam. The President also made a special
request for assistance to Korea which was being threatened from the
North.
The President proudly informed the Congress that "our AID
programs have a favorable long-range impact on our balance of payments
by building new markets for our exports" (Public Papers, 1970, p. 63).
He regretted that during the preceding year "my foreign aid request,
already the smallest in history, was reduced by almost one-third"
(Public Papers, 1970, p. 63). Then he urged the Congress to use
foreign aid generously as the answer to the dilemma of peaceful or
violent change abroad.
The Foreign Assistance Act of 1969
This Act authorized the President to participate in the
development of large scale water treatment and desalting prototype
plants, and to use funds to carry out programs of communication which
used television and related technologies including satellite trans
missions for educational, health and community development purposes in
the less developed countries. It also promoted the participation of
110
private enterprise in the development of housing projects in all
countries and facilitated funds for housing projects similar to those
insured by the Department of Housing and Urban Development in Latin
America.
This Act created the Overseas Private Investment Corporation
and authorized the President to pay as capital of the Corporation no
more than $20,000,000 for the fiscal year 1970 from dollar receipts
from loans made under the Mutual Security Act of 1954. This Corpora
tion was authorized to issue investment insurances for private enter
prises with business abroad, to make loans to American investors
abroad, to survey investment opportunities in foreign countries, and to
promote enterprise participation in assistance programs for less
developed countries.
This Act established pilot programs in no more than five Latin
American countries to encourage private banks, credit institutions,
lending institutions, and private non-profit development organizations.
Besides, it created the Inter-American Social Development Institute
whose purposes were to strengthen the bonds of friendship and under
standing among the people of the Western Hemisphere and to encourage
the growth of democratic private and governmental institutions. Its
purposes were to be carried out through and with private organizations,
individuals, and international organizations. The management of the
institute was vested in a Board of Directors of seven members appointed
by the President; four members of the Board were to be from private
enterprises and three from among officers or employees of Agencies of
the United States concerned with inter-American affairs (U.S. Statutes
at Large, 1970). Ill
President Nixon's 1970 Special Message to the Congress
Proposing Reform of the Foreign Assistance Program
In this message, President Nixon proposed a major transforma
tion in the United States foreign assistance programs to meet the needs
of the 1970s. He proposed the following six reforms:
1. To create separate organizational arrangements for security,
humanitarian and development programs of assistance. Security
assistance programs should be designed according to what the President
called "The Nixon Doctrine," that is, the United States military
assistance to foreign countries should help them assume their own
defense responsibilities. Humanitarian assistance should be concerned
with providing help for relief from natural disasters, child care,
material welfare, and refugees and immigrants. Development assistance
should be aimed at building self-reliant productive societies in the
lower income countries. These three types of assistance programs
should function in harmony as parts of a whole and in accordance with
the three interrelated purposes of American foreign aid: promotion of
national security, provision of humanitarian relief, and furthering the
social and economic development of the lower income countries.
2. To create a new International Security Program based on the
Nixon Doctrine whose objective was "to help other countries assume the
responsibility of their own defense and thus help us reduce our
presence abroad" (Public Papers, 1971, p. 293).
3. To support an expanded role for multilateral assistance
programs such as the Inter-American Development Bank, the Asian
112
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Development Bank, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.
4. To reshape United States bilateral programs by creating
(a) a United States International Development Corporation in charge of
administering the United States lending program for the developing
countries on business-like basis, and (b) a United States International
Development Institute to bring the genius of United States science and
technology to solve the problems of development.
5. To open new sources of funds for the low income countries
such as utilizing the resources of the sea to promote economic
development.
6. To expand the contribution to development of trade and
private investment by eliminating those tying restrictions of aid,
establishing a system of tariff preferences for the exports of lower
income countries, promoting the Overseas Private Investment Corporation
and the Inter-American Social Development Institute.
President Nixon also proposed to place strong emphasis on the
problem of population growth in collaboration with international
organizations. Besides, he suggested that the United States should
work to deal effectively with the debt service problem of lower income
countries whose growth had been financed mainly through external
borrowings.
The President closed his message by stating that the reforms he
proposed would turn United States assistance programs into a more
successful investment for the 1970s.
113
The Foreign Assistance Act of 1971
This Act provided financial assistance for the re-opening of
the Suez Canal after agreement for the use of the Canal by ships of all
nations, including Israel. It also provided assistance for technical
and vocational training to the Arab refugees and made available
$250,000,000 for the relief and rehabilitation of refugees from East
Pakistan. Assistance to the government of Pakistan was suspended and
restriction of assistance to Greece was authorized unless it was
required for the national security of the United States.
The President was authorized power to furnish assistance to any
country or international organization for the control of the production,
processing and traffic of narcotics and psychotropic drugs. He was
also authorized authority to suspend assistance to governments which
had failed to take adequate steps to prevent the production, processing
and traffic of narcotics in their territory.
In order to promote economic and political stability, the
President was authorized to appropriate $618,000,000 of which not less
than $50,000,000 was to be available solely for Israel.
To encourage programs of population control further, this Act
authorized the President to appropriate $125,000,000 to carry out these
types of programs. The Food-for-Peace Program was also further
promoted.
This Act included special dispositions for assistance to
Cambodia, but limited the number of civilian officers and employees of
executive agencies of the United States present in Cambodia to two
hundred. 114
The Congress recognized in this Act, that the planning and
administration of development assistance by or under the sponsorship of
the United Nations, multilateral lending institutions, and other
multilateral organizations might be more efficient. Thus, the Congress
authorized the President to reduce the amounts and numbers of loans
made by the United States directly to individual foreign countries
(U.S. Statutes at Large, 1973).
President Nixon's 1973 Special Message to the Congress
Transmitting Proposed Legislation for Funding of
Foreign Assistance Programs in Fiscal Year 1974
President Nixon recognized in this message that assistance to
other nations was a key part of United States foreign policy. But he
clarified that foreign assistance was not an act of pure altruism and
that
. . . successful development by friendly nations is important
to us both economically and politically. Economically, many
of the developing countries have energy resources and raw
materials which the world will need to share in coming years.
They also could represent larger markets for our exports.
Politically, we cannot achieve some of our goals without
their support. Moreover, if essential needs of any people
go entirely unsatisfied, their frustrations only breed
violence and international instability. (Public Papers,
1973, p. 133)
The President presented the following objectives for the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1974:
1. To help low income countries achieve economic growth, rapid
improvement in health care, hunger and poverty.
2. To respond swiftly to victims of natural disasters.
115
3. To assist friendly governments in maintaining their
independence and security. President Nixon claimed that the United
States had had a number of successes in this regard such as in the
cases of South Vietnam and South Korea.
4. To help South Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia in their post-war
rehabilitation, after the signing of cease-fire agreements.
Finally, President Nixon urged the Congress to approve his
request for foreign aid which he considered the absolute minimum
prudent investment in international stability.
The Foreign Assistance Act of 1974
This Act amended the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 in the
following aspects:
1. It facilitated assistance for food production and nutrition
programs to countries with per capita income under $300 a year and
especially to the 32 countries identified by the United Nations as the
most seriously affected by the current economic crisis.
2. It further promoted population planning programs by
authorizing the President to appropriate $ 1 6 3 , for these
programs.
3. It encouraged the establishment of community development
programs in Latin America and prescribed the establishment of pilot
programs which used agricultural credit and self-help community
organization in not more than five countries.
4. It ordered the suspension of assistance to Turkey unless
this country took measures to solve the conflict with Cyprus. Funds to
116
the UNESCO were also suspended until that organization "has taken
concrete steps to correct its recent actions of a primarily political
character" (Section 302). Besides, assistance to any country engaged
in trade with North Vietnam was to be suspended.
3. It had special provisions for assistance in the reconstruc
tion of South Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, and it invited the Portuguese
colonies in Africa which were attempting to gain independence to use the
United States assistance program.
6. It established ceilings for military assistance available
to Chile, South Korea, and India.
7. It prohibited the use of funds under this act for training
of police of foreign countries, and for operations of the CIA in
foreign nations unless the President considered it to be necessary for
the security of the United States.
8. It authorized the President to exchange military assistance
and furnish defense articles to foreign countries which had strategic
raw materials which were in short supply in the United States such as
petroleum, other fossil fuels, metals, minerals, and other natural
substances.
9. It made funds available for programs designed to prevent
the unauthorized dissemination or use of nuclear materials.
10. It authorized the President to terminate, except in
extraordinary circumstances, military assistance to any country which
consistently violated human rights.
11. It requested the President to instruct each representative
of the United States in international organizations to encourage the
117
integration of.women into the national economies of member countries
(U.S. Statutes at Large, 1976).
The foregoing documents were subjected to content analysis
using a checklist to discriminate concepts between belonging to
developmentalism and dependency ideological paradigms. As a result,
and as shown in Table 1, between 50 and 90 percent of the ten issues of
the checklist were implicated in the documents. Table 2 indicates that
most of the concepts about development expressed in these documents
correspond to the ideology of developmentalism.
Table 1 indicates that 10 percent of the concepts included in
each of seven documents corresponds to both ideological paradigms.
Then Table 2 indicates that this 10 percent corresponds in 35.7 percent
of the documents to the item which discriminates between capital
intensive technology and labor intensive technology; and in the
remaining 14.3 percent of the documents it corresponds to the item
which discriminates between economic growth and economic sovereignty as
indicators of development. That is, the former group of documents
considers that both types of technologies should be included in
development plans; and the later group of documents considers that both
economic growth as well as economic sovereignty are proper indicators
of development. This convergence points out the concepts at which
American foreign policies begin moving away from developmentalism.
From the dialectical standpoint this convergence of concepts suggests
that the ideological contradiction between developmentalism and
dependency might be in the initial process of being dissolved because
some concepts expressed by basically developmentalist entities include
elements of the two opposing paradigms. 118
119
Table 1
Percentage of Developmentalist and Dependency Concepts about Development in Fourteen Selected
Documents on the United States Foreign Assistance Policies
Documents on Foreign Assistance
Percentage of Concepts About Development
Developmentalist Dependency Both
Not
Applicable* Total
Foreign Assistance Act 1961 80 - - 20 100
Kennedy's Address 3, 1961 80 - 10 - 100
Kennedy's Message 1962 30 - 10 40 100
Foreign Assistance Act 1963 90 - 10 - 100
Johnson's Message 1964 50 - - 50 100
Foreign Assistance Act 1963 90
-
10 - 100
Johnson's Message 1966 70 - - 30 100
Foreign Assistance Act 1967 90 - 10
- 100
Johnson's Message 1968 80 - - 20 100
Foreign Assistance Act 1969 90 - 10 - 100
Nixon’s Message 1970 80 - - 20 100
Foreign Assistance Act 1971 90 - - 10 100
Nixon's Message 1973 70 - 10 20 100
Foreign Assistance Act 1974 70 - - 30 100
* Percentage of concepts from the ten item'checklist which do not appear in each document.
Table 2
Percentage of a Sample of United States Documents on Foreign Assistance Policies Including
Developmentalist and Dependency Concepts About Development
Paradigms (In Percentages)
Concepts About Development Developmentalist Dependency Both
Not
Applicable* Total
Kinds of social change 100 - - - 100
Process of development 92.9 - - 7.1 100
Indicators of Development 71.4 - 14.3 14.3 100
Regulation of production 92.9 - - 7.1 100
Private enterprise 92.9 - - 7.1 100
Foreign investment 92.9 - - 7.1 100
Transference of technology and values 92.9 - - 7.1 100
Type of technology - - 35.7 64.3 100
Universal education 85.7 - - 14.3 100
Type of education 50.0 -
-
50.0 100
* Percentage of documents which do not include the concept listed in the first column.
hO
O
The concept of social change as an orderly and stable process
was found in all the documents as shown in Table 2. In fact, it is
expressed in some of the documents analyzed that countries which
attempt a radical change of the socioeconomic order are not considered
eligible for assistance. The Foreign Assistance Act of 1967, for
instance, prescribed the following:
(f) No assistance shall be furnished under this Act, as
amended, (except section 214 (b)) to any Communist country.
This restriction may not be waived pursuant to any authority
contained in this Act unless the President finds and promptly
reports to Congress that: (1) such assistance is vital to
the security of the United States; (2) the recipient country
is not controlled by the international Communist conspiracy;
and (3) such assistance will further promote the independence
of the recipient country from international Communism.
(Section 614)
Section 214 (b) mentioned in the foregoing statement of policy
is related to assistance to hospitals outside the United States which
are sponsored by American citizens. In harmony with the statement of
policy above quoted, President Johnson expressed commitment to orderly
change as follows:
The people we seek to help are committed to change.
This is an immutable fact of our time. The only questions
are whether change will be peaceful or violent, whether it
will liberate or enslave, whether it will build a community
of free and prosperous nations or sentence the world to
endless strife between rich and poor. Foreign aid is the
American answer to this question. (Public Papers, 1968,
p. 63)
Similarly, Table 2 indicates that 92.9 percent of the documents
subscribe to the ideal that development unfolds through predetermined
stages of continuous linear progress from traditionalism to modernity.
The Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, for instance, talks about countries
in "the earlier stages of economic development," and President Johnson
121
supported his proposed foreign assistance programs by saying:
These are just a few of the steps on the road to
modernization. They are far from easy. We would do well
to remember how difficult many of them were for us, but
they are absolutely necessary. (Public Papers, 1966, p. 41)
The inclusion of this idea of development through stages in
statements of policy reflects the influence of existing theoretical
models of development in the social sciences. Particularly influential
in policies was Rostow's theory described in his book entitled The
Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-Communist Manifesto (1962). Rostow,
a professor at HIT, became President Kennedy's Director of Policy and
Planning in the State Department, and President Johnson's advisor. He
contended that societies pass through five stages of development: the
traditional; the precondition for take-off; the take-off; the drive to
maturity; and the age of high mass consumption. The assumptions of this;
theory and its policy implications have been criticized as being based
on ideological commitments rather than on historical and scientific
evidence. This theory takes the development process of today's
industrialized countries as a model for other societies living out the
possibility that today's underdeveloped countries are experiencing a
different process, and that the future may not replicate today's mass
consumer societies. Besides, the age of high consumption, given
today's knowledge about the finitude of the world resources, seems more
like an utopia than a scientific prediction. Rostow's second stage,
conditions development to external influence, may be considered as the
justification for the expansion of industrialized countries. This case
points out the relationships between ideology, social science, and
policies.
122
In 71.4 percent of the documents analyzed, the developmentalist
idea of economic growth and increase of the national income as the
indicator of development, was found to be present. In his 1968 Message
to the Congress on Foreign Aid, President Johnson stated that "AID
programs are designed both to stimulate general economic growth and to
give first priority to agriculture," and to support his request for aid
he reported that in Latin America "their gross national product has
risen by 30 percent." He also reported about Turkey that "her gross
national product has grown an average of six percent annually since
1962" (Public Papers, 1968, p. 63). President Nixon named "lower
income countries" all aid recipient countries and stated that
. . . the lower income countries taken together exceed the
economic growth targets of the first United Nations
Development Decade. (Public Papers, 1970, p. 293)
This concern for economic growth parallels the concern for
population growth of aid recipient countries.
All the analyzed documents, except one (92.9 percent), were
concerned with the developmentalist idea that the market should
regulate economic production. The remaining document did not address
itself to this issue. President Kennedy, for instance, proposed
economic integration in Latin America as "a genuine step toward larger
markets and greater competitive opportunity" (Department of State,
1965, p. 345). However, American markets were limited to foreign
products as the Foreign Assistance Act of 1963 prescribed in the
following words:
(d) No assistance shall be furnished under section 201
of this Act for construction or operation of any productive
enterprise in any country where such enterprise will compete
123
with United States enterprise unless such country has agreed
that it will establish appropriate procedures to prevent
the exportation for use or consumption in the United States
of more than twenty per centum of the annual production of
such facility during the life of the loan. (Section 613)
Although this policy protects American enterprises from foreign
competition, it may also hinder development possibilities of countries
in need of assistance. It may also open possibilities for expansion of
American businesses abroad through subsidiaries or multinational
corporations. It is not surprising, then, to find that in 92.9 percent
of the documents private enterprise and foreign investment are
considered to be beneficial for the development of foreign countries.
That is, American policies are promoting the development of the
capitalist system abroad. This promotion is expressed through the
establishment of investment guaranties, the financing of surveys of
investment opportunities, and the determination of making available to
private enterprises not less than 50 percent of the loan funds, as
established in the Foreign Assistance Act of 1963. Further this Act
stated as a policy:
It is the policy of the United States to strengthen
friendly foreign countries by encouraging the development
of their free economic institutions and productive
capabilities, and by minimizing to eliminating barriers
to the flow of private investment capital. (Section 343)
Later, the Foreign Assistance Act of 1969 created the Overseas
Private Investment Corporation "to mobilize and facilitate the
participation of United States private capital and skills in the
economic and social progress of less developed friendly countries"
(Section 231).
124
Since the development of national enterprises which compete
with America's is not stimulated with assistance, and rather American
investments in foreign countries are encouraged through assistance
policies, by implication, the development of assistance recipient
countries could become conditioned to the development of foreign
capital.
The encouragement of American investments in foreign countries
parallels the promotion of American technology, institutions and values
as it was found in 92.9 percent of the documents on foreign assistance
policies. The Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, for instance, authorized
the President to provide funds to American schools and libraries which
serve "as study and demonstration centers for ideas and practices of
the United States" (Section 214); the Foreign Assistance Act of 1965
stimulated the establishment of credit institutions, savings and loan
associations, and labor unions in Latin America; and the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1969 promoted the construction of "private housing
projects in Latin America of types similar to those insured by the
Department of Housing and Urban Development" (Section 222).
Universal education was considered in 85.7 percent of the
documents as a necessary requirement for economic growth. In fact
illiteracy was considered to be at the roots of poverty. President
Kennedy proposed to Latin American countries in 1961:
. . . to combat illiteracy, improve the productivity and use
of their land, wipe out disease, attack archaic tax and land-
tenure structures, provide educational opportunities, and
offer a broad range of projects designed to make the benefits
of increasing abundance available to all. (Department of
State, 1965, p. 345)
125
Although there is evidence of the correlation between universal
education and economic development, such as stated by Harbison and
Myers (1964), this does not mean that promoting universal education
produces economic growth— parallel changes in the socioeconomic
structure are also needed as President Kennedy points out.
The emphasis on specialized technical and vocational education
was found in only 5Q percent of the selected documents. The Foreign
Assistance Act of 1963, for instance, made loans available "for
financing the opportunity for individuals to obtain practical education
in vocational and occupational skills" (Section 102). Later, the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1971 provided funds for "technical and
vocational training and other assistance to Arab refugees" (Section
302). This promotion of technical and vocational education abroad was
an extension of the American experience at home where schools had
attempted to be responsive to the socioeconomic needs of the system.
However, this type of education may not be functional to a different
socioeconomic system.
In summary, the findings from the content analysis of seven
Foreign Assistance Acts and seven Presidential Messages reported in
this chapter point out the fundamental developmentalist ideology of
American foreign assistance policies. This ideology harmonizes with
the American socioeconomic structure, from which it springs. The
promotion of this ideology abroad through foreign assistance policies
attempts to legitimize the extension of the American socioeconomic
system to those countries.
The following chapter presents the findings related to UCLA's
technical assistance programs in Latin America. ___________________126
CHAPTER V
THE IDEOLOGY OF UCLA'S TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
PROGRAMS IN LATIN AMERICA
This chapter presents information about UCLA as the site of
this case study, describes the University's technical assistance
programs in Latin America, and presents the data from content analysis
of documents pertaining to those technical assistance programs.
The University of California at Los Angeles
The University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) is one of
the nine branches of the University of California system (UC). This
system is the result of both the growth of the state of California and
the expansion of the first site of the University at Berkeley.
The idea of a state university was expressed at the first
Constitutional Convention of California in 1849. However, since the
new State lacked funds to support a university, private schools and
academies sprang up throughout the State. One of these private
institutions was the College of California, founded at Oakland in 1853,
but debt stalked this college from the beginning. In 1866, under the
Morril Act of 1862, the Legislature established in California an
Agricultural, Mining, and Mechanic Arts College; however, the new
College had funds but no campus. Then, the College of California
offered its buildings and lands to the State in 1867 for the
127
establishment of the new university. The Legislature accepted the gift
and the Governor of California signed the Charter of the University of
California on March 23, 1828. Besides the Oakland site, the College
had a property four miles to the north, which became the Berkeley
campus. The University benefited from other donations from private
citizens. Indeed, most of the early buildings were the result of
gifts, as were books, art collections, and professorships in specific
fields (UC, 1966).
The expansion of the University began at the opening of this
century when the University Farm School was established at Davis, the
Citrus Experiment Station at Riverside, the Scripps Institution for
Biological Research at La Jolla, and the Hooper Foundation for Medical
Research in San Francisco (UC, 1966).
UCLA began as a two-year Normal School in 1881. It became part
of the University of California in 1919, and was known as the Southern
Branch. As part of UC, the school expanded gradually into a four-year
general institution (UCLA, 1976).
UCLA has grown in an unpredictable manner. It had more than
33,000 students enrolled during the fall of 1976. It counts 13 schools
and colleges, 70 departments of instruction, 23 research institutes and
centers, and 18 libraries with some 3,300,000 volumes (the largest
research collection in the Southwest and fourth in the nation). For
complex research the university has a computer network, a cyclotron, a
100 kilowatt nuclear reactor, an isotope laboratory, an elaborate "dead
room," and a nuclear fusion laboratory. The facilities for the arts
include the Sculpture Garden with twentieth century masterpieces,
128
primitive art collections from Africa and the Pacific, and a collection
of exotic musical instruments (UCLA, 1976).
A strong faculty is available to guide students in academic
undertakings. Included in this faculty are two Nobel Prize winners:
Dr. Willard Libby, and Dr. Julian Schwinger. By 1975 UCLA ranked
fourth in the list of those faculty members winning such honors as
Guggenheim Fellowships, and first in the list of Fulbright Fellowships
(UCLA, 1976).
UCLA had by 1973, the nation's second highest graduate enroll
ment on a single state university campus— 11,101 students— led only by
Michigan University. The National Council on Education's nationwide
survey for quality of graduate instruction conducted in 1970 found that
UCLA had twelve departments in the top ten nationally, and an additional
seventeen departments which ranked among the top twenty. Besides, in
fiscal 1974, UCLA was second in the nation in federal grants for
research with a total of $73,685,000 in federal commitments. UCLA also
has the third highest number of faculty members— 112--serving on state
and national commissions (UCLA, 1976).
The UC system is governed by a Board of Regents composed of 24
members, 16 of whom are appointed by the Governor of California and the
remaining are ex-officio members. The UC system is headed by a
president appointed by the Board of Regents, and each of the nine
campuses is headed by a chancellor who has considerable administrative
autonomy (UC, 1966).
Since 1962, UC began an Education Abroad Program and opened
centers in Bordeaux (France), Goettinger (Germany), Padua (Italy),
129
Madrid (Spain), Tokyo (Japan), Edinburgh (United Kingdom), Delphi
(Greece), Hong Kong (China), Sussex (United Kingdom), Birmingham
(United Kingdom), and Bogota, Colombia (UC, 1966). New centers have
been set up in Sao Paulo and Mexico since 1975. Each UC campus has an
Education Abroad Program office, but the program is coordinated by UC
Santa Barbara.
The international dimensions of UC is justified in the
following statement from the academic plan of the university:
The drastic and momentous changes occurring daily in
world affairs demonstrates our critical need for more
knowledge of other nations and for our relations with them.
Only our universities can supply this knowledge on the scale
required and they can do it only if they receive support
for research on foreign areas and international problems.
The university will continue to work with the private
foundations that now make possible many of its international
programs. But it also must find ways to help the State and
Federal Government see their obligation to support increased
research about the rapidly changing world we live in. (UC,
1966, p. 4)
The human and institutional resources of UC have made possible
the creation of several centers involved in world affairs. At Berkeley,
the university has the Institute of International Studies with centers
for Latin American, Chinese, Japanese, Slavic and East European, South
Asian, and South-East Asian Studies. At UCLA there exist the Institute
for International Studies, and centers for Latin American, African, and
Middle East Studies. The main function of these centers is the
preparation of competent university personnel as resource specialists
for government and foundation agencies. They hold special colloquiums
for the analysis of issues of foreign or international relations.
Typical of their service function, these centers are actively engaged
in research and assistance to other countries. The following statement
130
points out this commitment:
As an internationally known center of learning and public
service, the University of California has an acknowledged
obligation to seek and communicate knowledge about the
affairs of men everywhere. The University contributes and
benefits from advances in science, technology and education in
many other nations. The university stake in the survival
of our free society requires that it helps to build inter
national understanding with the unique resources at its
command. Thus, the University in a broad range of its
activities must strive to encourage international perspectives
among its students, its faculty members and the society it
serves-. (UC, 1966, p. 48)
Accordingly, President Kerr's report of his six years of
leadership (1958-1964) described that by 1964, UC was engaged in more
than twenty aid programs in Africa, Asia, Europe, and South America.
He reported that the University was contributing to the development of
a system of regional colleges in Chile, to the establishment of
economic programs in Colombia, of^public administration programs in
Italy, and of science and engineering programs in India, financially
supported by private foundations and the United States and foreign
governments. President Kerr also reported that the University of
California had trained Peace Corps volunteers for service in Ghana,
Nigeria, Togo, Sierra Leone, Ethiopia, India, Venezuela, Peru, Bolivia,
and Panama, and had designed programs for more than 1,000 foreign
agricultural trainees. He also stated that the University had trained
technical assistance specialists for work in foreign countries (Kerr,
1964). Although these international activities were carried on by the
UC system, the coordination of each program was assigned to a deter
mined UC campus. Thus, the technical assistance programs for Latin
America selected to be analyzed in this study were coordinated by UCLA.
131
Besides participating in international programs of technical
assistance, UCLA's faculty members have been engaged in research
studies about foreign countries. For the period 1976-1977, for
instance, the UCLA Latin American Center reported that 242 research
projects focused on Latin American issues were conducted by the
University's faculty. Thirty-eight of these projects were in the field
of anthropology, twenty-five in Spanish and Portuguese, twenty-four in
Latin American studies, and twenty in education (UCLA, Latin American
Center, 1976-1977).
In conclusion, UCLA is one of the most important universities
of the United States due to its physical, organizational and academic
resources. Its international programs have been led by an inter
nationally conscious academic leadership and stimulated by government
and foundation grants.
UCLA's Technical Assistance Programs
in Latin America
Based on interviews with UCLA's officials and faculty members,
as well as on documents from the University archives, it was found that
since 1960 UCLA has administered the following technical assistance
programs for Latin America:
1. The Brazil Program for technical assistance, stimulation, and
development of local industry (1961-1963)
2. The Peru Program— a Peace Corps training program for university
teachers, artists, and craftsmen (Spring, 1963)
3. The Peru and Bolivia Program— a Peace Corps training program
for university teachers (Summer, 1963)
132
4. The Ecuador Program— a Peace Corps training program for
secondary and higher education teachers (Summer, 1964)
5. The Mexico Program for academic exchange between UCLA and the
Instituto Politecnico Nacional de Mejico (1963-1976)
6. The Chile Program of academic exchange between UCLA and the
University of Chile (1963-1976)
Decisions to participate in these programs have been made by
the University upon request from the financing institutions and/or the
host country. These decisions, according to information provided by
the Vice Chancellor of UCLA during an interview, were based on academic
considerations and mutual benefit. He further expressed the philosophy
that UCLA does not have foreign policies but academic policies.
The Brazil Program
This program began in 1961 when Dr. Morris Asimow, Professor at
UCLA, suggested to Mr. Ruben Costa of the Inter-American Development
Bank that graduate engineering students could be used in technical
assistance programs in Latin America. Dr. Asimow proposed that both
American and Latin American students could be in charge of making
feasibility studies and carrying through detailed designs for specific
small industry projects to benefit local areas. This idea was
communicated to authorities of the Organization of American States
(OAS).
The local authorities of Northeast Brazil became interested in
the idea and invited Professor Asimow and a group of specialists from
OAS and UCLA to visit the country and discuss the project. As a result
133
of this visit, the program was established and housed in Cairi located
in the south end of the State of Ceara. The coordination of the
program was assigned to a committee integrated with faculty members of
both the University of Ceara and UCLA. The program was initially
financed with UCLA grants and OAS fellowships. Later the Ford
Foundation financed the publication of the feasibility studies.
Interdisciplinary teams of graduate students were selected at
UCLA and the University of Ceara to conduct an initial survey of the
products and merchandise sold in the market place. Thereafter,
feasibility studies for industries which met the various constraints of
resources, skills, capitalization, timing and local needs were
conducted. These industries were: a cement plant; a sewing machine,
radio, and small electric motor plant; a clay products plant; a corn
products processing plant; and a pressed wood plant.
The feasibility studies for all fjive factories have in common
the following recommendations:
1. High wages to increase the living and educational standards of
the population, activate the consumer market, and promote the
industrialization of the region
2. Low prices to increase the demand and therefore the production
3. Modern equipment and methods to operate the factory. It was
recommended that the Managers and Chief Engineers of the
factories be sent to the United States for training in the form
of a six month internship.
4. University trained technical staff
5. Financing from private investors and bank loans
134
During the field surveys, committees of community leaders were
integrated to support and diffuse the information about the projects.
As a result, some members of the middle classes became stockholders of
the five corporations. After the initial surveys were conducted, and
the community was organized, the American team of graduate students
returned home and with the assistance of UCLA professors made the final
design for each factory.
In January 1963, the group of Brazilian managers of the
factories went to UCLA for a semester of training and the factories
were ready to start in the summer of 1963.
In November 1963, the president of the university reported to the
Regents that Dr. Asimow's program "has planted the seeds of a quiet
social revolution abroad through a series of small scale industrial
projects." He continued saying that "Dr. Asimow planned, in effect, to
introduce grass roots capitalism into a region where the existing
choices were roughly feudalism and communism" (UC, 1963).
The Peru Program
This program began in February 1963 and was designed to train
Peace Corps volunteers to serve in Peruvian universities as teachers,
artists, and craftsmen.
The course of instruction included experiences in the following
areas:
1. American institutions and International Relations. The
trainees were confronted with issues such as: definition of
democracy, American economy and society, American foreign
policy, and communism.______________________________ 133
2. Physical education with special emphasis on the sport
activities of the host country.
3. Latin American studies including lectures, informal discussions,
and slide presentations on history, geography, demography, pre-
Columbian art, Latin American music, Peruvian literature,
politics, social structures, education, Peruvian social
problems, economic development, community development, and
Peruvian dances.
4. Health orientation in order to help the trainees in dealing
with health problems abroad.
5. Spanish language to enable the trainees to understand, read and
speak Spanish as it is used in the host country.
6. Technical studies to supplement the volunteers' skills and
knowledge in ceramics, textiles, metals, general materials.
Projects for the handicapped, colonial and Indian arts,
cooperative administration, community analysis, teaching
English as a second language, and teaching mathematics,
physics, sociology, anthropology and education.
The trainees also participated in sensitivity training with
emphasis on interpersonal and intergroup phenomenal, in relation to
acculturation. Besides, the participants received counseling which was
designed to assist the trainees in integrating the Peace Corps training
with their own interests (UCLA, 1963).
136
The Peru and Bolivia Program
This program was designed in 1963 to train Peace Corps
volunteers to serve as teachers at Peruvian and Bolivian universities.
The program was administered by the University Extension in cooperation
with the School of Education and sponsored by the Latin American
Studies Center.
The program was prepared with a threefold objective: (1) to
supply the trainees with the necessary skills and information to be
effective in the host country; (2) to lay the basis for the trainees'
experiences in the host country so that it would be more rewarding; and
(3) to bring the trainees into closer contact with the Peace Corps.
One of the most important parts of the course of instruction
was the intensive instruction and practice in Spanish. Also important
was the Latin American Area Studies Program which introduced the
trainees into a society markedly different from their own. Thus,
special emphasis was given to the Indian and Spanish traditional
elements in the societies of Peru and Bolivia as well as to issues
related to population growth and Communism in those areas.
In order to appreciate and understand their own country, and to
relate it wtoh Latin America, the course of instruction included
lectures and informal discussions about American Institutions and Inter
national Relations. The trainees were expected to see political events
more perceptively and to "articulate democratic values more
convincingly." Explicit and implicit comparisons between American
constitutional democracy and Soviet totalitarianism were included in
the program. 137
The physical training course, included in the program, intended
to introduce the trainees in the games and sports of the host countries
and review the games and sports of the United States.
The health course was oriented toward those diseases which are
common in Peru. Training in interpersonal and group relationships was
devoted to prepare the volunteers emotionally for a second culture.
Provisions for personal counseling for the trainees were included. The
technical studies class was concerned with the teaching of English as a
second language and teaching instructional methods (UCLA, 1963).
The Ecuador Program
This program trained Peace Corps volunteers for teaching
positions at both secondary and higher educational levels in Ecuador.
It was developed during the summer of 1964.
The overall goal of the Peace Corps program in Ecuador was
stated in the introduction of the syllabus for the course:
This project seeks to take advantage of this awareness
and to expose the universities to United States scholarship
ideas, and teaching methods, thereby improving the quality
of Ecuadorian University Education. (UCLA, 1964, pp. 1-2)
Peace Corps volunteers for Secondary education were expected to
serve in technical, normal, and vocational schools because of the
country's shortage of teachers as vocational educational instructors.
This training program, as all the others, was financed through
the Peace Corps office in Washington, D.C. It was academically
sponsored by the UCLA Center for Latin American studies, and was
administered by University Extension in cooperation with the School of
Education.
138
The Course of Instruction included experiences similar to those
of previous UCLA Peace Corps Training Programs such as: Latin American
studies, American institutions and international relations, Spanish
language, personal and community health, physical training, counseling,
and technical studies on teaching English as a second language, and
teacher preparation (UCLA, 1964).
The Mexico Program
This program began in 1963 when the Undersecretary for Technical
and Higher Instruction in the Ministry for Education in Mexico contacted
Chancellor Franklin D. Murphy of UCLA to establish a relationship
between UCLA and the Instituto Politecnico Nacional de Mejico (IPN).
After exchange visits by a IPN team to UCLA, and by a UCLA team
to IPN, the University of California submitted a proposal for an
exchange program to AID resulting in an AID-UCLA contract for three
years. A separate agreement between IPN and UCLA under the spirit of
the Alliance for Progress was signed up. The AID grant was over in
1968, but the program has continued to be financed by the Mexican
Government.
Initially the exchange program covered the areas of engineering,
mathematics, physical sciences, medicine, biology, and computer
sciences. In 1966, the academic fields were expanded to include
business administration, industrial technology, social sciences, and
food technology. This program provided research opportunities for
faculty members from both universities. The principal activities of
UCLA faculty members at IPN have been: teaching courses and seminars
139
for IPN faculty and graduate students; consulting in curriculum
planning, laboratory procedures and equipment needs; and conducting
research projects jointly with IPN professors.
The following activities carried on by the UCLA team have been
of particular significance for the modernization process of IPN: a
seminar on reorganization of the curriculum of the School of
Engineering; a series of lectures sponsored by the National Chamber of
Electrical and Electronic Computation Industries on the latest advances
in the field of Digital Systems for Computers; the establishment of an
electronic microscope laboratory at the School of Biology; the design
of a doctoral program in Business Administration and of a Research
Center in the School of Commerce and Administration.
The principal activities of IPN faculty members have been:
enrollment in UCLA graduate programs; participation in special courses
or short training programs at UCLA; participation in joint research
projects; and development of individual programs at UCLA.
The overall goal of this program was to develop graduate-level
teaching for Masters and PhD programs at IPN. It was thought that the
achievement of this goal would represent a major contribution to the
autonomous development of the country, because IPN supplies
professionals to private and public Mexican industries.
This program was administered by a Program Policy Committee
composed of the Director General of IPN, the Coordinator of Overseas
Programs at UCLA, and the Education-Training-Advisor of the United
States AID Mission-Mexico. Policies about the program are made under
the principle of mutual academic benefit for both UCLA and IPN (UCLA,
1968). 140
The Chile Program
This program commonly known as "The Convenio" began in 1965
after the University of California accepted the request made by the
Ford Foundation and the University of Chile (UCh) fora long-term
academic exchange relationship between the two universities. Both
universities entered into this agreement because of the potential
academic benefit for them. The Ford Foundation provided the financial
support for the program.
The overall goal of the Convenio was to support research,
teaching, and graduate education in both universities through faculty
and student exchanges, and the direct funding of research equipment for
UCh.
The Convenio was administered by a joint Policy Committee from
UC and UCh. Although all UC campuses were involved in the program,
UCLA was in charge of coordinating the Convenio activities. There were
joint subcommittees for the following academic fields: agriculture and
veterinary medicine, arts and literature, natural sciences and
engineering, social sciences and library science. These subcommittees
recommend policies for their respective fields.
Priority was initially given to programs in agronomy,
veterinary medicine, physics and computer science. But there were also
programs in chemistry, microbiology, zoology, engineering, music, dance,
theatre, art, archeology, social welfare, urban planning, and library
science. Later the following new fields were incorporated in the
Convenio: animal health and production, forestry, wood technology,
141
chemical engineering, snow hydrology, earthquake engineering and
demography.
Although there was an impressive beginning in the areas of art
and literature, particularly in musicology, ethnomusicology, and the
fine arts, the program experienced decreasing activities in these
fields especially after the political events which concluded in 1973
with the overthrow of the constitutional government of Salvador Allende
and the establishment of a military dictatorship in Chile.
Differences in interests and methodology between UC and UCh
social scientists made difficult every attempt at team research in the
social sciences. Nevertheless, there were exchanges of students and
faculty members in the fields of demography, social welfare, and urban
planning.
The highest percentage of expenditures by fields has been in
natural sciences and engineering, followed by agriculture and
veterinary medicine. The highest expenditure from the Convenio funds
at UCh has been for the training of graduate students at UC campuses.
The next highest expenditure has been for the organization and
equipment of the library. The third highest expenditure has been for
laboratory and research equipment such as the acquisition of a
cyclotron, copy machines, and an IBM computer.
Most of the Convenio funds at UC have been used to provide
grants for visiting professors and research assistants at UCh.
During the first stages of the program, the activities were
focused on joint research and on the training of graduate students from
Chile at UC. However, since 1969, there have been efforts for the
142
establishment of Masters and Doctoral Programs at UCh in the following
fields: fruit culture, chemistry, geology, physics, hydrology,
forestry, animal production, chemical engineering, pharmaceutical
chemistry and earthquake engineering. During the Allende government in
Chile (1971-1973) these graduate programs experienced some problems
because of the shortage of supplies and equipment. After 1973, some
programs were seriously weakened by loss of faculty who left Chile for
political reasons.
The policy of UC about the internal political affairs of UCh
and of the country was defined in 1968 when UCh experienced a student-
led reform movement. Then UC decided to assume a position of
neutrality, and continued its collaboration with the new authorities of
UCh and within a broader faculty participation structure of the
Chilean University (UCLA, 1969-1970).
Since 1973, the Ford funds for the Convenio have been
decreasing. But the 1973-1976 report includes a statement of agreement
between UC and UCh to continue the collaborative academic relationship
between individuals or groups in specified academic fields. The focus
of activities during this last period has been on continued support of
the few remaining Chilean graduate students at UC. However, some UC
professors have obtained grants from several institutions for
conducting research in Chile.
The University of California has benefitted from the Convenio
by doing scholarly work in cooperation with the scholars from UCh in
many scientific fields. It has also enhanced its graduate programs with
Chilean students and lectures. Besides this program has produced
143
valuable links between the various UC campuses.
Because of the geographic and climatological similarities of
California and Chile research in the fields of earthquakes, geology and
ecology,made under the Convenio have been of particular significance.
An important achievement of the earthquake team research was the
establishment of a seismographic network between Argentina and Chile.
The Convenio has attracted grants for research in several
fields from other sources as well. The United States National Science
Foundation, for instance, has granted research assistance to consider
the question of convergence of ecosystem structures, and the United
States Air Force has funded research in zoology. Many articles written
by American and Chilean scholars under the Convenio have been published
in American and Chilean scientific journals.
The current political situation of Chile, ruled by a military
dictatorship, has hindered the impact of the program. The fact is that
some UCh faculty members, with experience in the Convenio activities,
are leaving the country, and some students who have recently completed
their PhD programs at UC are reluctant to return home and are looking
for employment in Canada, Puerto Rico, and other countries.
Analyses of the Six Programs
Reports from the six foregoing programs were content analyzed
using a checklist to discriminate between developmentalist and
dependency concepts about ten issues regarding development. Between 30
and 70 percent of those issues were implicated in the documents as
shown in Table 3. The limits of this range, 30 and 70 percent, are
144
lower than the limits of the range of issues implicated in the United
States documents on foreign assistance policies, 50 and 90 percent,
presented on Table 1. Obviously foreign assistance policies are
broader in scope than technical assistance programs which are concerned
only with the educational and manpower development of other countries.
According to Table 3, in half of the documents 10 percent of
the concepts include elements corresponding to both ideological
paradigms as was the case of the United States documents on foreign
assistance policies, as reported in Chapter IV. Table 4 indicates that
this 10 percent corresponds to the issue of capital versus labor
intensive technology. That is, in half of the documents on UCLA's
technical assistance programs in Latin America both types of
technologies are considered to be acceptable for promoting development
abroad. This finding coincides with the finding in documents of United
States foreign assistance policies presented in Chapter IV.
Where concepts about development are expressed in UCLA's
documents they correspond to the ideology of developmentalism. This is
also true in the case of United States documents on foreign assistance
policies. That is, according to both sets of documents there is
ideological harmony between United States foreign assistance policies
and UCLA's technical assistance programs in Latin America.
Table 4 indicates that the concept of social change as an
orderly and stable process was included in 33.3 percent of UCLA's
documents. This concern for stability in Latin America has guided
American policies toward those countries as reported in Chapter II.
145
Table 3
Percentage of Developmentalist and Dependency Concepts About Development in Reports of
UCLA's Technical Assistance Programs in Latin America
UCLA's Reports on
Technical Assistance
Programs in
Latin America
Percentage of Concepts About Development
Developmentalism ,
Developmentalism
Dependency and Dependency
Not
Applicable* Total
Peru 30 - 70 100
Peru and Bolivia 60 10 30 100
Ecuador 30 10 40 100
Brazil 70 10 20 100
Mexico 30 - 50 100
Chile 40 - 60 100
* Percentage of concepts from the ten item checklist which do not appear in each document
-p >
C T s
Table 4
Percentage of UQLA's Documents on Technical Assistance Programs in Latin America Including
Developmentalist and Dependency Concepts About Development
Concepts About Development
Paradigms (In Percentages)
Developmentalist Dependency Both
Not
Applicable* Total
Kind of social change 33.3 - - 66.7 100
Process of development 16.6 - - 83.4 100
Indicators of development 16.6 - - 83.4 100
Regulation of production 16.6 - - 83.4 100
Private enterprise 83.4 - - 16.6 100
Foreign investment 16.6 - - 83.4 100
Transference of technology and values 100.0 - - - 100
Kind of technology - - 30 30.0 100
Role of universal education 100.0 - - - 100
Type of education 100.0 - - - 100
* Percentage of documents which do not include the concept listed in the first column.
■ p-
There was concern for the process of development in 16.6
percent of the documents, as shown in Table 4. In those cases
development was conceived as a process which unfolds through pre
determined stages of continuous linear progress from traditionalism to
modernity. The following excerpt from the report on the Peru and
Bolivia training program for Peace Corps implies both the existence of
traditional and modern stages of development and concern for stability:
The successful transition of the Peruvian Indian into a
monied economy will result in many economic, social, and
political benefits. Economic benefits will entail efficient
and productive use of manpower as well as the development
of new industries; social benefits will accrue from the
cooperatives use of material and human resources, and employed
people will result in greater political stability. (1963, p. 1)
The developmentalist concept of economic growth and increase of
the national income as the indicator of development was found to be
present in only one of the documents— the one corresponding to the
Brazilian project. The remaining documents did not address themselves
to this issue. Similarly, the concept that the market should regulate
economic production was found to be present only in the document
corresponding to the Brazilian program. The other documents were not
concerned with this issue.
Table 4 indicates that 83.4 percent of the selected documents
corresponding to UCLA's programs of technical assistance for Latin
Americacwere concerned with the issue of private enterprise; and in all
of those documents private enterprise was being encouraged. Hence,
both American foreign policies, as indicated in Chapter IV, and UCLA's
technical assistance programs in Latin America are attempting to extend
the basic economic structure of the United States to Latin America.
148
The developmentalist concept that foreign investment has a
positive contribution to the development of underdeveloped countries
was found to be present in 16.6 percent of the documents as indicated
in Table 4. This 16.6 percent corresponds to the document on the
Brazilian .program which is the one more closely concerned with
production. However, the issue of transference of institutions,
technology, and values was found to be present in all the documents.
After all, technical assistance programs are guided by the assumption
that the experiences which have been successful in one country could
be tried in another. Thus, through its technical assistance programs,
UCLA has brought the idea of creating research centers, graduate
programs, and computer centers in Latin American universities. In
addition, some technological equipment has been introduced in Latin
America through these programs like computer machines, Xerox copy
machines, microfilm, cyclotron, accelerographs, etc.
All of the documents analyzed subscribed to the idea that
universal education is a necessary requirement for economic growth.
Similarly all UCLA documents on technical assistance programs in Latin
America foster the developmentalist idea that specialized,- technical,
and vocational education should be emphasized.
UCLA documents coincide with the United States documents in
their concepts about education. That is there is no ideological
difference about the role of education in developing countries.
This ideological congruence between American foreign assistance
policies and UCLA's technical assistance programs in Latin America as
expressed in the documents analyzed in this study, has made expedient
149
their partnership in promoting development abroad. In fact, President
Johnson talked about the "creative partnership" of more than 120
American colleges and universities which participated in AID technical
assistance programs during fiscal year 1967 (Public Papers, 1968).
This partnership has become more evident since the 1960s when the
government of the United States has often called members of the
universities to hold government offices concerned with foreign affairs.
Table 5 presents the data corresponding to the percentages of
both sets of documents on the U.S. foreign assistance policies and
UCLA's technical assistance programs in Latin America, which include
developmentalist concepts. In this table the percentages corresponding
to the documents on UCLA's technical assistance programs in Latin
America are low for several issues. This is so because some documents
do not deal with all the issues listed in the ten item checklist.
Hence, although as a whole both sets of documents can be classified as
developmentalist as indicated in Tables 1 and 3, there is not strong
evidence that the university fully subscribes to the following
concepts: development is a process which unfolds from traditionalism
to modernity; economic growth is an indication of development; the
market regulates production; and foreign investment is beneficial for
development.
Since 83.4 percent of UCLA's documents subscribe to the
promotion of private enterprise abroad, and 100 percent of the same
documents encourage the transference of values, institutions and
technology to foreign countries, it is likely that the University also
encourages foreign investments.
130
Table 5
Percentage of Documents on the United States Foreign Assistance
Policies and UCLA’s Technical Assistance Programs
Including Developmentalist Concepts
Percentage of
Documents
Developmentalists Concepts U.S. UCLA
Social change as an orderly process 100 33.3
Development from traditionalism to modernity 92.9 16.6
Economic growth as indicator of development 71.4 16.6
The market as regulator of production 92.9 16.6
Promotion of- private enterprise 92.9 83.4
Encouragement of foreign investment 92.9 16.6
Encouragement of value and technological transfer 92.9 100
Emphasis on capital intensive technology - -
Education as requirement for economic growth 85.7 100
Encouragement of technical and vocational education 50.0 100
In summary, UCLA is one of the largest and most important
universities of the United States. It has participated in inter
national programs and has been concerned about world affairs, as
expressed by its research about foreign issues conducted under the
responsibility of several of its foreign area study centers. Since
I960, UCLA has administered technical assistance programs in Brazil,
Peru, Ecuador, Bolivia, Mexico, and Chile. From the content analysis of
documents pertaining to these programs, it appears that the University
is basically concerned with issues related to education; transference
of values, institutions, and technology from the United States to Latin
151
America; and to the promotion of private enterprise in those countries.
The position of UCLA on these issues, as expressed in the documents
analyzed, was basically developmentalist. However, in relation to the
issue of capital vs. labor intensive technology, the position of the
university is moderate*; . . that is, both types of technologies are
considered to be of some value in promoting development abroad.
152
CHAPTER VI
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
In this chapter the main features of the study are summarized.
In addition, the conclusions drawn from the findings of the research
and some recommendations are presented.
Summary
Restatement of the Problem
This study was concerned with the possibility of ideological
discrepancy between the official American policies of foreign
assistance and the technical assistance programs administered by UCLA
in Latin America.
Ideology as a system of related ideas, beliefs, principles, and
assumptions by which people explain and justify ends and means of
social action, is considered to be at the core of all planned change,
such as those promoted by the United States foreign assistance policies
and UCLA's technical assistance programs. Therefore this research was
concerned with the following twofold question:: (1) What are the
underlying ideologies of UCLA's technical assistance programs in Latin
America and the American foreign assistance policies? and (2) Is there
congruence between the ideological position of UCLA's programs in Latin
America and American foreign assistance policies?
153
As a part of the American social system, the ideology of the
programs administered by the University could be congruent with the
ideology of foreign assistance policies, thus promoting the interests
of the United States Government abroad. However, since a purpose of
the University is to deal technically with the issues of development,
it could be attempting to design and implement new models of develop
ment through its technical assistance programs abroad.
Two opposing paradigms of development, the developmentalist and
the dependency, were identified in the literature as being permeated by
ideological assumptions, and were used as points of reference to
classify the foreign assistance policies and the technical assistance
programs. These two paradigms sprang from different socioeconomic
conditions— American and Latin American— and have opposite views about
issues related to development and social change. In addition, their
goals reflect the current international controversy between capitalism
and communism.
The basic elements of each paradigm were basically drawn from
the works of Bodenheimer (1969), Chilcote and Edelstein (1974), Frank
(1972), and Paulston (1976). These elements are as follows:
The Developmentalist Paradigm
1. Social change is an orderly and stable process which proceeds
in a continuous, linear progression through*stages which begin
in "traditionalism" and end in "modernization."
2. Modernization brings about consensus-directed politics in
replacement of the ideological politics which have made
instability chronic in Latin America.
154
3. Development is diffused from advanced to backward areas.
Thus, the transference of capital, technology, and institutions
from developed to underdeveloped regions is encouraged.
4. The economic production of society is considered to be
determined by the demands of the market.
3. Development is basically measured in terms of the Gross
National Product.
6. The function of the educational system is the manpower training
in technical and vocational education.
The Dependency Paradigm
1. Social change in Latin America will come about through a radical
disruption of the existing socioeconomic order, which places
Latin American countries in a situation of external dependency.
2. The widely accepted belief that the problems of Latin America
spring from its political instability is wrong because the
problems come rather from the immutability of the Latin
American socioeconomic order, led by traditional political
groups which are not interested in changing such order.
3. The transference of capital, technology, and institutions from
developed to underdeveloped countries stimulates Latin American
dependence.
4. The economic production of a country should be planned
according to the needs and resources of all its people.
3. Development should be assessed in terms of the economic and
cultural sovereignty of the country.
153
6. The function of education is the awakening of the students'
social consciousness through theoretical and practical
experiences.
Data for this case study were obtained from: (1) reports from
UCLA's technical assistance programs in Latin America since 1960, and
(2) the United States Foreign Assistance Acts, the Annual Presidential
Messages to Congress on Foreign Aid, and President Kennedy's 1961
Address to Latin American Diplomats and Members of Congress concerning
the creation of the Alliance for Progress. This analysis was
restricted to the period 1960-1976.
The following assumptions were made:
1. Foreign assistance policies and programs are led by identifiable
ideologies about development.
2. Ideas, beliefs, and assumptions about development are revealed
in documents pertaining to foreign assistance policies and
programs.
3. American universities are a part of the predominantly
capitalist system of the United States.
4. All social systems are subject to basic instabilities and
internal conflict.
Review of Literature
Bibliography items concerning the following main topics were
reviewed: (1) the role of American foreign policies in the world; (2)
the United States relation with Latin America; (3) the ideologies of
development; and (4) the role of American universities in world affairs.
156
As a result of this review it was found that the United States emerged
as a center nation after the First World War, and has become since then
a leading power in the world. Its foreign policies guided by economic
and security interests have been very influential in the world,
particularly in Latin American countries. These nations have developed
as peripheral to the central power of the United States.
The literature revealed that a characteristic of American
foreign policies is the foreign assistance program. American univer
sities have been involved in these assistance programs under the
assumption that the mission of the university is the diffusion of
knowledge, technology and democratic values to the rest of the world.
The literature also disclosed the existence of two ideological
paradigms— developmentalism and dependency— which have guided policies
and programs on foreign assistance. The main postulates of each
ideological paradigm were found in the studies reviewed and were used
to structure the instrument of research.
The literature review provided information relevant for the
selection of the study's primary sources of data. It also pointed out
the context within which the analysis of the data could be done.
Methodology
The method of research used in this study was descriptive, and
the basic research technique-) was qualitative content analysis. The
following documents were selected as primary sources of data for the
analysis of American foreign assistance policies:
1. The U.S. Foreign Assistance Acts of 1961, 1963, 1963, 1967,
1969, 1971, and 1974.
137
2. The Annual Presidential Messages to the Congress on Foreign Aid
corresponding to 1962, 1964, 1966, 1968, 1970, and 1973.
3. President Kennedy's Address to Latin American Diplomats and
Members of the Congress of March 13, 1961, pertaining to the
creation of the Alliance for Progress.
The University's technical assistance programs in Latin America
were identified through interviewing UCLA's administrative officials
and faculty members, and by reading the reports of the president of the
University to the board of trustees. In this manner, the following
documents corresponding to the six programs identified, were content
analyzed:
1. "The Brazil Project Feasibility Studies," 1962.
2. "Report on the Exchange Program between the Instituto
Politecnico de Mejico and the University of California at Los
Angeles," 1968.
3. "Report of the Activities of the Convenio between the University
of Chile and the University of California," 1971-1972, 1973-
1974, 1974-1973, and 1975-1976.
4. "Report of UCLA Peace Corps Training Program for Peru," 1963.
5. "Report of UCLA Peace Corps Training Program for Peru and
Bolivia," 1963.
6. "Report of UCLA Peace Corps Training Program for Ecuador," 1964.
A checklist containing the basic issues of each paradigm was
designed and pretested to use as a research instrument.
The analysis of data involved the following steps: pre-reading
of each document; content analysis of each document using the checklist
158
for coding; tabulation of the items and categories of the checklist in
summary data sheets; and description and discussion of the findings.
Findings
The following were the most important findings of this study:
1. Most of the concepts about development expressed in
documents corresponding to both American foreign assistance policies
and UCLA's technical assistance programs in Latin America belong to the
ideology of developmentalism.
2. The following developmentalist concepts were found in all
the documents corresponding to both UCLA's programs and American
policies concerned with those issues:
a. Social change should be an orderly and stable process.
b. Private enterprise should be encouraged.
c. Foreign investment has a positive contribution to make in
underdeveloped countries.
d. The transference of technology, institutions and values from
developed to underdeveloped societies should be encouraged.
e. Economic production should be regulated by the demands of the
market.
f. Universal education is a necessary requirement for economic
growth.
g. Educational programs should emphasize specialized, technical
and vocational education.
3. Although in total both sets of documents, corresponding to
the American foreign assistance policies and UCLA's technical assistance
programs in Latin America, subscribe to the ideology of developmentalism
15S
there was no strong evidence that the University holds the following
concepts: development is a process which unfolds from traditionalism
to modernity; economic growth is a measure of development; and the
market regulates production.
4. Almost 36 percent of the documents^about foreign assistance
policies considered that both labor and capital intensive technologies
should be included in development programs. In addition, 14.3 percent
of the documents on foreign assistance policies considered that the
emphasis of development programs should be placed on both economic
growth and self reliance. Hence the elements of both paradigms regard
ing these two issues were combined in half of the foreign policy
documents.
5. The elements of both paradigms regarding the issue of
capital vs. labor intensive technology were combined in 50 percent of
the documents pertaining to UCLA's technical assistance programs.
Conclusions
In light of the role of the U.S. foreign assistance policies,
the historical pattern of relations between the U.S. and Latin America,
and the function of the American university in world affairs, the
following conclusions are drawn:
1. American foreign policies are led by a dominant develop
mentalist ideology. That is, those policies are influenced by the
following ideas, beliefs, and assumptions: social change is an orderly
and stable process which proceeds in a continuous linear progress
through stages which begin in the phase of "traditionalism" and end in
160
the stage of "modernization"; the process of modernization brings about
consensus-directed politics; development is diffused from advanced to
backward areas; the transference of technology, capital, institutions
and values from the modern to the developing societies promotes
development; development is basically measured in terms of growth of
the national income or product; economic production should be regulated
by the demands of the market; and the chief function of education is
manpower training through technical and vocational education.
The foregoing developmentalist ideas have been challenged by
some scholars whose studies present empirical data which deny the
scientific validity of those ideas. Thus, Chilcote and Edelstein (1974;
demonstrated that the development process followed by England was
qualitatively different than the process Latin American countries are
undertaking. Bernstein (1971) showed that "traditional" societies have
some of the positive characteristics of "modern" societies.
Hirschman (1971) demonstrated that conditions taken as obstacles to
modernization, according to whether those conditions were prsent or not
at about the time when development was brought under way in today's
modern societies, may be assets to modernization. Bodenheimer (1969)
showed how the emphasis on an orderly and stable change has hindered
the possibilities of social change in Latin America. Baran and Sweezy
(1966) demonstrated that economic development in underdeveloped
countries was inimical to the dominant interests in the advanced
capitalist countries. Magdoff (1969) demonstrated that foreign
investment in Latin America produced outflow of capital from these
countries and aggravated their condition of economic dependence. Frank
161
(1972) contended that advanced countries only diffuse the technology
which serves as the basis of monopoly control over underdeveloped
countries. Deutsch (1975) demonstrated that the degree of inequality
among the world's countries and the peoples within countries has not
diminished. Woodhouse (1972) demonstrated that the concentration on
aggregate GNP growth as a prime measure of economic development does
not provide an adequate indication of development.
The developmentalist ideology as promoted through American
foreign assistance policies harmonizes with the capitalist structure of
the U.S. whose basic premises are the development of private enterprise
and market regulation of production. This ideology also legitimizes
the expansion of the capitalist structure into peripheral countries.
Moran (1973) reported that recent studies of the growth of American
industries confirm that the largest corporations consider foreign
investment to be a vital need and an institutional necessity. However,
according to Purtado (1974) there is a qualitative difference between
central and peripheral capitalism because
. . . the dynamism of central capitalism stems from the flow
of new products being introduced and from the permanent
expansion of mass consumption. Quite differently, peripheral
capitalism is based on cultural imitation and depends on
concentration of income to grow. (p. 11)
This concentration >of income increases economic inequality in
peripheral countries and the vast majority of population then tend to
remain excluded from the fruits of technical progress and capital
accumulation. In addition, American foreign assistance policies impel
peripheral countries toward a development similar to that of the United
States through the "demonstration effect" and the "domination effect."
162
According to the demonstration effect the aspirations of peripheral
nations are molded according to the type of consumption of center
nations. According to the domination effect center nations have
relative autonomy ini making decisions which affect the world market
(Guerreiro-Ramos, 1969).
2. UCLA's technical assistance programs in Latin America are
mainly concerned with educational issues; the transfer of technology,
values and institutions; and the promotion of private enterprise in
those countries. The ideological position of the University's programs
in these issues is developmentalist. Hence, there is ideological
harmony between the Government's policies and the University's programs
concerning those issues. The University, then, functions as a channel
of political significance, it may be communicating to Latin America the
United States Government's ideology about technology, values, institu
tions, education, and private enterprise, which may lead to the
development of a structure similar to that of the United States, and to
the attainment of the economic and security goals of American foreign
assistance policies.
3. UCLA's documents on technical assistance programs in Latin
America show little concern for issues related to the kind and process
of development, the role of the market in the economic production, and
the indicators of development. This may indicate some reluctance by
the University to get involved in issues which are very sensitive to
ideological manipulations. It may further indicate that the University
personnel involved in the implementation of technical assistance
programs abroad express their own ideology. The University as an
163
academic institution claims to be non-ideological and to deal
technically with development problems. In fact, several of the faculty
members interviewed expressed that the University does not have a
foreign policy but has only academic concerns.
4. The fact that the technical assistance programs analyzed in
this study have been accepted and demanded by center groups of Latin
America points out the linkages between the United States as a center
nation and the center groups in peripheral nations. This relationship
is explained by Cockcroft, Frank, and Johnson (1972) as follows:
The close correspondence between the interests of Latin
America's bourgeoisies and those of foreign investors, their
dependence upon international support for survival against
the forces of nationalism and revolution, and the growing
importance of the multinational corporation all testify to
the impact of the metropolis upon the class structures of
the satellites. The so-called "national" and "progressive"
bourgeoi.sisjin Latin America is neither nationalist nor
progressive— it is a dependent, comprador bourgeoisie. Latin
America's bourgeoisies have been the active agents of foreign
economic penetration— and related phenomena such as increased
militarization— over the past two decades. The masses, of
course, continue to produce the wealth and pay the price for
this ongoing misdevelopment. (p. xviii)
The recognition of this linkage is very important for designing
strategies for broader development. After all, as Mazrui stated:
"The worst form of cultural dependency is indeed that dual dependency
that blames all misfortunes on external forces and seeks all solutions
from outside" (Mazrui, 1975, p. 203).
5. The great emphasis that the developmentalist ideology of
American foreign assistance policies and the University's technical
assistance programs in Latin America places on both private enterprise
and increased growth contrasts with today's concern for limited world
resources, the depletion of the environment, and the social costs of
164
pollution. Thus, as mass consumption is stimulated because it promotes
industrial growth, and as the largest benefits of such growth belong to
private entities, the side effects of growth, such as pollution, affect
all peoples whether they are or are not consumers or producers.
Recommendations
In light of the assumptions, findings, and conclusions of this
study, the following recommendations are proposed:
1. The sample design utilized in this study should be expanded
to include a representative sample of American universities to deter
mine if the findings of this case study can be generalized to other
universities.
2. Further research about the ideological impact of UCLA's
technical assistance programs in Latin America may indicate to what
extent the University has been an efficient communication channel for
the diffusion of the ideology of developmentalism.
3. Since this study was limited to the analysis of official
statements, further inquiry into the process of policy making and
implementation may add valuable information to the understanding of the
linkages between ideology and politics.
4. Since all UCLA's technical assistance programs analyzed in
this study have been ending during the 1970s, and instead the University
has increased research about Latin American problems, an analysis of
the ideological component of those research studies may provide further
precise information on the role of UCLA in the diffusion of ideologies
to Latin America.
163
5. Since all technical assistance programs analyzed in this
study were created during the 1960s, a decade largely ruled in the
United States by the Democratic Party, further research into the
ideology of American political parties in relation to foreign
assistance may bring up new conceptual elements for the understanding
of this phenomenon.
6. Policy makers of both the United States and Latin America
should assess the value of the developmentalist ideology in terms of
the widening gap between center and peripheral countries and the future
of the world ecosystem. As Goulet (1974) pointed out:
Present resource distribution patterns in the world run
counter to social justice: a minority of nations enjoys the
lions share of scarce resources to satisfy wants, many of them
trivial or harmful, while real needs of the majority are
ignored. Moreover, the untramelled quest for growth
subordinates means to ends. Economic growth, institutional
modernization, better social services— these and other goods
expected from development are beneficial only if they optimize
a society's sustenance, esteem, and freedom. (p. 14)
Consequently, policies for development should be guided by an
ideology based on ethical principles of social justice. A new inter
national order grounded on austerity and self-reliance may be more
satisfactory. Austerity is needed in both center and peripheral
countries to improve the quality of the environment and to set the
ground rules governing access to world resources and proper environ
mental management, self-reliance means regeneration through self
efforts, and national development based first and foremost on human and
natural resources; it demands the deliberate organization of society in
such a manner that it would be impossible for individual interests to
be pursued at the cost of other people; it also means national
166
independence to choose the economic and political system according to
the will of nationals without interference, coercion or threat of any
form; it does not exclude suitable outside help but centers decisions
within the nation; it means international cooperation on the basis of
sovereign equality and mutual and equitable benefit for all nations.
7. Latin American peoples should appraise the value of the
ideology promoted by American foreign assistance policies and UCLA's
technical assistance programs in light of the goals that much ideology
searches. Hence, if the United States were taken by Latin America as
its referent society, as the ideology of developmentalism attempts, it
should tbke into account the following estimates reported by Guerreiro-
Ramos: "In order to achieve the current U.S. per capita GNP, Argentina
would need 69 years; Brazil, 130 years; Mexico, 162 years; Colombia 338
years" (Guerreiro-Ramos, 1969, p. 18). These estimates point out the
imponderability of the task given the present conditions of the inter
national system. However, as Guerreiro-Ramos (1969) analyzed:
From an economic standpoint, the world as a whole
presently has effective resources significantly to minimize
the burden of poverty where it exists. It is true that the
world's average annual per capita income of $600 is so low
that a distributive policy on a world wide scale would not
be possible. Nevertheless such could be done to minimize
the existing gap between rich and poor nations today if some
means were made available to redesign the present international
system. (p. 16)
Thus, rather than searching for models of development in the
experiences of center nations, Latin American nations should work towarc
the establishment of new goals for development.
8. Universities engaged in technical assistance programs for
foreign countries should recognize that since their task is aimed at
167
promoting social changes, their activities are affected by ideological
and political factors. They should then assist countries in the design
of models of development which are less sensitive to ideological
manipulation by submitting their goals and assumptions to open critical
examination.
9. To avoid the ideological influence of a single country,
nations in need of assistance should search for multilateral aid from
different socioeconomic systems and make their own decisions about the
means and ends of development programs.
10. This inquiry suggests the need for both clarification of
the assumptions that guide social research and further investigation
about the role of ideology in the causation of social phenomena and in
the identification of social possibilities for development. After all,
social reality results in the "tension between objective possibilities
and human choices" (Guerreiro-Ramos, 1970, p. 30). Human choices in
turn are affected by ideological commitments.
168
REFERENCE LIST
169
REFERENCE LIST
Adams, W., & Garraty, J. A. Is the world our campus? Michigan:
Michigan State University Press, 1960.
Agency for International Development. Principles of foreign economic
assistance. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Printing Office, 1963.
Agency for International Development. The AID story. Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Printing Office, 1966.
Alba, V. The Latin Americans. New York: Praeger, 1969.
Almond, G., & Coleman, J. (Eds.). The politics of developing areas.
Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1960.
Althusser, L. Escritos I. Bogota: Ediciones Contacto, 1971.
Bailey, T. A. A diplomatic history of the American people. New York:
F. S. Croft & Co., 1944.
Baran, P., & Sweezy, P. Monopoly capital: An essay on the American
economic and social order. New York: Monthly Review Press, 1966.
Berstein, H. Modernization theory and the sociological study of
development. Journal of Development Studies, 1971, 7_, 141-133.
Blake, N. M., & Barck, 0. T. The United States in its world relations.
New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1960.
Blume, S. S. Toward a political sociology of science. New York: The
Free Press, 1974.
Bodenheimer, S. The ideology of developmentalism: The American
paradigm-surrogate for Latin American studies. Berkeley Journal of
Sociology, 1969, 2_, 165-211.
Bourdeau, P., Chamboredom, J. C., & Passeron, J. C. El oficio del
Socioloqo. Bogota: Editorial Critica, 1968.
Bowles, S., & Gintis, H. Schooling in capitalist America. New York:
Basic Books, 1976.
Brandon, D. American foreign policy, beyond utopianism and realism.
New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1966.
170
Briggs, E. Anatomy of diplomacy. New York: David McKay Company,
1968.
Butts, R. F. America's role in international education: A perspective
on thirty years. In H. G. Shane (Ed.), The United States and
international education. Chicago: The University of Chicago
Press, 1966.
Cardoso, F. H. The industrial elite. In S. M. Lipset, & A. Solari
(Eds.), Elites in Latin America. New York: Oxford University
Press, 1967.
Cardoso, F. H. Sobre teorisa e metodo em socioloqia. Sao Paulo:
Edicoes CEBRAP, 1971.
Cardoso, F. H. Industrialization, dependency and power in Latin
America. Berkeley Journal of Sociology, 1972, 18^, 381-397.
Carnoy, M. Education as cultural imperialism. New York: David McKay
Company, 1974.
Chilcote, R. H., & Edelstein, J. C. (Eds.). Latin America: The
struggle with dependence and beyond. Cambridge: Schenkman
Publishing Company, 1974.
Cockcroft, J. D., Frank, A. G., & Johnson, D. L. Dependence and under
development . New York: Doubleday & Company, 1972.
Council on Higher Education in the American Republics. The arts and
the university. New York: CHEAR Publications, 1964.
Coleman, J. S. Academic achievement and the structure of composition.
Harvard Educational Review, 1939, Reprint series No. 1, 17-21.
Coombs, P. H. Education and foreign aid. Cambridge: Harvard
University Press, 1963.
Corradi, J. E. Cultural dependence and the sociology of knowledge:
The Latin American case. International Journal of Contemporary
Sociology, 1971, 8_, 35-55.
Correa-Weffort, F. Nota s8bre a teoria da dependencia: Teoria de
classe ou ideologia nacional. In F. H. Cardoso, et al. Sobre
teoria e metodo em socilogia. Sao Paulo: Edicoes CEBRAP, 1971.
de Sola Pool, I. Trends in content analysis. Urbana: University of
Illinois Press, 1959.
Department of'State. Foreign aid. Facts and fallacies (General Public
Policy Series). Washington, D.C.: Department of State, July 1961.
171
Department of State. American foreign policy: Current documents.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1963.
Department of State. American foreign policy: Current documents.
Washington, D.C.: U.S; Government Printing Office, 1963.
Department of State. American foreign policy: Current documents.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1968.
Deutsch, K. W. On inequality and limited growth. International
Studies Quarterly, 1975, 19, 381-397.
Deutsch, S. E. International education and exchange. Cleveland: The
Press of Case Western Reserve University, 1970.
Dos Santos, T. El nuevo caracter de la dependencia. Santiago de
Chile: Centro de Estudios Socio-Economicos, Universidad de Chile,
1968.
Dos Santos, T. Dependencia economica y alternativas de cambio en
America Latina. Revista Mexicana de Socioloqia, 1970, 32^, 417-463.
Dos Santos, T. Imperialismo y empresas multinacionales. Buenos Aires:
Editorial Galerna, 1973.
Dreeben, R. The contribution of schooling to the learning of norms.
Harvard Educational Review, 1967, 3J7, 211-237.
Frank, A. G. Latin America: Underdevelopment of revolution. New
York: Monthly Review Press, 1969.
Frank, A. G. Sociology of development and underdevelopment of
sociology. In J. Cockcroft, A. G. Frank, & D. L. Johnson (Eds.),
Dependence and underdevelopment. New York: Doubleday & Co., 1972.
Fr-iedricks, R. A socioloqy of socioloqy. New York: The Free Press,
1970.
Furfey, P. H. Sociological science and the problem of values. In
L. Gross (Ed.), Symposium on sociological theory. New York:
Harper & Row Publishers, 1959.
Furtado, C. The myth of economic development and the future of the
third world. University of Cambridge, Center of Latin American
Studies, Working Papers No. 16, 1974.
Galtung, J. A structural theory of imperialism. Journal of Peace
Research, 1971, J3, 82-117.
Gardner, J. W. AID and the universities. New York: Education & World
Affairs, 1964.
172
George, A. Quantitative and qualitative approaches to content
analysis. In I. de Sola Pool (Ed.), Trends in content analysis.
Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1959.
Gerassi, J. The great fear in Latin America. New York: Collier
Books, 1973.
Goulet, D. Development and the international economic order.
International Development Review, 1974, 16^, 10-16.
Greene, F. The enemy. New York: Vintage Books, 1971.
Guerreiro-Ramos, A. Prospects for Latin America in a shrinking world.
Paper delivered at the 27th Institute on World Affairs, Department
of Political Science, San Diego State, August 27, 1969.
Guerreiro-Ramos, A. Modernization: Towards a possibility model. In
W. A. Beling, & S. 0. Totten (Eds.), Developing nations: Quest for
a model. New York: Van Nystrand Reinhold Co., 1970.
Gumperez, E. M. Internationalizing American higher education.
Berkeley: University of California, Center for Research and
Development in Higher Education, 1970.
Harbison, F. H., & Myers, C. A. Education, manpower, and economic
growth. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1964.
Harnecker, M. Los conceptos elementales del materialismo historico.
Medellin: Editorial Prisma Ltda.,'1971.
Hawaii University, East-West Center. The international programs of
American universities. An inventory and analysis. Honolulu:
Institute of Advanced Projects, 1966.
Health, Education, and Welfare Department. Inventory of federal
programs involving educational activities concerned with improving
international understanding and cooperation. Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1969.
Hirschman, A. 0. A bias for hope. New Haven: Yale University Press,
1971.
Horowitz, I. L. Philosophy, science and the sociology of knowledge.
Springfield: Charles C. Thomas Publisher, 1961.
Humphrey, R. A. (Ed.). Universities and development assistance abroad.
Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education, 1967.
Inkeles, A. Social structure and socialization of competence. Harvard
Educational Review, 1966, 36^ 265-283.
173
Johnson, D. L. Dependence and the international system. In J. D.
Cockcroft, A. G. Frank, & D. L. Johnson (Eds.), Dependence and
underdevelopment. New York: Doubleday & Company, 1972.
Kerr, C. Values and visions. A report of six years of university
growth 1958-1964. Berkeley: University of California, 1964.
Kissinger, H. A. American foreign policy. New York: W. Norton &
Company, 1969.
Konstantinov, F. V. El materialismo historico. Mexico, D.F.:
Editorial Grijalbo, 5.A., 1966.
Kuhn, T. The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press, 1962.
La Palombara, J. Decline of ideology: A dissent and an interpretation.
American Political Science Review, 1966, 6JD, 5-16.
Lenin, V. I. The essentials of Lenin. Westport: Hyperion Press, 1973.
Leopold, R. W. The growth of American foreign policy. New York:
Alfred A. Knopf, 1962.
Lipset, S. M. Political man: The social bases of politics. New York:
Doubleday, I960.
Little, I. M. D., & Clifford, J. M. International aid. Chicago:
Aldine Publishing Company, 1965.
Loucks, W. N. Comparative economic systems. New York: Harper &
Brothers Publishers, 1957.
Lowenthal, A. F. United States policy toward Latin America: "Liberal,"
"radical," and "bureaucratic" perspectives. Latin American
Research Review, 1973, 8^, 3-25.
Magdoff, H. The age of imperialism: The economics of U.S. foreign
policy. New York: Monthly Review Press, 1969.
Mannheim, K. Ideology and utopia. New York: Harcourt, Brace and
Company, 1929.
Mazrui, A. A. The African university as a multinational corporation:
Problems of penetration and dependency. Harvard Educational
Review, 1975, 45_, 191-210.
Melvin, K. Education in world affairs. Lexington; D. C. Heath and
Company, 1970.
Mende, T. From aid to re-colonization. New York: Pantheon Books,
1973.
174
Michie, A. A. (Ed.)* Diversity and interdependence through inter
national education. New York: Education and World Affairs, 1967.
Mills, C. W. Images of man: The classic tradition in sociological
thinking. New York: George Braziller, Inc., 1960.
Moran, T. H. Foreign expansion as an ’ ’institutional necessity" for
U.S. corporate capitalism: The search for a radical model. World
Politics, 1973, 25, 369-386.
Morray, J. P. The United States and Latin America. In J. Petras, &
M. Zeitlin (Eds.), Latin America: Reform or revolution?
Greenwich: Fawcett Publications Inc., 1968.
Murga, A. Dependency: A Latin American view. NACLA Newsletter, 1971,
4, 1-13.
Mullinsr, W. A. On the concept of ideology in political science. The
American Political Science Review, 1972, 66_ , 498-510.
Parsons, T. The social system. Glencoe: The Free Press, 1951.
Parsons, T. The school class as a social system. Harvard Educational
Review, 1959, 29, 297-318.
Paulston, R. G. Conflicting theories of social and educational change:
A typological review. Pittsburg: University Center for Inter
national Studies, 1976.
Plamenatz, J. Ideology. New York: Praeger, 1970.
Prebisch, R. The economic development of Latin America and its
principal problems. New York: United Nations, 1950.
Public papers of the Presidentsco'f the United States. Washington, D.C. :
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1963.
Public papers of the Presidentsco'f the United States. Washington, D.C. :
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1965.
Public papers of the Presidentstof the United States. Washington, D.C. :
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1966.
Public papers of the Presidents.of the United States. Washington, D.C. :
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1968.
Public papers of the Presidents of the United States. Washington, D.C. :
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1970.
Public papers of the Presidents dfthe United States. Washington, D.C. :
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1971.
175
Public papers of the Presidents of the United States. Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1975.
Richardson, J. R. Partners in development. East Lansing: Michigan
State University Press, 1969.
Rostow, W. W. The stages of economic growth. A non-Communist
manifesto. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1962.
Rudner, R. Value judgments in the acceptance of theories. In P. G.
Frank (Ed.), The validation of scientific theories. Boston: The
Beacon Press, 1954.
Russet, B. The Americans' retreat from world power. Political Science
Quarterly, 1975, 910, 1-21.
Ripp.yy, J. F. Latin America in world politics. New York: Alfred A.
Knopf, 1928.
Sartory, G. Politics, ideology and belief systems. American Political
Science Review, 1969, 63_ , 398-411.
Schrumann, F. Ideology and organization in Communist China. Berkeley:
University of California Press, 1973.
Schwartz, A. J. The schools and socialization. New York: Harper &
Row, 1975.
Schwartz, F. (Ed.). Scientific thought and social reality. Essays by
M. Polanyi. New York: International University Press, 1974.
Selinger, M. Ideology and politics. New York: The Free Press, 1976.
Stuart, J. M., & Tigner, R. W. Latin America and the United States.
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1975.
Stub, H. R. The sociology of education: A sourcebook. Homewood,
Illinois: The Dorsey Press, 1975.
Stupak, R. J. American foreign policy. New York: Harper & Row
Publishers, 1976.
Sunkel, □. Big business and "Dependencia-" Foreign Affairs, 1972, 50,
517-531.
Tulchin, J. S. Problems in Latin American history. New York: Harper
& Row Publishers, 1973.
United States statutes at large, Vol. 75. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1961.
176
United States statutes at large, Vol. 81. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1968.
United States statutes at large, Vol. 83. Washington, D.C. : U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1970.
United States statutes at large, Vol. 86. Washington, D.C. : U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1973.
United States statutes at large, Vol. 88. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1976.
University of California. The President's report to the Regents.
Berkeley: University of California, 1963. (Mimeo)
University of California. A brief history of the University of
California. Berkeley: University of California, 1966. (Mimeo)
University of California. A report of the activities of the Convenio
between the University of Chile and the University of California
presented to the Ford Foundation. Berkeley: University of
California, 1967. (Mimeo)
University of California. 1969-1970 Annual report and 1971 funding
request. A cooperative education and research program between the
University of Chile and the University of California. Berkeley:
University of California, 1972. (Mimeo)
University of California. 1971-1972 annual report and 1973 funding
request. A cooperative education and research program between the
University of Chile and the University of California. Berkeley:
University of California, 1972. (Mimeo)
University of California. 1973-1974 annual report. A cooperative
education and research program between the University of Chile and
the University of California. Berkeley: University of California,
1974. (Mimeo)
University of California. 1974-1973 annual report. A cooperative
education and research program between the University of Chile and
the University of California. Berkeley: University of California,
1975. (Mimeo)
University of California. 1975-1976 annual report. A cooperative and
research program between the University of Chile and the University
of California. Berkeley: University of California, 1976. (Mimeo)
University of California at Los Angeles. The Brazil project.
Feasibility studies. Los Angeles: UCLA, 1962. (Mimeo)
177
University of California at Los Angeles. Final report of Peace Corps
training program for Peru. Los Angeles: UCLA, Spring 1963.<
(Mimeo)
University of California at Los Angeles. Final report of Peace Corps
training program for Peru and Bolivia. Los Angeles: UCLA,
Summer 1963. (Mimeo)
University of California at Los Angeles. Final report of Peace Corps
training program for Ecuador. Los Angeles: UCLA, Summer 1964.
(Mimeo)
University of California at Los Angeles, Office of the Coordinator,
Overseas Programs. Report on the exchange program between the
Instituto Politecnico Nacional de Mejlco and the University of
California at Los Angeles. Los Angeles: UCLA, 1968. (Mimeo)
University of California at Los Angeles, Latin American Center. Latin
American resources and activities at UCLA 1973-1977. Los Angeles:
UCLA, 1977. (Mimeo)
University of California at Los Angeles. Information. Los Angeles:
UCLA, 1976. (Mimeo)
University of Chicago, Research Center in Economic Development and
Cultural Change. The role of foreign aid in the development of
other countries. A study prepared at the reguest of the Special
Committee of the United States Senate to study the foreign aid
program. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1937.
Wanamaker, T. American foreign policy today. New York: Bantam Books,
1969.
Wilson, H. E. Universities and world affairs. New York: Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace, 1931.
Wilson, H. E., & Wilson, F. H. American higher education and world
affairs. Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education, 1963.
Woodhouse, E. I. Revisioning the future of the third world: An
ecological perspective on development. World Politics, 1972, 24,
1-33.
178

Asset Metadata

Creator Zuniga-Escobar, Miryan (author)

Core Title The role of the American university in the diffusion of ideologies of development to Latin America: A case study of the University of California at Los Angeles

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Education

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag education, higher,Education, Multilingual,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c26-473260

Unique identifier UC11247729

Identifier usctheses-c26-473260 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier DP24627.pdf

Dmrecord 473260

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Zuniga-Escobar, Miryan

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA