• CatratchoPalestino [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      I don’t have access to their correspondence but I’m gonna assume Áñez wanted power and opposed Evos reforms, the OAS didn’t want to see reduced exports and political power entrenchment, and Exxon probably donated a fair amount of money to allow economic liberalization to take place. I hope you realize people in our own countries have their own thoughts and motivations and aren’t just automatons that do what the CIA says. the coup in my own country was done by military generals upset over having their airbases turned over to civilian use as an example

      • voight [he/him, any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        7 months ago

        How about Pedro Castillo? Does it upset you that online leftists reacted negatively to the lawfare coup against him, despite having already marked him as a kind of centrist milquetoast?

        Nobody I can recall framed his actions as based anticolonialism, besides the fact he didn’t really get to do anything, they just observed the financial, legal, and military pressures the core places on the periphery.

        • CatratchoPalestino [none/use name]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          7 months ago

          I’m not upset seeing people opposed to america meddling in other countries affairs. I think america meddling in other countries affairs is both bad for other countries short term and bad for america long term. I’m opposed to assuming that because a country appears to have a government nominally opposed to the united states it’s for the working class movement. this ideology has its roots in american trotskyist parties in the 60s like the worker’s world party and it’s global class war line. I consider my own government or the pedro castillo government to be better than the opposition by a large margin but I don’t consider either to be good

          • voight [he/him, any]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            7 months ago

            I don’t think there are any “reverse nationalists” or “marcyists” or “campists” or whatever you may call them around here. I’ve checked. Quite the opposite. Every time SCMP or Jacobin says jump we ask how high before we double back.

            That’s not what an anti-war, anti-imperialist, anti-colonial perspective implies when it results in viewing geopolitical moves taken by far right anticommunists who have been cornered in a situation where it’s in their best interests as overall good because it limits the exploitation of natural resources & labor power.

            Most people have pointed to the supply shock caused by COVID and the inter-imperialist squabble that played out between Europe and the US fought through the Ukraine proxy war as being the straw that broke the camel’s back & forced these moves which are pro-3rd world sovereignty.

            I don’t think people should jump to conclusions about this though like they have with Gabon recently. Not even an anti-French coup! Silly!

            I don’t find the refrain of “calling it a CIA coup denies the agency of people in the periphery” too convincing. Find me a person who won’t point to elements which the CIA allies with domestically when there’s been a coup. I don’t think it’s ever happened Ex Nihilo. Holding up a bible sends a pretty clear message about the alliance to be formed with Christian nationalism in North America.

            • CatratchoPalestino [none/use name]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              7 months ago

              you may consider marcyism to be non existent but marcy’s theories, in modified forms at least, maintains a high level of belief in the western or more specifically english cultural hegemony and in the united states specifically the PSL is a former marcyist organization and it’s the largest marxist leninist org in the country. and your explanation is falling on deaf ears when all I’m hearing is “don’t organize against your demsoc government because it’s fighting for national sovereignty against the united states” (sovereignty for national bourgeois who oppress all the same)

              • voight [he/him, any]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                12
                ·
                7 months ago

                Man I’m just 360° noscoping these. Yeah you would have scolded Iraq War protestors.

                all I’m hearing is “don’t organize against your demsoc government because it’s fighting for national sovereignty against the united states” (sovereignty for national bourgeois who oppress all the same)

                Are the Marcyists in the room with us right now?

                • CatratchoPalestino [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  the iraq war where the united states invaded iraq or do you mean the gulf war where iraq invaded kuwait because I think you’re conflating them

                  seems like there are marcyites since it sounds like i’ve found their strongest defender

                  • voight [he/him, any]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    9
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    The protest movement against Iraq II, meek as it was, resulted in the word Marcyite being thrown around quite a bit. And one of Slavoj Zizek’s stinkiest papers ever

                    You just keep insisting there is a connection between basic anti-imperialist postions and dabbing on the global poor.

                    Well, I’m sorry to disappoint you but nothing I said should be heard as telling you not to organize for a better world, I wish you the best with that.

                • CatratchoPalestino [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  even if every single american leftist has never said “don’t organize against socdems” and I can assure you there are people probably within this very post who think criticizing let alone organizing against someone like say maduro is western imperialism waiting to end venezuelan sovereignty I think the standard should be higher towards more solidarity and support within the international movement for each other

                  • autismdragon [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.netOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    6
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    Sounds like you made some assumptions about my positions that dont actually apply then. Ive never even brought up Maduro. I am aware though that the ML party there opposes him and the Guyana situation. I dont want to jump to the conclusion that they are right just because they label themselves ML but i am inclined to lend them faith

      • autismdragon [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.netOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        7 months ago

        Again i cant stress enough how unusual the situation in your country is versus the historical trends in the region…

        The idea that the coup in Bolivia didnt have a strong imperial influence behind it is definitly heterodox. Obviously people there had their own motivations, but when i ask “why was Evo couped” i mean “why was it backed by imperial powers”

        Also you understand that the CIA and state department serve the needs of those “individual capitalists” that stand to lose right?

        This makes me wonder your thoughts on things like Hong Kong and the color revolutions.

        • CatratchoPalestino [none/use name]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 months ago

          assuming the CIA played a role in the bolivia coup which it might have it doesn’t say much at all. the CIA has supported people are far left as pol pot to as far right as the mujahideen, neither of which liberalized their respective countries. with the same logic the kaiser sending lenin to russia makes lenin an agent of german authoritarianism. these “historical trends” of my region only make sense from an outsiders perspective trying to come up with a simplified narrative

          • autismdragon [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.netOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            7 months ago

            Pol Pot wasnt a genuine communist so idk why that example. Surely you dont deny that the imperial hegemon has motives in their imperial actions and things can be read from that?

            Reading a bit about your situation in Hondorus, i have my doubts a socdem takeover was even the intention of what the US did. I also have no idea how US friendly Xiomara even is. Is she nationalizing resources? Is she doing anything to upset the US or the capitalists thereof at all?

            • CatratchoPalestino [none/use name]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              7 months ago

              what does pol pot being a genuine or not communist have to do with anything? it’s pretty obvious he was supported by the united states because he opposed vietnam and vietnam was allied to the soviet union and expanding the Soviet bloc. not everything the US does is about stopping countries from nationalizing resources or to open up markets

                • CatratchoPalestino [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  yeah and the united states supported mexico when it nationalized its oil and gas in 1938 under the PRI and the saudis when it granted an oil concession in 1933 giving themselves majority share. sometimes the us is more interested in stability than higher profits

                  • Vncredleader [he/him]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    10
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    We didn’t support Mexico when it did that. We pulled our equipment out and made them start the industry more or less from scratch. It was only WW2 that made the US make concessions. How do you look at the Cardenas presidency and get THAT conclusion?

                  • autismdragon [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.netOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    6
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    Ok so latam social democracies arent inherently worthy of support just because they call themselves that. But id say they are when they materially oppose American control of their countries or when America opposes them or tries to interfere.

                    Doesnt sound like thats the case in Hondorus.