Inter-American Social Security Coordination in an Era of Global Development, 1947–60

Only months before the United Nations approved documents declaring social security a “human right,” U.S. authorities invited social welfare practitioners from Latin America to a three week inter-American “social security leadership” institute. The event promoted social welfare coordination as a new feature of the expanding international labor standards code. To this end, and in conjunction with the International Labor Organization (ILO), welfare officials founded the Permanent Inter-American Social Security Committee to deal primarily with programs in Latin America. With democratic and labor movements in the region relatively strong in the years following the war, policy-makers turned their attention to restructuring state social institutions. Set on expanding both the aims and the reach of such entities, social security experts truly occupied an intercessory space in this endeavor. Linking local politics and labor activism to national social welfare campaigns these men and women simultaneously engaged in the world of international diplomacy. This paper tracks the accomplishments, and the disappointments, of these social welfare envoys via their rich and ongoing correspondence.  Their collaboration reveals an interesting admixture, combining visions of social security as a universal right—recognizing the “innate dignity” of all mankind—with hard political and economic realities imposed by each national environment.  Throughout the 1950s, the motivation behind regional social security remained shrouded in ambiguity, inspired by the belief in human rights, as noted, but also supported by advocates of a more aggressive modernization thrust. Outwardly, inter-American social welfare experts continued to consider the dilemmas of development in terms of individual standards of living but, increasingly, industrialization experts anchored social security to productivity and growth. Urbanization in the postwar decades pulled millions of people from traditional, informal forms of social protection. What were the consequences for these workers themselves if widespread economic development failed now?