suppose that it amounts to this: the poor and unprogressive countries of Latin America want the taxpayers of the United States to meet the cost of developing their resources, just as they are going to pay for the reconstruction of Europe. But the problem is far more complex than this, and such a presentation of the case is quite unfair.

It happens that the great majority of the Latin American nations have had to struggle against geographic and social factors, which have played a decisive part in their economic development, cultural progress, and social stability. It would be well to repeat here in passing that the vast natural resources generally attributed to Latin America are a legend almost as old as history, but unfortunately just a legend. In terms of the units of measure to which you are accustomed, the potentialities of Central America, the islands of the Caribbean, and the southern half of the hemisphere are certainly meager. With the exception of Argentina, Uruguay, Chile and the south of Brazil (all in the extreme southernmost part of the continent), the best lands are generally to be found in the mountain areas, which enjoy a healthful climate and contain isolated groups of population surrounded by vast jungles seething with tropical diseases that took a terrific toll of the hapless peoples whose lot it was to live there. The Andean mountain ranges both protected these highland delwlers from outside encroachment and delayed their progress by making them inaccessible to the rest of the world until the middle of the XVIII century, and by preventing the introduction of modern ways of life. It is true that Latin America is rich in great underground petroleum deposits, and has excellent mines and other economic resources awaiting exploitation. But where are the transportation systems that are needed? Where are the equipment and

the capital required? In tropical Latin America international interests did develop the quinine and rubber industries, until they discovered that it was cheaper to get these products from the Orient after wagelevels in the New World started to rise. For some time other great imperial interests have been trying to develop coffee plantations in countries where slavery still exists, replacing their Latin American sources lest the payment of a decent wage to workers be added to the cost of coffee. The fault does not lie entirely with the Latin Americans that the efforts made in the past century and this to develop their resources with the aid of foreign capital— railroads, mining and oil wells, agricultural enterprises-have not served to enrich them in spite of the great profits derived from these activities by the investors. The fact is that in a large part of these countries there are two concurrent ways of life: one, on the surface, composed of a thin stratum of people who live very much as do Europeans and North Ameri¡cans and enjoy a cosmopolitan outlook and in some cases a broad education; the other layer lies far below this level, engulfed in poverty and social neglect, living in a state of ignorance and often in the most primitive conditions. Between the two there are very few contacts. In countries where there is an appreciable Indian element in the population, this is always to be found in the second category.

Jeans

If the standards of living of these great masses of humanity were raised so that they could take their places as producers and consumers of goods, millions of people of unusual intelligence and native ability would be incorporated into the economic life of the hemisphere. There are many factors that have been delaying this inevitable evolution, and they also menace the political stability of Latin America, which is subject to continuous underground

movements and mysterious collapses it would be impossible to explain in terms of social and political phenomena that occur in this part of the world or in Europe. One of those factors is the resistance offered by the upper economic stratum, which regards as revolutionary any change in the living conditions of the people and as bad business any improvement in wages or working conditions. These interests find it possible to bring sufficient pressure to bear on the governments, whoever may happen to be in power at the time, to secure protection for monopolistic industries that retard the natural flowering of the national economy, lessen the opportunities for employment, and make the life of the people more costly. From time to time revolutions or political upheavals of a social nature arouse a desire for power among the lower levels of society, and sometimes even a national congress will distinguish itself with progressive legislation, which later turns out to be impossible of execution.

Therefore, the disillusionment and the feeling of impotence in the face of poverty, combined with a considerable measure of freedom of the press and of propaganda, provides a fertile soil for the seeds of new uprisings which, in countries whose population is prone to engage freely in politics, may take a new form each time. This is not surprising in lands where there are millions of inhabitants without a home or an organized family life, without schools, without land, without even personal belongings. Their only risk in joining a revolutionary movement is the loss of the following day's wages. To this state of chronic instability must be added the need that every government feels to strengthen the forces of public order-the police and the army usually up to a point incompatible with the financial resources of the nation. In such a situation those who govern the

Latin American States have all felt the pressing need to achieve some social balance, a measure of justice. In their search for the solution, however, they have more than once run counter to the interests of foreign capitalists. These capitalists, while accepting as part of their production costs the high wages paid in other parts of the world where there is a spiraling cost of living, nevertheless quickly adapt themselves in Latin America to the existing colonial economic system. Frequently they limit their ties with those countries to the minimum contact necessary to derive the highest possible return from their investments, which usually enjoy the advantage of government concessions and special privileges intended to attract foreign capital.

All these factors contribute to the difficulty of introducing at any given time an effective system of economic cooperation, one that would result in reciprocal benefit to the United States on the one hand and to the Latin American republics on the other. But difficult though this may be, it is also for the same reasons vital, urgent, and no longer to be deferred, in the interests of all the American republics, not excepting the United States. To cite just one example, let us consider a topic that has justly claimed the special attention of American public opinion since the last war, and that is hemispheric security, which is affected not only by the way the signatory states honor such international agreements as the Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance, but also by the political stability of the Latin American governments. But as long as no positive effort is made to improve social conditions in Latin America, to raise the standard of life of the lower classes, this stability remains ever in jeopardy, and each day the danger grows.

It is not that the Latin American countries may turn communistic. No, the

trouble lies in the fact that in some parts of our continent the social atmosphere is such that abject poverty leads naturally to disturbances of the peace, to anarchy, and to popular uprisings; and of course international communism takes advantage of these situations, not necessarily to proselytize, but to spread confusion and to sabotage the good neighbor relations. and our strong inter-American ties. Powerful communistic parties are not needed, now or in the future. All that is required is that scattered representatives of subversive international organizations be alert to make the most of every disturbance, to utilize every occasion to destroy order, to foster revolt, and to aggravate every source of friction between the American states.

I cannot think of any other factor that could be more disruptive of the security of this nation and of the best interests of world democracy than an unstable Latin America, in a state of disorganization, and shaken by social convulsions and sudden changes of government that would make impossible cooperation with the United States in behalf of peace or national security. This is one good reason why we should seek effective forms of economic cooperation to promote, defend, and maintain the democratic principles of the hemisphere. But that is not the only one.

Another is the fact, however much we might wish to evade it, that the economic life of the hemisphere is indivisible. If vigorous and well directed steps are not taken to create better living conditions in Latin America, that section of the world may easily become a burden—an intolerable one-and an obstacle to the progress of life in North America. With rising standards in the United States will come, inevitably, higher prices for the goods produced here, and at the same time fewer purchases by the countries to the South. The United States cannot continue in

definitely acting the part of the player who periodically divides his winnings among his ruined fellow-players in order that the game may go on. In all the world, and particularly in this hemisphere, we have need for better living standards, greater purchasing power, and a larger number of consumers for the goods of a system of production that appears to have no limits to its growth. Today it would be possible with very little effort to give a vigorous impulse to the development of the Latin American nations. With the passing of time, and the interaction of political instability and the present economic disorganization, the task may well become one of reconstruction, such as that the American taxpayer is underwriting in Europe at the present time.

Hence the great significance of the preparatory work to be undertaken by the Inter-American Economic and Social Council before the meeting of the Buenos Aires Conference. I have gone into so much detail here in the desire to make it clear to you that we should not give undue weight to reports and comments that would present the difficulties encountered with the Economic Agreement at the Ninth Conference as evidence of a breakdown in the friendship and collaboration between the United States and Latin America. The problem has many angles to it, and it is not wholly understood even by the countries most vitally affected; so it is going to be necessary to work out a series of successive adjustments in this field that in the end will produce an economic cooperation among the Americas that will stand revealed as just as clear, easy, and simple as Our political cooperation is today.

Many passing private interests, both here and in Latin America, will have to make way, and they will not do so without a fight. When business is good it has a

WHEN the first Spanish settlers arrived in the Western Hemisphere in the early 16th century they found many millions of people already long resident here whom they called "Indians." The tropical lowlands, the coastal regions, and the great plains were occupied for the most part by rude and simple tribes that subsisted largely on the products of the hunt and fishery. Some tribes in these areas were slightly more advanced and possessed a rudimentary agricultural economy but migrated as seasons, sources of food supply, and other conditions changed.

Some of those along the routes of the migration of early man in America had been stimulated by exchange of knowledge and goods and had developed large cities, complex political systems, elaborate arts, and a considerable body of organized information, including careful astronomical observations, an excellent calendrical system, and picture writing that closely approached a phonetic alphabet. Architecture was well developed and, at least indirectly, has influenced some of our own modern design.1

1 The cultures of these peoples were, of course, very complex and varied greatly. Professional anthropologists have done much to increase our knowledge and understanding of these differences and it has been found important to take into account their findings in the development of specific practical programs. These variations should not be forgotten in making such broad generalizations as have been made. Those interested in reading more along this line are referred to: Julian H. Steward's The Changing American Indian, in: Linton, RalphEditor, The Science of Man in the World Crisis. New York, Columbia University Press, 1945, pp. 282-304, and John Collier's The Indians of the Americas. New York, W. W. Norton & Co., Inc., 1947, 326 p.

With certain outstanding exceptions, the Indian peoples were rather easily conquered. Among the reasons for this were the failure of the natives of America to develop the wheel and to make use of iron. They did not have the horse or mule, and they had not acquired a coordinated mastery of military tactics. But perhaps the most important factors leading to their easy defeat were their lack of unity and the fact that, especially in the great Indian nations, the majority were not participants in a democratic society for whose survival they were willing to fight and die. They were a subjugated people who, on being enslaved by the Europeans, merely changed masters. The aborigines had developed a number of democratic institutions, but for the most part these were not widespread or were in a decadent condition. The most stubborn resistance was from the upper, more privileged classes whose authority and position were threatened, and the cream of Indian culture was lost with their annihilation.

The bulk of the Europeans settled in towns and cities in the same regions that had previously been heavily populated by the natives, and a great deal of mixture resulted. The Church, the encomienda system (a form of land grant), and the colonial government were the principal instruments of control. The number of colonists was not great enough, however, to overcome the enormous geographical barriers, so that a large percentage of the Indians who moved to the more remote