Top Leaderboard, Site wide
November 28, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Get Truthdig's headlines in your inbox!






The Chain


Truthdig Bazaar more items

 
Ear to the Ground

Latin Leaders Rebuke U.S.

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Dec 17, 2008
Latino Leaders
AP photo / Andre Penner

Argentina’s Cristina Kirchner, Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez and Bolivia’s Evo Morales share a good chiste.

In a summit that celebrated the absence of the U.S. on its guest list, Latin American leaders met in Brazil to discuss a post-U.S. hegemonic world. The talks, which centered on the “demise” of the capitalist model, also snubbed former colonizing nations Portugal and Spain in a further demonstration of the increasing political autonomy of the region.


Reuters:

The summit also did not include prior colonizing nations Portugal and Spain.

Latin American leaders on Tuesday blamed the global economic crisis on rich countries and welcomed Communist-run Cuba at a summit meeting designed to weaken U.S. influence in the region.

The presence of Cuban President Raul Castro at the meeting in northeastern Brazil was touted as a sign of Latin America’s growing independence from the United States, a far cry from the Cold War era when Cuba was expelled from the Washington-based Organisation of American States.

“The most positive thing for the independence of our continent is that we meet alone without the hegemony of the empire,” [Hugo] Chavez said in reference to the United States.

Previous summits of Latin American and Caribbean leaders have always included former colonial powers Spain and Portugal or the United States.

Read more

More Below the Ad

Advertisement

Square, Site wide

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By KDelphi, December 20, 2008 at 11:18 pm Link to this comment

cann4ing—Yes, I am more familiar with the Chomsky version…but I cannot doubt what you say. I just do not know. The alternative by Lanesdale sounds plausible enough.I think most people “know” the “Chojmsky version”, whether they know that that is what it is or not…

“The second factor is a tendency of the progressive wing of the American intelligentsia, faced with the past sixty years of history, to ascribe imperial intent to all of America’s political elites”

If that has not been the “intent”, it has certainly been the result…with the current “war on terror” (sigh…), I dont think that it is unreasonable to come to a conclusion, such as that. Hell, even ANSWER and Code Pink are going to do a “general Wall St protest” on the anniversary of the invasion of Iraq. I dont know why it is necessary to keep pretending that we are not at war in Iraq anymore. But that is how we usually do it—Vietnam and all.The “elites” may not intend it, but, if they let the military -industrial complex (I know, becoming a cliche’) do what they will, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

But, I feel, that, soon, we will be so broke, people will demand that we stop hyper-militarizing. Or maybe it is wishful thinking. (Not that we’re “broke”, although that is unavoidable. That we will be forced to stop spending so much on military)

This little library here doesnt have it. I will try my college library after Xmas..
Thanks for info…

Report this

By cann4ing, December 20, 2008 at 11:30 am Link to this comment

KDelphi, As “Plausible Denial” was published in 1991, I doubt you will be able to purchase it on line, except maybe as a used book on E-Bay.  But it should be available at your local public library.

Note, however, there’s an incongruity between the view presented by Raymond Garthoff in “Reflections on the Cuban Missile Crisis” (1987) reiterated by Noam Chomsky in Hegemony or Survival and that presented by Mark Lane’s Plausible Denial.  Garthoff and Chomsky depict a Kennedy administration intent on the violent overthrow of Castro right up to the end.  Chomsky, citing Garthoff, asserts a mere ten days before his assassination, Kennedy approved a CIA plan to target a large Cuban oil refinery, an electric power plant, railroad bridges and harbor facilities.  Chomsky states, without citing those personally involved in the decision, that “a plot to kill Castro was initiated on the day of the assassination.”

Lane contends that Kennedy had initially approved Operation Mongoose as a low key, covert program, which was then converted into a small war against Cuba by Gen. Ed Landsdale, the CIA’s liaison to Sec. McNamara; that, upon learning that Lansdale had already sent three teams into Cuba, a “furious” RFK reacted on Oct. 30, 1961 by canceling all “sabotage and militant operations during negotiations with the Soviets,” which then led to the abolition of Operation Mongoose.  Lane’s view on JFK’s intent to dismantle the CIA was confirmed by Col. L. Fletcher Prouty, the Joint Chief’s head of special operations 1955-1963 and is supported by JFK’s firing of Allen Dulles the Director of Central Intelligence, Dep. Director Charles Cabell and Richard Bissell, Dep. Director of Plans, and by the issuance of National Security Action memoranda which would have eliminated the CIA’s ability to initiate operations which required anything beyond the use of handguns.

It is probably not possible to reconcile Lane’s assessment of JFK with that presented by Garthoff and Chomsky.  The real question is which of these two divergent views is accurate.  Two factors favor Lane’s.  The first comes from E. Howard Hunt, who testified that, long after JFK’s death and at the behest of Charles Colson, he had undertaken to forge State Department cables in order to implicate Kennedy in the assassination of former South Vietnamese President Ngo Dinh Diem.  Hunt accomplished this by drafting cables that could no longer be found in sequence in the State Department’s files because they had been transferred to the JFK library.  Hunt copied the forged cables, then forwarded the copies to Time and Life. 

If the widely held view that JFK had been involved in the Diem assassination is but the product of a CIA fabrication, surely this calls into question the reliability of the sources originally relied upon by Garthoff.

The second factor is a tendency of the progressive wing of the American intelligentsia, faced with the past sixty years of history, to ascribe imperial intent to all of America’s political elites.

Report this

By KDelphi, December 20, 2008 at 10:44 am Link to this comment

cann4ing—Yes, the Marita Lorenz “link”—I did hear some of this…I will check out what I can find out online. If I like it, I will ask for the book for Xmas (our family “loves books”, and, will rarely deny one to another, if we have the money…lol)

Maybe I will get MANY books for Xmas (I dunno, with the economy, plus I need other stuff), because I’ve already asked for a couple.

Have you read “The War at Home” (COINTELPRO) by Glick? Just wondering…

Report this

By cann4ing, December 20, 2008 at 10:36 am Link to this comment

KDelphi—In this day of instantaneous technology, I suppose someone like me, whose knowledge base is primarily based on the “printed” word, especially books, is somewhat of an anachronism.

But my last post did direct you to my primary source, a book written by attorney Mark Lane entitled “Plausible Denial.”  The book is based on Lane’s defense of a small publisher, Liberty Lobby, in U.S. District Court against a libel action brought by E. Howard Hunt.  This related to an article published by former CIA agent Victor Marchetti which linked Hunt to the JFK assassination.

“Plausible Denial” presents a thoughtful, fact-filled, persuasive and sustained account of CIA involvement in both the assassination and ensuing cover-up, an assassination Lane contends took place because JFK, in the wake of the Bay of Pigs fiasco, planned to dismantle the CIA following an anticipated 1964 electoral victory and had issued National Security Action Memo No. 263 containing a blueprint for the total withdrawal from Vietnam.  The book recounts an admission made by the CIA’s David Atlee Phillips during a September 1977 debate with Lane and additional evidence which debunked, as a CIA concocted myth, spoon fed to the Warren Commission, that Lee Harvey Oswald had visited the Cuban and Soviet Embassies in Mexico City on September 27 and October 1, 1963.  Lane disclosed the content of a once secret CIA memo he obtained through litigation.  The memo directed the CIA’s media assets to impugn the integrity of authors who dissented from the Warren Commission conclusions; Lane, in particular, prompting Phillips at the outset of the September 1977 debate to apologize to Lane for the CIA’s efforts to destroy him.

In addition to presenting Hunt’s testimony, including a blistering cross-examination which utterly destroyed Hunt’s claim that he was in Washington DC on November 22, 1963, “Plausible Denial” includes the sworn testimony of Marita Lorenz, Fidel Castro’s former girlfriend who was recruited into the CIA by another convicted Watergate burglar, Frank Sturgis.  Lorenz testified that she, Sturgis and a number of other specifically named individuals, which included Orlando Bosch, traveled in a two-car caravan, loaded with weapons, from Miami to a Dallas motel in November 1963 where they met up with Hunt who handed Sturgis an envelope filled with cash.  About a half hour after Hunt left, a second visitor arrived—Jack Ruby!

Lorenz said she did not know the details of the operation; only that it was “big” and she was to act as a decoy.  She got cold feet; persuaded Sturgis to drive to the airport; then flew back to Miami.  Hunt’s lawyer, apparently concerned with the impact this had on Hunt’s claim he was in D.C., sought to challenge Lorenz by asking whether she spoke to Sturgis after the assassination.  She did.  Sturgis told her she missed “the really big one.”

“We killed the president that day.  You could have been a part of it—you know, part of history.  You should have stayed It was safe.  Everything was covered in advance.  No arrests, no real newspaper investigation.  It was all covered, very professional.”

The corporate media neither covered the jury’s conclusion that the CIA killed JFK or that Hunt would later make a death bed confession.

Report this

By cyrena, December 20, 2008 at 3:43 am Link to this comment

By Fadel Abdallah, December 18 at 9:15 am #

I am so pleased to see this Latin American unity and solidarity against the imperialist powers, old and new.
I am particularly delighted to see a beautiful feminine face among those beautiful revolutionaries!

Que viva la unidad y revolucion de los libres Latinos!

~*~*

Fadel..

You took the words right out of my brain. In fact, I examined the photo for longer than I generally look at them. It is a delightful sight to have Christina Kirchner among them. Now that’s the kind of high class progressive stuff we’ve fallen so behind on here in the US, since our politics have gone backwards at the same rate that Latin America’s have progressed.

For the first time in the history of this place, (the US as a state) we’re FINALLY getting some public servants that aren’t Male WASP’S. We’re finally getting a more balanced collection of women and ethnicitys’other than WHITE! (that is based on the on going selection of Obama’s Cabinet)

We’ve still got a long way to go on the ‘solidarity’ side though, even right here on the domestic front. God may know what it will take to undo the damage that Dick Bush has created in terms of relations with the rest of the world, but I don’t.

Report this

By KDelphi, December 19, 2008 at 11:59 pm Link to this comment

cann4ing—I did not know about any of this about Kennedy, etc. I know you dont “link” much, but, can you think of a book? Thanks!@

Ham-Archy—Good links! Thanks!

Report this

By cann4ing, December 19, 2008 at 9:30 pm Link to this comment

The first thing the Obama administration could do to demonstrate meaningful change is to lift the embargo on Cuba, and follow this up with the establishment of full diplomatic relations—an event that perhaps would have occurred in the mid-sixties if the CIA had not assassinated JFK. 

As revealed by Mark Lane in “Plausible Denial” (1991) JFK not only considered sending William Atwood, the U.S. Ambassador to Guinea to negotiate with Castro, but asked Attwood’s friend, French journalist Jean Daniel, to convey to Castro that he, Kennedy, accepted that “the ‘economic colonization, humiliation, and exploitation’ visited upon Cuba were at least in part due to the policies of the United States…’  Kennedy asked Daniel to pass on to Castro that the “United States can coexist with a nation in the hemisphere that espouses a different economic system….It is the subservient relationship with the Soviet Union that creates the problem.’”  Kennedy followed up with a November 18, 1963 address to the Inter-American Press Associates in Miami, stating that the U.S. would “not dictate to any nation how to organize its economic life.”

When Kennedy’s position was relayed, Castro not only told Daniel that he believed Kennedy was “sincere” but that he believed Kennedy “still has the possibility of being, in the eyes of history, the greatest president of the United States, the leader who may at last understand that there can be coexistence between capitalists and socialists.”

Report this

By Ham-Archy, December 19, 2008 at 7:49 am Link to this comment

In case you miss this link on Google Books;

http://www.isreview.org/issues/44/imperialism.shtml

Report this

By KDelphi, December 18, 2008 at 11:27 pm Link to this comment

mill-It is indeed a shame that you, and so many others, have to go back to WW II to the “good war”, to find a “war that you think that the US has done right”. The first “war” we did “wrong” was the Revolutionary War, but I digress..

Everything we do “give” away has Imperialistic strings attached. The Marshall Plan (and others ) was just a way to keep socialism from spreading throughout Europe. Now, they want our bases out of there.

We wer speaking of Latin America—what do you think of the job that the CIA and Chicago School has done down there? If lA is “going Marxist”, it may be because the US couldnt seem to stop stiking its nose into their business, and, trying to open up new markets for capiatlism. The “free trade agreements” have not helped them , either, and we are p[ushing for more. It just lets multi-nationals confiscate indigenous land and resources.

“Our development in information technologies - electronic computers, the internet - are tearing down the political barriers the Communists in China have had built since Mao’s revolution in 1949.  They can’t stop their peoples’ march to freedom and greater prosperity.  We should claim some credit there.”

Youre kidding here, right? OUR “Internet browser”(Yahoo) has turned information over to the Chinese govt about people starting so-called “revolutionary” blogs online. They are censored all the time. As far as capitalism, if they owe it to us, we shoudl be sorry—they passed us up in produciton of exports a long time ago. They could swallow us whole.

Give them a few more years of laissez-faire capitalism, as teh pollution , murder rate, suicide rate,all go up, and they will be even less “grateful”!

Everyone does NOT “want to be an American”...that is long ago.

I do not trust “our” system. It has been warped, degraded, and the constitution shredded (written by rich white men anyway). There has vbeen no self-correction, and, our capitalism is the bane of the globe. It is just based on MONEY now—nothing more.

If it is self correcting, why do we have another , more benevolent, monarchy?

I wish that working classes here would awaken the way they have in Latin America. This is becoming a country of the haves and have mores, only.

Report this

By Xntrk, December 18, 2008 at 11:02 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Mill, I assume you are not one of the grouchy seniors who spend their time correcting the posts of their juniors, like I do. It certainly is not the fault of the victims of education in the US if they have no concept of the history of both the US, Latin America, and the USSR and the various European conflicts of the past century.

Trotsky was Lenin’s chief deputy during the Russian Revolution - But, Lenin stepped down in 1922, because of poor health, and died in 1924. You should also know that Russia was immersed in a Civil War, and fighting off various invasions from its Capitalistic neighbors till at least 1919, and possibly as late as 1921 [We even sent an “Expeditionary Force’ to help]. Stalin who was a newcomer and not well thought of by the inner circle, snatched power about as soon as Lenin was installed in his mausoleum. Trotsky, who was very popular both in and out of the government, went into ‘voluntary’ exile in 1926 or so to stay alive. He eventually wound up in Mexico City writing and speaking until he was assassinated in 1940 by Stalin’s traveling murderers. His writing and theories are still widely read and he is honored by most of the Left in South and Central America.

Chavez attempted a coup in 1994, failed and spent the next few years studying Socialism while cooling his heels in prison. When he got out, he was ELECTED to office in 1998. He didn’t get there at gun-point. He has won at least at least 3 and maybe 4 elections since then the and also survived a US sponsored Coup in 2002.

The phrase “President For Life” is a catchy propaganda slur that showed up in the US Media when they were voting on the proposed new Constitution in Venezuela. The truth is, that the new Constitutional provision would simply have removed term limits from the Presidency. I don’t know how many of our Governors don’t have term limits, but many. No one in Congress has term limits - obviously, they keep electing them when they are senile! Mayor Bloomberg just removed term limits in NYC by fiat - I suppose he too is now a Mayor for Life!

Most of Europe has no term limits on the heads of State, so it is really not such a unique idea that Chavez is proposing. All it really does is say a person can run for office, and hold down the job, as often as he can win an election. As you know, here in the US, the President doesn’t even have to be elected if he is manipulative enough.

Time and space are too limited to discuss our role as the champions of Liberty. We refused to aid the Elected and legal government in Spain in 1936, allowing both Hitler and Mussolini to perfect their war machines, and we only joined the fight against them, after 2 years of cheering from the sidelines.

Vietnam, Korea, and other adventures like the Bay of Pigs give a pretty good idea of our reaction to uppity small countries that want to control their own destiny.

Do some reading other then Wikipedia and simplistic Web Sites spouting CIA propaganda. You might be surprised and dismayed by the things you learn - I know I was…

Report this

By mill, December 18, 2008 at 8:21 pm Link to this comment

BTW of possible interest to readers here

Minneapolis Star Tribune has - this Thursday 12/18 evening, 7pm local time - predicted that Al Franken will win the Senate race in my home state, Minnesota ... by a margin under 100 votes out of some 2.9 million cast ... now THAT is good news, in a progress-in-small-steps sense ... Senator Coleman was one of the most egregious lapdogs of the Republican looters ...  i hope their forecast holds through the probable litigation that will follow

http://senaterecount.startribune.com/ballots/

Report this

By mill, December 18, 2008 at 8:09 pm Link to this comment

Hi, Kdelphi

I don’t know much about Trotsky - thought he was part of the 1917 revolution crowd in Russia, but what ever, i’m sure he’s as lovable as the posters suggest here

That Chavez has not yet succeeded to ensure his perpetual rule is a good thing.  He did try though. That is not a good thing. Even Bush hasn’t tried to stay beyond the Constitutionally set 2 term limit ... yet (now THERE’s an nightmare)

You’re not really being “fair and balanced” to suggest that (Chavez) “has stood up to Imperialism, while the US only promotes it.”

Our role in World War II was on the right side of the issue.  Our former enemies (Japan, Germany, Italy) all flourish as pretty peaceful and democratic places.

Jimmy Carter as president made human rights a formal part of our foreign policy - he nudged Haiti in the right direction on his watch, didn’t do very well interacting with Iran.  But got the Eygyptians and Israeli’s to move toward peace.  That’s not imperialistic. 

Our research in agricultural production has resulted in so many more people eating regularly around the planet - start with hybrid corn adapted to a variety of growing conditions as one instance. 

Our development in information technologies - electronic computers, the internet - are tearing down the political barriers the Communists in China have had built since Mao’s revolution in 1949.  They can’t stop their peoples’ march to freedom and greater prosperity.  We should claim some credit there.

We do a lot wrong .... the last 7 years have been a nightmare of corporatism and imperialism about oil masquerading as patriotism - but there is no better system for self-correcting than the US political system.  I trust the collective wisdom of a people rather than the one strong man - Trotsky or Chavez, that seems to excite my poster friends’ admiration.

Yes, yes, we’re a republic, not a democracy. 

Peace, all

Report this

By Ham-Archy, December 18, 2008 at 7:55 pm Link to this comment

mill;
Just to add to that, it was what you might call a facetious reaction to your fear of his motivation. AND ‘life’ is not ‘indefinitely’. He could only live maybe another 30 years no?
Honestly, I am very happy with his role in Latin America. He would not want the U.S.

Report this

By KDelphi, December 18, 2008 at 6:36 pm Link to this comment

mill- who is “dictator for life”?? Trotsky was no “supporter of Stalin”!

The president for life election failed. Chavez is abiding by it.

“Live free or die” is New Hampshire—I lived there for about 18 mos. Rather “die than go back”!!

Yes, eventually, they will get it right…I cannot think of a single time in my lifetime that the people of the US have gotten it “right”.

The “common folk”?? Here? Who are they? Never hear about them…

We have No “reprensentative democracy”—you are dreaming. Chavez was more democratically elected than Bush or Obama. The Constitution doesnt even SAY we are a “democracy”.

Chavez came from the slums of Venezuela. He has stood up to Imperialism, while the US only promotes it. Youre another brainwashed USAn..the reason the “US” (not me!) is so pissed about LA, is that , they brought it on themselves. And, they refused to sell back Venzuela’s (and others) assets at a fair price..

Viva Chavez!

Report this

By mill, December 18, 2008 at 6:06 pm Link to this comment

Ham Archy

I agree that there is nothing to worry about from the summit.  The headline suggests the snub should be somehow important. 

Call it what you want, if you support someone for president-for-life, that’s not support for government of the people, by the people, for the people, which democracy can approximate. 

Wilkopedia notes the difficulty of defining facism precisely (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism) but the view i have is that it is submission to an unchanging authority figure, and i’m not going to do it.  I believe we should churn national leadership regularly

Like that expression, “Live free or die!”  No single person, whether Obama or Bush, Roosevelt or Reagan, Che’  or Chavez ... can be wise enough to lead indefinitely

I wonder why you think highly of Trotsky?  The russian revolution overthrew an incredibly corrupt fascist government, and replaced it with a brutally repressive one, one that killed millions - did he have a role in that, or was he the pure-thought fella, while stalin played the thug so admired by saddam hussein?

the key is, when you concentrate that much power in one human’s hands, bad tends to overwhelm good. 

give me free, regular elections, and eventually the people will get it right.

Report this

By Ham-Archy, December 18, 2008 at 11:25 am Link to this comment

mill: Where does this ‘nothing to worry about’ kind of notion come from. Nothing in the article, or the other posts refer to this development as worisome to anyone but ‘investors’. Where the hell is your head at?
Why do I like Chavez? Well, one thing, we were born on the same day, another, we both admire Trotsky.
Hugo Chavez also has stood up, with great bravery, against many formidable threats and pressures. AND most importantly, he is cleary one of the worlds greatest enemies of facism. It seems you may not understand the meaning of the word.
Also, were Chavez to be president for life, I would prefer it be president of the U.S.
Chavez IS the coolest. Viva Chavez!

Report this

By samosamo, December 18, 2008 at 11:00 am Link to this comment

This just in from msnbc:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28295945/

Seems South Korea is wising up to american imperialism and the smarter people DO NOT want it. The article states that the whole country of S. Korea will benefit but were not the people of South American countries told how much everyone would benefit from ‘free trade’ when actually corporations were the ones that benefited ? They experienced it and found it NOT so. Now, apparently a lot of South Koreans know and don’t want it. Truly a blow to the american push for idiotic and greedy economics. Our newly elected people better start paying attention.

Report this

By Fadel Abdallah, December 18, 2008 at 10:15 am Link to this comment

I am so pleased to see this Latin American unity and solidarity against the imperialist powers, old and new.
I am particularly delighted to see a beautiful feminine face among those beautiful revolutionaries!

Que viva la unidad y revolucion de los libres Latinos!

Report this

By mendez, December 18, 2008 at 6:47 am Link to this comment

Hegemony through coercion is what the U.S. is most famous for today.  As long as the majority of U.S. citizens think we have done nothing wrong, our fate is sealed.  It will be very interesting to watch as S.A. takes our wealth from us and, eventually, our land.  We won’t be able to say we weren’t warned.

Report this

By samosamo, December 17, 2008 at 10:14 pm Link to this comment

It is good to notice the lack of ‘blowback’ from the commenters here as they know what has happened to South American countries in the last 50-60 years of US imperialism. But, I would bet there are lots of people that have seen it for the first time and don’t understand or corrolate it with US economic intervention in S.A. countries with milton friedman’s (scientific formulated) ‘unfettered’ free market system forced upon them. The bounce back of S.A. countries is due to the rejection of such tried and disasterously proven polices. And they know who to keep out of the summits they hold to hopefully strengthen those rebuilt economies.
Now the U.S. has earned its part in friedman economics, I just wonder if we will survive as there are a lot of crooks still trying their best to prevent a lot of people’s survival.

Report this

By mill, December 17, 2008 at 7:52 pm Link to this comment

Ham-Archy suggests, “Chavez is the coolest.”

Really?  He wants to be president-for-life, rigging the country’s constitution to ensure his continuity.  It’s not leftist, or socialist to do that. It’s not cool. It’s fascist, and those sort of countries tend to lose site of the common folk more than representative democracies do.  He looms large partly because he spreads around oil wealth - easier at 147 a barrel last July than 47 a barrel now. 

If you think Venezuela is paradise, you really should check it out.  Maybe you’ll find it so.

But truth is, the common folk do better under democratic governments than fascist ones.  Castro’s Cuba sustained itself through Soviet subsidies.  As those dissolved so has the Castro regime.  Chavez has that oil.  We’ll see if he can restrain his taste for power for he and his close associates.  Watch for free elections as one of the key symptoms.

Report this

By mill, December 17, 2008 at 7:41 pm Link to this comment

Yawn. 

It’s good that countries in our hemisphere cooperate more with each other.

It’s good that Cuba will be more engaged than under Castro’s rule.

The better off these countries are, the better for the United States as well. 

Brazil will loom large in such a conference, even if Spain, Portugal or the US were involved, because of their relative size and location. 

Do we need to be at this conference?  Unless they’re forming a treaty of common defense against us, either militarily or economically, I don’t see the worry.

Report this

By Shift, December 17, 2008 at 7:35 pm Link to this comment

This is nothing less than the overturning of five hundred years of genocide imposed by European Nations on the Americas.  It is the process of decolonization of both the mind and the land.  It represents a reestablishment of Indigenous beliefs and lifeways as they apply to modernity.  It represents the end of Euro/American imperialism.  Be cautious in attempting to understand the political changes in South America with the Euro/American mindset and classification systems.  The depth of Indigenous culture is unique to Indigenous peoples and has deep roots going back fifteen to twenty thousand years. The word Socialism has deeper meanings to them and are enshrined in ancient   lifeways wholly integrated into a complex culture.

Report this

By Xntrk, December 17, 2008 at 6:51 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Ham Archy, I think it was less than 2 months ago that Chavez invited any American who wants to experience a Revolution to spend some time in Venezuela. As for the language, I got along so-so in Cuba with poor Spanish and one lost hearing aid… And, not many Cubans speak English.

Oh, I am broke. I have a bunch of responsibilities that cannot be put on hold, or I’d at least head for Havana for New Years, and the 50th Anniversary Parties!

Report this

By Ham-Archy, December 17, 2008 at 6:11 pm Link to this comment

BTW, Latin America? I am elated! Chavez is the coolest. I think about going south, but I would have a hard time with speaking spanish. Why do you think I say ‘good news for those who love freedom’?

Report this

By Ham-Archy, December 17, 2008 at 5:59 pm Link to this comment

I am most certainly not talking about political action. I have been trying hard to get the point across that political ‘solutions’ do NOT EXIST. To put it rather crudely, and bluntly, POLITICS IS PURE SHIT! And by pragmatic I mean just what you will find in the dictionary definition. It is not a sound bite meant to make people’s minds flip onto some democrat’s rhetoric.
So what people who have suffered from this economic disaster, which is, as you point out, most crucial, need to do is this. You organize, meaning, you get a group together with common a grievance. Now this is a piece of cake because many thousands of people got screwed over by the same corps. And then you find a lawyer, and their are plenty of them. You seem to have access to a computer and internet access so this to is cake. When you have a class action the cost per individual is very low, and the pecuniary judgement against the corp is usually VERY large. It can do much damage. Read up on some of the cases that are presented on Fair Finance Watch. You will see that there are already cases that have established precedence for the kind of action I am advocating.
I cannot advocate violence and you should realize that such actions only play into the hands of the oppressor and the result will be yet further erosion of our freedom. It is pretty much just what the predator wants you to do, and he is ready for it. BAD MOVE!
I am trying to help injured people find a real, do-able, factual, and legal solution. That is pragmatic.

Report this

By KDelphi, December 17, 2008 at 5:01 pm Link to this comment

Ham-Archy—I assume that you are primarily addressing the prior?

I agree with alot of what you say…but, I do NOT feel that this is a time for more “pragmatism”, at least not pragmatism as it is being expressed by the Democratic Party now!

It is time for action, on the part of political leaders, but, failing that, by citizenry, by any means necessary.People are freezing to death tonight.

Maybe things are not so bad where you live. They have been bad here in the Rust Belt for a very long time.More than half the houses in my city are boarded up or for sale. The food banks are empty.

What are these peoel supposed to do, wait for a “pragmatic” solution? Who will “press charges”? Certainly neither one of the duopoly. They both have too much stake wat keeping things the way that they are.

I understand some of what you say, but, I do not understand what you are asking for—other than, to talk about class action, etc, in union meetings, etc. Unforutunately , there are not alot of lawyers with class action experience at these meetings—at least not here.

And WHY hasnt some good attorney brought this up? No one seems to be talking about it.

Many are assuming that the housing criminality, the Wall Str theft, are “ancient history” as one guy put it. That is exactly what they want!

BTW—how do you feel about Latin America , these days? lol

Report this

By Ham-Archy, December 17, 2008 at 4:17 pm Link to this comment

Well, I keep repeating this kind of thing because it occurs to me that a vulnerability exists at this time. If you feel that you have no problem with the system, or that it does not effect you in an adverse way then you need not heed what I am saying.
Part of the reason that I put things the way I do is that while there is a great focus on regional politics (i.e. election time) other resolutions to very crucial issues have lost focus.
I read words of people who are ready to take to the streets because of perceived abuses. I really want people to see that such actions are more futile than pragmatic solutions that ARE available. Crimes have been commited, and existing laws can uphold the rights of those who HAVE BEEN violated.
This article is an observance of the overthrow of U.S. hegemony. If you do not have the understanding of political history to realize that this means the erosion of Imperialism you have very much to learn. If you do not understand the campaigns of oppression that have been exacted against these countries, you will not be able to appreciate how great the value of their freedom is today. If you do not understand that you probably do not value freedom. So the first line in my last post would have been all you could have expected to understand.

Report this

By KDelphi, December 17, 2008 at 3:26 pm Link to this comment

DMFDS—What the hell are YOU talking about?? Have you read any of the mortgage contracts, pulled on senior citizens and minorities, in need of home equity to pay outrageous US medical bills?

I saw some of these contracts—criminal acts were certainly commited! Why some attorney hasnt taken up class action is beyond me!

YOU are the idiot, because you are dumb enough to be overhauled by the ridiculous, laissez-faire capitalist agenda—or maybe you are a trust fund brat..

You guys should keep this up! We Socialists will just wait…fight amongst yourselves.

BTW—Latin Am and Cuba have every right to self rule and determination! If the uS hadnt stuck its ass in where it didnt belong, trying to open up new markets for “capitalism”, and “globalization”, we night have true allies there now.

It is time for the uS to leave LA alone! Chavez and Morales were at least as democratically elected as our “commanders in chief”.

Or, we could join them…we’ll just wait…

Report this

By Steve E, December 17, 2008 at 2:30 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The Neocons will take care of these dreamers.

Report this

By DMFD, December 17, 2008 at 1:38 pm Link to this comment

Hurry up chicken little (ham-archy), the sky is falling, the sky is falling.  What in the hell are you talking about? Take what back?  I haven’t lost anything.  “Victim of predatory lending”?  What a joke.  If you don’t have an income and someone tries to give you money you know you can’t pay back that is your fault for being an idiot!

Report this

By Ham-Archy, December 17, 2008 at 1:23 pm Link to this comment

More great news for people who love freedom.
This is another clear affirmation that the Imperialist propaganda machine’s abuse of the term is no longer fooling anyone but the U.S. vidiot. The fallacious slogan “Keeping the world safe for Democracy” should no longer be fooling ANYONE. It in fact means, “Keeping Imperialism safe from the world.”
NOW! It is clearer that the Oppressor is being brought to his knees. These messages from around the world should be telling you that U.S. politics have no power OR will to do anything about it.
It is time for U.S. citizens to take LEGAL ACTION to reclaim what they have been defrauded of. The elite cannot withstand another blow.
Free your thoughts from the aberration of political perplexities. Focus on the critical mission of overcoming the grip of the predator. Join the rest of the world in putting the beast in it’s grave. Get organized to establish class actions. If you are a member of any union or association bring this up at meetings. If you have been the victim of predatory lending, look for other people who have done business with the same company. Use the power of social networking sites to seek out peers in this context. DO IT NOW! Before the beast rises again to make a final meal of YOU!

Report this
 
Monsters of Our Own Creation? Get tickets for this Truthdig discussion of America's role in the Middle East.
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.

Like Truthdig on Facebook