The reception and influence of Popper’s philosophy of science and his political philosophy in Latin America have depended heavily on the translation of his major works originally published in German and English. Thus, for example, The Logic of Scientific Discovery, which was originally published in 1959, was translated into Spanish in 1962 and into Portuguese only in 1974. Similarly, The Open Society and Its Enemies, originally published in 1945, was translated into Spanish twelve years later in 1957 and into Portuguese in 1974. But apart from a discussion of the impact of the translations of his books, I also want to show that the political situation in some Latin American countries, for example, Chile, Cuba and Peru, has played a very important role in the introduction, reception and influence of Popper’s philosophy of science in general and his social and political thought in particular. Accordingly, the main purpose of this article is to examine the reception of Popper’s ideas in Latin America and give an account of his influence and legacy in some of the Latin American countries such as Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Cuba, Mexico, Peru and Uruguay.

Regionalism is a process that began from Western European and with the passage of time, it witnessed some developments. Therefore, the starting point of regionalism studies, reviews and theorization have been mainly the Western European region. This fact has led to a situation where actions and efforts of theoretical and practical regionalism in Europe is a criterion and standard for recognition and evaluation of regionalism in other regions of the world. Accordingly, since the establishment of integration agreements between North American countries, namely, Canada-US Free Trade Agreement (CUSFTA) in 1989, North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1994 among US, Mexico and Canada and then security and prosperity partnership of North America (SPP) in 2005 among US, Canada and Mexico from North American region, being termed “ a region where the states have regional integration links” . However, the above mentioned regionalism agreements differ from the regionalism present in other parts of the world both in practice and regarding the concepts being used. It seems that above mentioned agreements in North America have created regionalization which much differ from regionalism. So the question of the present paper is why North American states welcome regionalization but show resistance to regionalism?