I'm reading this book on political culture in Latin America right now, and have read about half of it, I just stumbled, for the 100th time, on a U.S. supported coupe d'?tat. Unbefuckinglieveable...the U.S. has literally intervented in every damn country out there, to stop 'communism' (which was in most cases simple socialism, but if it had anything to do with reforms, Marxism, Sandinism it was automatically redubbed communist or revolutionist)....in fact, these inteverntions have in general managed to break down processes which integrated the stricken countries into the global market and liberal politics and set them back for 20-40 years.

Ok...most of you know I don't hate Americans, but dudez...I'm getting a nasty taste about U.S. foreign politics here man! lol...just needed to get this off my chest. WTF can I do about it eh?

Re: U.S. intervention in Latin-America

Iran-Contra anyone?

The US has been doing this kind of thing for 100 years. Dont expect it to stop anytime soon. :cry:

2 books I would suggest reading:

Confessions of an Economic Hitman.

Crossing The Rubicon: The Decline of The American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil.

Re: U.S. intervention in Latin-America

I'm glad you're opening your eyes Yao. 1960-1980 was a horrible time for Latin America, military interventions funded, trained, and supported by the United States via CIA and special military units devastated our continent. We are still paying the consecuences, a whole generation of future leaders was eliminated/silenced, economic independence destroyed through IMF/WB, elimination of the state of welfare, fascist regimes controlled the continent puppeteered by the 'free and democratic' world leaders.

France collaborated in training (as the US did) military and police forces in 'anti-guerrilla' combat. Combat meaning torture, assasination and systematic disappearance (ever heard of Algiers?) of the bodies of the 'terrorists', terrorists as in, teachers, priests, human rights advocates, their families, their friends... stealing their sons and daughters, their possessions. All of this in the name of the battle against communism.

Too bad there aren't more people interested in reading and learning about topics like this Yao, but congratulations to you for doing so.

Here's some links if you want to read a little bit of the consecuences of this in Argentina (just as an example of what happened throughout Latin America up until 1990):

[url]http://www.abuelas.org.ar/english/history.htm[/url] [url]http://www.yendor.com/vanished/index.html[/url]

Re: U.S. intervention in Latin-America

thanx Beto...it's exactly as you stated there, but hasn't even stopped until today. Crazy shit...but I'm doing this as an extension of my African studies, since I'm very interested in both continents: they have so much similarities, especially on this particular subject. In Africa the influence of Europe had similar effects, tho not exactly the same, not as direct as the U.S. did it in L-A, but still with largely the same results.

I'll be sure to check out those links mate, thanks for finding some additional info for me. Might even help me scoring some extra points on monday ;-)

This book is: [i]Politics of Latin America[/i] by Harry E. Vanden & Gary Prevost. Tough but very good read, I'm actually enjoying it a lot. Recommendation...

Re: U.S. intervention in Latin-America

[quote=beto]Combat meaning torture, assasination and systematic disappearance (ever heard of Algiers?) of the bodies of the 'terrorists', terrorists as in, teachers, priests, human rights advocates, their families, their friends... stealing their sons and daughters, their possessions. All of this in the name of the battle against communism.[/quote]

yes, i've heard of algiers. =)

as i may have mentioned before, my family and i barely escaped algeria alive in 1993 when the civil war broke out. many members of my family are still considered political dissidents and some regularly receive death threats allegedly signed by the Islamist groups (but we all know who sends them).

the US had its hands in pretty much every conflict that took or is taking place from east timor, to algeria, to nicaragua.

it's basically all about risk-free democracy, to use john esposito's term. that is, democracy is appropriate when and only when it supports or furthers the US' interests. hence our support for certain dictatorships in the middle east, while others we invade or pressure to change regimes...

Re: U.S. intervention in Latin-America

i have come to the conclusion that america is fucked. everyone wants to solve the worlds problems, but NO ONE CAN/WILL DO IT>. seriously. think about it. we just took a dictator down whom killed over 300k people and the country is hated even more. im moving to the netherlands, no one complains there.

is it paradise Yao?

Re: U.S. intervention in Latin-America

if you read the washington post's feature these past few weeks, you'll find out that Finland is an awesome place to live.

check it out!

Re: U.S. intervention in Latin-America

[quote=thesightless]i have come to the conclusion that america is fucked. everyone wants to solve the worlds problems, but NO ONE CAN/WILL DO IT>. seriously. think about it. we just took a dictator down whom killed over 300k people and the country is hated even more. im moving to the netherlands, no one complains there.

is it paradise Yao?[/quote]

ROFL...well...at least you won't get jailed for chilling with a spliff here ;-)

Everyone complains...The Netherlands as well. The problem with nobody (or at least not enough countries to the liking of Bush) wanting to help the US is simple: this whole democratizing-war thing is nothing but protecting the interests of the US...for the same reason a lot of countries (inluding the US) have supported dictators in the past because that proved convenient for their economic/political interest. Now that it's not like that anymore for some countries, they start attacking them, but not every country wins by taking on that stance, like France for instance: US is pissing on them for not co-operating in this Iraq-war, but damn...the US used to support Iraq in the past. Now it has become a threat to their economical/political interests, and they suddenly expect France to tag along: but France was still profiting, and not gaining anything by an invasion, plain and simple. So there ya go...

Accusing others of being ego?stic when it's you yourself that's just as ego?stic is not really recommendable in the end...

but feel free to move here Sightless, we'll have a whiskey, a spliff for you and some cigars for me while discussing politics :mrgreen:

Re: U.S. intervention in Latin-America

Yao,

seriously, fuck the french. ungrateful. rude people, and im not even bringin up WW2. i have yet to meet a polite considerate frenchman. show me one and ill start to change my opinion.

Re: U.S. intervention in Latin-America

[quote=thesightless]Yao,

seriously, fuck the french. ungrateful. rude people, and im not even bringin up WW2. i have yet to meet a polite considerate frenchman. show me one and ill start to change my opinion.[/quote]

hmm. is their opposition to the iraq invasion the main reason for this francophobia? i don't get it, really. WWII? are you one of those guys who always says...if it weren't for us the French would be speaking German? because that's just silly. you could extend that same logic with reference to our war of independence, and say that if it weren't for the French, Americans would still be sipping English tea and carry a portrait of the queen in their wallet.

and as for the ungrateful, rude, and impolite comments, i don't understand those, either. do you really know that many French people to merit such large-scale judgment? personally, almost all of my father's family are French nationals--albeit most are of Algerian descent--and they're really nice people. and i've spent a lot of time in France and with French people, for whom i have much respect. i'm not saying there aren't any French assholes out there, but there is also much diversity when talking about French citizens today. it's not just your typical douche in the black-and-white-striped shirt, questionable moustache, and red beret screaming, "sacr? bleu!"

so, France is no longer a homogeneous "Gallicanized" culture. your typical Frenchman is not so typical anymore. Post-Colonial France is as diverse as its former colonies were, to put it bluntly. you're just as likely to meet a Frenchwoman from the Caribbean or North Africa as you are a Frenchwoman "de souche" (~indigenous). it is really quite fascinating to read about the changes taking place in French culture and society today.

i just don't understand how such categorical french demonization is tolerated--even encouraged--in our society.

Re: U.S. intervention in Latin-America

No need to add anything to that I believe Face...

This whole hatin' ting towards France is getting a bit over the top at the moment, and I'm thinking it is indeed sneakily instigated by the US govt. with quite subtle propaganda. It's quite irrational to ask of France to be at your side always because you've once liberated them in the first place. Isn't liberation all about giving someone the freedom to decide for himself? Large part of the US still seems to think France should be licking their arses for WW II...but as Face said, in that case France can make the same call referring to the independence of the US.

I don't always approve of France's politics, nor do I always approve of the US's politics. Still I'm on speaking terms with you mate...as well as with the French.

The British don;t like the French, period.

Food is pretty good and the women would be tasty if they ever shaved under their arms. :P

I spent about three weeks in Paris a few years ago in addition to random visits to other parts of France, and have developed the opinion that, speaking in broad generalizations, the people of Paris were quite rude, while the people in other parts of the country were very friendly. I do speak passing French, by the way (or at least I did at the time), and that didn't really help me in Paris.

Giving the French folk the benefit of the doubt, Paris is a big city; New Yorkers have a reputation for being rather rude as well, so it could be a function of that as much as anything. I think of New Yorkers as simply curt as opposed to rude, so maybe being curt plus a French accent is enough to turn people off. It was enough for me. It's been a few years, though -- I'd still go back...

My $.02

Re: U.S. intervention in Latin-America

Yea, the peepz in Paris suck ass man...but in the rest of the country it's quite alright. I've spent about 6 summers in the south, near Marseille, and had some great times over there with other French youths.

Also made my French good enough to keep talking to a buch of French grown-ups for a few hours without them realising I wasn't French ;-) That kicked ass.

Re: U.S. intervention in Latin-America

haha, well done yao.

two of my uncles live in paris at the moment, but one of them is retiring to aix-en-provence. i've spent much time there in transit--usually during the summer, but most recently during the bitter cold winter. admittedly, paris is quite daunting. and the people are not the friendliest, it's true. in nevers, where my father and some of his brothers were born, the people are very very nice.

i think the smaller towns are much friendlier, which can be generalized to any major urban center. and so i think NYC and paris are very similar: large metropolitan melting pots--culturally, ethnically, religiously diverse urban centers. even if you do speak the native language, you're probably better off not (better off with italian, senegalese, hebrew, arabic, lithuanian, or what have you!).

in paris they do give you a hard time when you try to speak french and mess up. it's funny: in the middle east, when foreigners try to speak arabic the locals love it! but they'd rather not speak it so that they can practice their english!

Re: U.S. intervention in Latin-America

Haha, that sounds veeeeerrryyy familiar! In most countries people are indeed thrilled if you've taken the trouble to learn their language...I've had some great and funny scenes in Africa beacause of that (I speak a little Ewe (Ghanaian language), tho in my country I'm prolly on of the few who speak it).

But in Paris, despite he beauty of the city, people can indeed even make fun of you for not mastering it perfect. Seems somehow to be some remainder of the colonial past, when France was considered the epicentre of civilization...I think that attitude still lingers in the French capital. At least I know my French well enough to give 'em hell when they start making fun of me.

L?che mon cul, salope...;-)

Re: U.S. intervention in Latin-America

in general tho, the french really appreciate you doing an effort, i've been to france many times, and find them to be very friendly. My parents returned a few weeks ago from there trip to montellimar, and were amased that every single person they passed said a friendly hello. I love that, i used to do that as a kid too, untill i got a bit too old for that i guess, and people started looking at me funny :oops:

Re: U.S. intervention in Latin-America

to quote chomsky... 'in order to defeat terrorism, we need to stop participating in it.'

and most of our 'terrorism' has been waged in latin america....

over 3,000 people were killed in 1 bombing run in panama city during operation just cause to extract noriega....who is now serving time for crimes mostly committed while he was cashing CIA checks. el salvador.....still recovering from the john negroponte-led death squads in the 80's....second poorest country in the hemisphere....to haiti. columbia....fighting the 'war on drugs' is really an excuse to funnel $$ and arms to fight leftist groups. chile....pinochet....'nuff said. the economic damage we have doen to argentina.... the list goes on and on...

Re: U.S. intervention in Latin-America

Just signing in and looking for significative forums. This one seems to be so.

Regarding the intervention. Either in Latin America or elsewhere, I believe that by the need to fight an enemy, either idea or agrupation, the US is looking to fulfuill it?s Manifest Destiny, and old concept born with their independence. Therefore, what ever they do and whoever the confront, its just to fullfill their interests, the rest is just politics and bureucratic BS.

I dont aggree with it, but I have to admit certain level of admiration for such commitment and determination.

On the other hand, its impossible to blame it only to the US. Aren?t the independent countries everywhere else supposed to protect and fulfill their own interests? Like it happened when Cordoba was lost to the Spanish by the Arabs and the ruling Emirate was mourning such defeat to his mother and she replied: "Don?t cry as a woman what you couldn?t defend as a man"