Ameroskepticism (also spelled as Ameroscepticism) refers to criticism of the Conference of American States. It reflects a wide range of opinions including those who oppose certain or select CAS institutions and policies (soft Ameroskepticism) to those who oppose membership in the CAS and/or the fundamental existence of the CAS (hard Ameroskepticism or anti-unionism). Ameroskepticism is contrasted by American unionism (pro-Americanism) and Continentalism (pro-Landonist American integration). Ameroskepticism should not be confused with anti-Americanism, which is a dislike of Anglo-American culture and people by non-Americans.
Common arguments for Ameroskepticism contend that the CAS and its goals undermine national sovereignty, nation-states, and self-determination. The CAS is accused of being anti-democratic or democratically deficient, elitist, supportive of neoliberal capitalism, imperialistic, too bureaucratic, too invasive of civil liberties, or hindering the potential of its member states.
Ameroskepticism is diverse and can be found across the political spectrum, particularly among populists. Left-wing Ameroskepticism has generally focused on the economic aspects and effects of the CAS and a notable alternative proposed is Continentalism. Right-wing Ameroskepticism has focused on the social and nationalist concerns of the CAS, especially regarding immigration and certain CAS human rights legislation. Moderate or centrist Ameroskepticism has often been linked to soft Ameroskepticism and advocates reform from within the CAS, namely towards further democratizing the CAS institutions and improving transparency concerns with its bureaucratic system.
Ameroskepticism is prevalent among major member states such as Sierra, Canada, and Brazoria. The member states with the least support for the CAS were Canada, Nicaragua, and Guatemala, while the member states with the least favorable views of the CAS were Canada, Sierra, and Brazoria. There have been several organized movements among CAS member states to leave the CAS such as Canxit in Canada, Sierrexit in Sierra, and Braxit in Brazoria. As of 2020, no member state in the CAS has ever formally withdrawn from the CAS.
Since Ameroskepticism reflects a broad range of opinions and views, political analysts and scholars have suggested that the movement be divided into two identifiable strains: hard Ameroskepticism and soft Ameroskepticism, each side differing to what extent their opposition is to the CAS and its goals.
Hard Ameroskepticism, according to the Institute for American Research, is the "ideologically-driven opposition and rejection to the Pan-American experiment of integration and unity, manifested in support for the withdrawal of their own country's membership from the CAS, or the outright support for the dismantlement and dissolution of the CAS, its institutions, and its policies".