Echoing what Manoel de Bonfim had written previously, in his 1903 book A América Latina: males de origem [doc. no. 832506 and doc. no. 833254], Sílvio Romero attributes the “ills” of Latin America to the Iberian colonization inflicted by predatory nations like Spain and Portugal. In the latter’s opinion, the opposite example can be seen in the United States, which was colonized by Anglo-Saxons, “the bearers of other, more productive and progressive ways.” Romero describes the people of the Americas as being endowed with a great ability to learn and assimilate, but he underscores the shallowness of “their powers of observation.” The ideas, theories, and doctrines of Latin American countries “have almost always been imported.” He claims that this trait is apparent “in every branch of the local culture,” and says that Latin Americans do not think, create, or question; they simply quote, reproduce, and “wait to be shown an obvious result.”

Manoel de Bonfim (1868–1932) and Sílvio Romero (1851–1914) were born in the same Brazilian state, Sergipe; they saw eye-to-eye on some matters, but radically disagreed on others, mainly when it came to the subject of Latin America. In spite of their personal and intellectual differences of opinion—that were due to their different cultural backgrounds and historical and theoretical points of view—they were united on one fundamental issue, which is immediately apparent in Romero’s book (A América Latina: análise de livro de igual título do Dr. Bonfim, 1906). They both saw that in time, Brazil would become a “civilized nation” motivated by a widespread acknowledgment of the “national backwardness” that plagues the country at every level, from its economic performance to its educational standards.   

Romero’s book was written in response to the first edition of a book by the same name written by Manoel de Bonfim [A América Latina-Males de origem(Rio de Janeiro: H. Garnier; Livreiro-Editor, 1903)], in which the latter describes the establishment of colonies in Latin America that led to an eternal state of dependence or “protector/protectorate” relationship. Romero counters by arguing that the colonization of America was “soft” compared to Egyptian, Babylonian, Persian, Phoenician, Greek, and Roman conquests.