Category Archives: Nicaragua

Anatomy of a Lie: All Latin American Revolutions Came from Cuba and the USSR

Jason: Also, the left not only believes the other side will torture them like on Hostel, but they believe the US is aiding the right. I suppose at one time, the right thought the USSR was aiding the left, but I think the real facts were exaggerated.

They have good reasons to think that. Do you realize that hundreds of thousands of Latin Americans have in fact been tortured like in Hostel? All with the approval, coaching, cheerleading and assistance of the US?

The USSR was aiding the Left only in a sense. In only a very few countries had an armed revolutions had sprung up and Cuba was aiding them. Russia gave the Cubans lots of arms and the Cubans smuggled them to Nicaragua and then to the rebels in El Salvador. That was it as far as I can tell.

The revolutionaries in the following countries never got one bullet or one nickel from Cuba or the USSR:

Guatemala: URNG and others 1954-1994
Colombia: ELN, FARC 1964-present
Peru: focos in the 1960’s, Sendero Luminoso 1980-present, MRTA 1984-1996
Ecuador: Sendero Luminoso 1990
Venezuela: small focos in the 1960’s and 1970’s
Brazil: urban guerrillas in the 1960’s
Uruguay: Tupamaros 1970-1983
Bolivia: Sendero Luminoso 1990, MIR 1960’s
Paraguay: recent guerrillas supported by the FARC 2012-present
Argentina: Tupamaros 1970-1983
Nicaragua: Sandinistas 1964-1979
Honduras: small guerrilla bands in the 1980’s
Chile: Manuel Rodriguez Patriotic Front 1970-1989, Lautaro Front 1990’s

As you can see, armed revolutions started up in all of those countries at one time or another usually for very good reasons. The Right tried to blame all this revolutionary activity on the USSR bogeyman. But the USSR never gave any of those groups one bullet or one dime. The Right also claimed and still does that everything was peachy clean and hunky dory in all of those countries except for the evil Soviets coming in and stirring things up by giving those university students all those funny ideas. This is complete nonsense. The truth is that if you have a decent country, you never get Left guerrillas, rural, urban or otherwise.

You only get an armed Left when your country is a complete Hellhole. The way to defeat an armed Left is to create at least a semblance of a decent society. If you do that, the Left will lay down its arms and even join the government.

The US always wants to say that rebels have no agency.

Leave a comment

Filed under Americas, Argentina, Brazil, Caribbean, Central America, Chile, Colombia, Conservatism, Cuba, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Latin America, Left, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Peru, Political Science, Regional, Revolution, South America, USA, USSR, Venezuela

Are Brownshirt Gangs a Necessary Component of Fascism?

In many respects, Trump and Trumpism looks like the Latin American Oligarchic Right. He also looks a lot like the rightwing, basically fascist Right in Latin America. Every time I look at his regime, I think of the Venezuelan Opposition Right. In fact, the Republican Party increasingly looks like the Latin American Oligarchic Right, and it has been slowly resembling them for some time now.

The rightwing fascists in Latin America do not all have Brownshirt street gangs, do they? Where are the Brownshirts of the Latin American rightwings? They have death squads, yes, in a number of countries, and they have street rioters, but Brownshirts who actually go around attacking the Opposition? Not really.

But there is something like this in the Chilean Right, which regularly engages in all-out street riot-wars with the street fighters of the Left. In this sense, Chile represents Germany in the interwar period.

Something similar goes on in Venezuela, where the Right engages in relatively continuous rioting, and sometimes there is fighting with leftwing mobs. Most of the fighting is with the police though.

The death squads of El Salvador were often made up of the fanatical anti-Communist street thugs of the lower middle class neighborhoods. Have you ever seen an ARENA rally in El Salvador? That looked something like a Brownshirt mob, but they did not take to the streets.

Yes there is a thuggish rightwing in Brazil, but is it really of the Brownshirt variety? The recent coup was a legislative one.

There are something like Brownshirt mobs in the east of Bolivia (who also fashion themselves as White supremacists), but they have not been very active lately, and they are countered by leftwing Indian mobs in the capital and east of the country.

There were rightwing Peronist mobs a while back, but that seems to be through. The only mobs in Argentina anymore are with the Left. The Right only has the support of the out of touch Rich.

The only rioting mobs in  Peru are on the Left, and riot they do, on a near-constant basis. There is no rightwing presence on the streets in Peru, as once again, the Right here is simply an out of touch White wealthy elite.

There are death squads in Ecuador, but they are not active anymore. The Right only has a presence in the security forces. The huge street mobs are in the capital and are of the Left.

The mobs in Nicaragua are mostly pro-Sandinista, as the Right down there has no street presence, since nobody much likes them.

The street is owned by the Left in Honduras too. The Right only has presence in a small number of rich and the security forces.

There are no street mobs of any kind in Guatemala. The murderous Right is present in the security forces.

In Colombia, the Right does have support, but there are no rightwing street mobs. The violent Right down there are the death squads run by the security forces who work in concert with civilian paramilitaries. There are not even many leftwing protests since a few weeks after huge leftwing protests, 10-15 of the protesters will end up murdered. So the Left in Colombia is armed to the teeth yet underground by necessity.

I do not think you need Brownshirt mobs to have a deadly fascist state as many examples in Latin America show us. When the rightwing government is running around murdering the Left, I am not sure if it matters whether that government is classically fascist or not. They are murderous rightwing thugs whether they earn the official fascist moniker or not. Officially fascist or not, they are still coming out to kill you, so at the end of the day, what difference does it make?

68 Comments

Filed under Americas, Brazil, Central America, Chile, Colombia, Conservatism, Ecuador, El Salvador, Fascism, Guatemala, Honduras, Latin America, Latin American Right, Left, Nicaragua, Peru, Political Science, Politics, Regional, Republicans, South America, US Politics, Venezuela

Problems of Communist or Socialist Democracy

Steve: I think the worst thing about 20th century communism was not the economic system but the totalitarianism, the police state and the spying and prison camps.

Maybe it was the revolutionary origins, the utopianism, the materialism, the fact the government had too much power because it owned and controlled everything BUT if it were possible to have communism with democracy, free speech, freedom of religion, trial by jury etc it really wouldn’t be so bad, you could live with the economic system.

Remember the communist countries had the cold war and sanctions and stuff to contend with too.

They have a certain amount of free speech in China, Vietnam and Cuba, but maybe not as much as you would like. They have anti-government demonstrations in Vietnam, and there are 100 protests every day in China.

There is critical press in Cuba that no one does anything about (check out Havana Times) and dissidents are mostly allowed to publish openly (check out the famous Cuban woman dissident blogger). There is freedom of religion in Cuba, and believers can now join the Party. They have trial by jury in Cuba. I am not sure how fair it is though. But there are some defense attorneys who are taking anti-government cases right now, people accused of criminal charges, police brutality cases, etc. You can read about them in Havana Times. Nobody does much to them.

In Cuba it was supposedly inside the revolution, total freedom of speech, outside of it nothing. But it never really worked out that way, and they went after a lot of loyal opposition types. In Cuba today, you can’t try to overthrow the government and you can’t advocate getting rid of the socialist system. Outside of that, you can supposedly say what you want, but even that may be limited. Check out Havana Times though. There are some very government-critical people there being published all the time, and I think they are mostly left alone.

Every time they try that, the capitalists go berserk, cause chaos and make endless coup and assassination attempts. Also they engage in mass economic sabotage. But this was only tried in places where the economy was still capitalist. The US starts flooding the country with millions of dollars to the dissidents and spends more millions setting up countless “democratic” pressure group that mostly spend every second of their time trying to overthrow the government. You going to let people own newspapers, magazines, TV and radio stations. Guess who’s going to buy up all the media? In Venezuela even today, 75% of the media is privately owned. OK you will allow free elections. How about campaign contributions? Guess who’s going to buy the elections?

You can’t have Communist democracy. That’s why Lenin talked about parliamentary cretinism.

You can’t have somewhat socialist democracy in a lot of places. Look what happened in:

  • Brazil (military coup, parliamentary coup)
  • Guatemala (military coup + 200,000 murdered over 40 years)
  • Iran (military coup + 150,000 murdered)
  • The Congo (military coup + assassination)
  • Haiti (military coup + chaos + contras + 3,000 plus murdered)
  • Dominican Republican (US invasion to topple regime)
  • Guyana (regime toppled by British)
  • Honduras (military coup + 1,000 murdered)
  • Syria (military coup)
  • Greece (military coup)
  • Italy (election fraud)
  • Indonesia (military coup + 1 million Communists murdered)
  • Colombia (assassination + death squads)
  • Panama (assassination)
  • Mexico (election fraud)
  • Afghanistan (contras)
  • Nicaragua (contras + sanctions)
  • El Salvador (military coup followed by 75,000 murdered)
  • Chile (economic sabotage, chaos, military coup, 15,000 murdered, defense attorneys tortured to death)
  • Venezuela (military coup, economic coup, constant riots and chaos), endless assassination plots, assassinations and murders, death squads, economic sabotage)
  • Argentina (military coup, 30,000 murdered)
  • Uruguay (military coup, 300 murdered)
  • Peru (military coup, 1.5 million arrested)
  • East Timor (military coup, invasion to topple regime, 300,000 murdered),
  • Paraguay (legislative coup + death squads)
  • Zimbabwe (sanctions)
  • Ukraine (coup)

Mao warned about this. He said there were always capitalist elements in the party trying to restore capitalism. That was the reason for the cultural revolution. Mao thought you would have to have cultural revolutions all the time to keep weeding out the reactionary elements in the party because they would keep springing up again like weeds.

Look what happened when Mao died. The reactionaries in the party around Deng took over and restored capitalism (sort of). Mao was right.

7 Comments

Filed under Afghanistan, Africa, Americas, Asia, Brazil, Capitalism, Caribbean, Central Africa, Central America, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Economics, El Salvador, Europe, Government, Greece, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Indonesia, Iran, Italy, Journalism, Latin America, Law, Maoism, Marxism, Mexico, Middle East, Nicaragua, Panama, Politics, Regional, Revolution, SE Asia, Socialism, South America, South Asia, Syria, Vietnam

Have Countries Improved by Moving Away from Social Democracy and Towards Neoliberalism?

HBD investor: Many countries floundered in various socialist schemes and their economies massively improved when they became less socialist.

None of this is true.

Many countries had problems with centrally planned economies with many or all state firms. This is called either state socialism or Communism and the record is not so wonderful. It isn’t so bad either. Been to Eastern Europe? See all that infrastructure? That was all built by the Communists. Go to Russia and see the same thing. Same in China. Communists built Russia and China up from nothing. They were nothing before, and Communism turned them into superpowers. They also had very high economic growth in industry and agriculture for decades. They massively expanded the nearly nonexistent education system. The Communists made monumental gains in housing in both countries. Health care improved to an incredible degree in both countries.

Now with Communism you can get great economic growth for a while, maybe a few decades, maybe more, but at some point it all starts bogging down in bureaucracy, lack of a pricing mechanism and a market, a lot of people just not working very hard and massive thievery of state property. In addition, the rate of economic growth slows. Although Communist countries usually wipe out poverty, in its place they only allow a relatively low standard of living. People probably want to live better than that. In addition, the collectivization of agriculture has been such a failure in Communist countries that I believe we should stop trying it. Production usually goes down by quite a bit and there are sometimes famines at the start if they try to do it too fast.

Yugoslavian Communism worked very well by the way, and they had a very good standard of living, the highest in Eastern Europe.

In addition, state socialist schemes with central planning had a lot of problems in Syria, India, Tanzania and other places. It just doesn’t work very well.

On the other hand, some form of social democracy is the norm all over the world. It’s not true that social democratic countries did a lot better as they shed most of their social democracy and adopted neoliberalism. The world has been doing that for a long time now and the record is in. It’s been a massive failure.

All of Europe except the UK is voting in Left parties, and at least the people want more social democracy and less neoliberalism. There’s no move towards neoliberalism and away from social democracy in Europe outside of Latvia and the UK.

There is no neoliberal free market capitalism in the Arab World. Arabs actually don’t believe in neoliberalism because Arabs and Muslims are sort of “naturally socialist” people. The Gulf states are huge social democracies. There is a lot of social spending and considerable state involvement in the economy in much of the Arab World.

Iran has been pretty much a socialist country ever since the Revolution. There is vast social spending, and the state is involved in the economy. Afghanistan is collapsed, but Communism was actually pretty popular there. Pakistan has been run by social democratic parties in recent years. India is officially a socialist country. It’s written right into the Constitution. An armed Maoist group is very powerful in India. Communist Parties have been running the states of West Bengal and Kerala for decades. Nepal is run by a coalition government consisting of a socialist party and a Communist party. The large opposition is made up of Maoists. I believe Sri Lanka is run by a social democratic party.

Myanmar’s been socialist forever. Vietnam and Laos are Communist. Cambodia has been run by Communists in recent years. The Philippines is a bad example, but they have free state health care for all, and education is free through the university level. Indonesia recently elected a socialist, a woman. The very popular newly elected president says he is a socialist. An armed Maoist group is very active in the country.

Australia and New Zealand are longstanding social democracies on the Canadian model.

Canada is a longstanding social democracy.

The largest party in Mexico is a member of the Socialist International, and the oil industry is state owned. Education is free through the university level, and health care is also free. El Salvador and Nicaragua are now run by former Marxist guerrillas, the FMLN and the Sandinistas. Costa Rica has been a social democracy since after World War 2. Honduras recently elected a leftwing president who was quickly overthrown in a state-sponsored coup. The military is still in power in Honduras, but everybody hates them.

A socialist party called Lavalas, the party of Jean Bertrande Aristide, continues to be the most popular party in Haiti, even though it has been declared illegal. To show you how popular Lavalas is, in the last election they ran in, they got 92% of the vote. During his short reign, Aristide built more schools than had been built in the entire 190 years before him.

A number of Caribbean island states are members of the Bolivarian economic bloc set up by Venezuela. Most Caribbean political parties are leftwing parties with the words socialist, revolutionary, workers, labor, or popular in them. Cuba is Communist and has a lower infant mortality rate than we do. A few years ago, they also had a longer life expectancy than we did.

Venezuela is still run by the Chavistas, a socialist party. Ecuador is run by a Leftist. Peru recently elected a leftwing Indian, although he has not been able to do much as his hands are tied. Brazil has been electing the socialist PT or Workers Party for many years now. A former Marxist guerrilla was the most recent president, and she was only removed by an illegal US-sponsored legislative coup. Paraguay elected a Leftist Catholic priest, a preacher of Liberation Theology, but he was soon overthrown in a legislative coup. The illegitimate party is now in power.

Uruguay has been a social democracy forever, and it is now governed by a former Marxist guerrilla. Juan Peron put in a social democracy in the 1950’s. Argentina was recently governed by a leftwing husband and wife team who alternated in the Presidency. Chile has been electing presidents from the Socialist Party for about 20 years now. The most recent Socialist, Michelle Bachelet, is a radical, but it remains to be seen what she can do. Chile has a huge class divide, the upper and lower classes  want to murder each other, and there are regular violent protests, leftwing versus rightwing street brawls, and riots, lately by students.

In Latin America, radical neoliberalism was imposed for 20 years, and it failed so badly that the whole continent has been electing leftwingers ever since.

I do not know much about Africa, but most African parties have been officially social democratic for a long time now. The Communist Party was recently part of a South African government. If anything has failed in Africa, it is neoliberalism.

21 Comments

Filed under Africa, Agricutlure, Americas, Argentina, Asia, Australia, Brazil, Britain, Cambodia, Canada, Caribbean, Catholicism, Central America, Chile, China, Christianity, Costa Rica, Cuba, East Africa, Economics, Ecuador, El Salvador, Eurasia, Europe, European, Government, Haiti, History, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran, Laos, Latin America, Left, Maoism, Marxism, Mexico, Middle East, Neoliberalism, Nepal, Nicaragua, North America, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Politics, Regional, Religion, Russia, SE Asia, Socialism, South Africa, South America, South Asia, Sri Lanka, Syria, Tanzania, Uruguay, USSR, Venezuela, Vietnam, Yugoslavia

Socialists Are Generally Elitist, and That’s Ok

Oops I did it again writes:

What socialists are not “elitist”? Aside from the “revolutionary masses”, all those who fancy leading/instructing them are and must be “elitists”.

It’s people who need a mission, something that will make them heroes, and are too intelligent to find that kind of gratification doing jobs even for 120 IQ people.

Of course this is true. It’s always been true. It’s surely true with Leninists and Communists. It always bothered me that Communist Party membership was limited to say, 6% of society. Every time I saw that, I felt pained. Why only 6%? How can you ever limit party membership to such a low number without that 6% becoming an elite in fact if not in essence? Assuming a person is sufficiently revolutionary, why can’t they join the party? And if they start lagging or going reactionary, just pull their membership. No problem there. Communists aren’t exactly democrats anyway.

Are the masses really that stupid and unaware of their own needs that only the top 6% of society is capable of addressing those needs, as 94% of them are class cucks who will always oppose their own interests?

If you read early Marxists, they were quite clear that the masses didn’t know what the Hell they were doing, had no idea of what their needs or even wants were, and were very easily swayed to support their class enemies on the basis of nationalism, jingoism, tribalism, racism, sexism, values conservatism, or religion.

They had no idea what they were doing and were incapable of figuring out what was best for them, so a paternalistic yet benevolent socialist elite (vanguard) was needed to show them the way. Granted, that may be the case, but it always seemed insulting towards the masses.

And even after years or decades of Communism, the masses are still as retarded as ever? After all those revolutionary classes and sessions, and they haven’t transformed in the slightest? That seemed so dubious to me.

The Chavistas, Sandinistas and others were trying to get away from that. I believe anyone can join the Sandinista Party, and members were often poor urban workers or peasants. The FMLN party in El Salvador is the same. Both of those parties managed to sell their project very well to the masses. Of course they were helped by decades of ruling class brutality and dictatorship that showed even the most blind of the masses that the ruling classes could never possibly be their friends in any formation or guise.

The Chavistas in Venezuela are much the same. In fact, the party itself is a grassroots party such that the grassroots nearly control the party direction, and those at the top are nearly beholden to those at the bottom, a complete transformation of typical human political relations, or probably of typical human relations in just about anything for that matter.

That’s not quite Direct Democracy, but it’s getting awful close.

7 Comments

Filed under Central America, Economics, El Salvador, Latin America, Left, Marxism, Nicaragua, Politics, Regional, Socialism, Sociology, South America, Venezuela

The Curious Politicization of US Refugee Laws on Latin American Immigration to the US

S. D. writes: Through all of the revolutions, somehow, someway the Iberian ruling classes have managed to remain on top and the Mestizos and Indians end up fleeing to the United States.

South Americans are not coming here, but S. D. is correct that Mexico and Central America do a piss poor job of distributing the wealth in their countries, and that is one reason why so many of their citizens come here.

I do not know how many Nicaraguans are coming here, but under the Sandinistas, it was mostly the upper and middle classes who were fleeing to Miami. Now large numbers of White upper and middle class Venezuelans have been leaving for Miami, but this has been going on for over a decade now through the whole time the Chavistas have been running things. Traditionally, it was the Whiter Cubans who used to be in the upper to middle classes who fled to Miami.

Of course 100% of the Venezuelans, Nicaraguans and Cubans all get admitted straight in because they are fleeing from “evil leftwing governments.” In reality, 100% of these people, including the Cubans, are economic refugees. There are zero political refugees fleeing Cuba due to persecution or Venezuela or Nicaragua for that matter.

If you are that much of a dissident in Cuba that the state really hates you, they may put you in prison, or they may just ask you to leave the country and not come back. There is something called the Orderly Departure Program in which you have to wait in line for 6 months in order to get a chance to leave the country. Then you can leave if you can get some country to accept you, which is the major problem because ~100% of them want  to go to the US, and we only let in ~22,000/year, which is ~20,000 too many if you ask me. A few want to go to Spain.

What is fascinating is that we always hear how wonderful the capitalist countries of Latin America and how much better they are than Cuba, but when it comes time to leave, ~0% of Cubans want to go to the capitalist countries of Latin America. Gee, are the Latin American capitalist countries really so much better after all?

Now, it is true that there are numbers of Cubans holed up in some Latin American countries. There are quite a few in Mexico and also in Ecuador, but ~100% of them in both countries are trying to get into the US and have no intention of staying in Mexico or Ecuador.

Of course, during the revolutionary wars in Central America in the 1980’s, many Guatemalans and Salvadorans were desperately trying to get into the US due to genuine fears of persecution; however, 98% of them were turned away because the US assumed that anyone fleeing those countries due to political persecution was a leftwinger.

In the case of the Salvadorans, the US immigration agents did paraffin tests on the palms of  the male refugees to see if they had fired a gun recently. If they had, it was assumed that they were guerillas. The US then sent them back to El Salvador with the positive paraffin test and said, “This guy is a guerrilla.” In most cases, the Salvadoran security forces were waiting outside the planes when they came back from the US with lists. The men who were on the lists as possible guerrillas were typically grabbed, carted away and tortured to death or disappeared.

7 Comments

Filed under Americas, Capitalism, Caribbean, Central America, Cuba, Economics, Ecuador, El Salvador, Florida, Guatemala, Immigration, Latin America, Law, Left, Mexico, Nicaragua, Politics, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, South, South America, USA, Venezuela, Whites

Latin America Is a Very Socialist Region: Central America

The largest party in Mexico is officially a socialist party and a member of the Socialist International. In Panama, since the US invasion, the government has been run by a party associated with Torrijos, a leftwing President murdered by the CIA. It alternates with an ostensibly rightwing populist party that has nevertheless put in many new social programs.

The Left in El Salvador and Nicaragua had to literally shoot their way into power at the cost of 155,000 dead. Costa Rica got rid of their army and put in a social democracy after World War 2 in part to ward off revolution. There was a military coup in Honduras a few years back which overthrew a Left president and put in a death squad government that has murdered 2,000 Leftists ever since.

Yes, the Right is in power in Guatemala, but they have stayed in power by killing 200,000 people, a project which is ongoing. The Left has now disarmed, but they were armed for over 30 years.

2 Comments

Filed under Americas, Central America, Economics, El Salvador, Fascism, Government, Guatemala, Honduras, Latin America, Latin American Right, Left, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Political Science, Regional, Socialism, USA

Problems and Achievements of Left Governments in Latin America

S. D. writes: I’m not sure that Socialism would benefit them to the same degree that it has benefited Norway or Sweden.

It requires each citizen to assume a fairly high degree of personal responsibility to see the entire society as a family.

And truthfully this is difficult outside of a super-homogeneous country.

Right-wing countries lead to more racial animosity because they are more of a meritocracy that do less for the poor worker, I agree.

But to what extent socialism is better I am not entirely sure.

Mind you, I have only two Poly-Sci classes to my college education. What do I know?

Some form of socialism is the only solution for Latin America, and most of the region is already formally socialist in one way or another and has been for some time now. Formally socialist or Leftist parties rule most of the continent in Cuba, Mexico, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Ecuador, Peru, Brazil, Bolivia, Uruguay and Chile. I understand that most political parties in the Caribbean are Left parties of some sort usually with “Revolutionary”, “Labor” or “Socialist” in their names. A number of them were allied with Chavez in Venezuela.

Leftwing governments have made massive strides in most of the countries above. The lives of the average Latin American have improved dramatically in every one of those places.

The recent rulers of Argentina, Uruguay, Ecuador, Brazil, Bolivia, Venezuela, Nicaragua and El Salvador have made serious leftwing changes in their countries.

Latin Americans hate the Right. Rightwing governments have never done jackshit for the vast majority of Latin Americans.

The main problem with any form of socialism or Left government in Latin America is that the Latin American Right is extremely fascist, violent and anti-democratic. According to them, the Left simply has no right to ever rule any of their countries. Hence any time the Left takes power in any of their countries, the Latin American Right tries to overthrow them by unconstitutional means such as military coups, lockout strikes, deliberate sabotage of the economy, legislative coups, etc.

South America serves as an instructive example.

Hence the implementation of any Left regime is often met with violence, sabotage or coups. There are often widespread street protests even leading to Left and Right street fighters fighting in the streets like Germany in the 1920’s. This sort of thing often occurs in Chile and Venezuela where  the Right is strong, radical and violent. The Right has been rioting in the streets for 15 years now in Venezuela ever since Chavez took power. Political protests in Chile usually turn violent as the Left attacks the rallies of the Right and vice versa.

There was a rightwing legislative coup in Paraguay to remove a Left President recently, and there is one ongoing in Brazil. The National Police made an aborted coup attempt to overthrow a Left President in Ecuador. The Right used economic sabotage to ruin the economies of Chile in the 1970’s and Venezuela at the moment. The Left President of Argentina also appears to have been voted out due to economic sabotage by the Right in league with the Obama Administration.

2 Comments

Filed under Americas, Argentina, Brazil, Caribbean, Central America, Chile, Cuba, Economics, Ecuador, El Salvador, Fascism, Government, Latin America, Latin American Right, Left, Mexico, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Peru, Political Science, Politics, Regional, Socialism, South America, Uruguay, USA, Venezuela

Revolution and Capitulation in Latin America

S. D. writes: We all agree that a tiny white minority in Mexico and Central America have the indigenous people and mestizo under their thumb.

Why can’t Anglos follow their example?

What are the Iberian elite of Central America doing right?

One thing they are doing right is running death squads to keep the poor under siege, to terrorize the poor into submission and to stave off revolution via sheer terror. This doesn’t really work because when the Right is armed and the Left is not and the rightwing death squads, army and police regularly murder the Left, eventually the Left, not being idiots, takes up arms.

The revolutionaries in El Salvador suffered decades of repression in the 1960’s and especially the 1970’s. While some of the Left was armed in the 1970’s, most of it was not. Many of the Left were murdered, especially in the 1970’s.

The Salvadoran revolutionaries said that eventually the people got tired of waiting in their homes for the government to come kill them. They decided that if the government was going to come try to kill them no matter what that they may as well take up arms, so at least they can try to fight off the army and police when they come out to kill them.

If the Right is armed and violent and the Left is not, eventually the Left takes up arms to defend themselves from the army, police and death squads of the state. And who can blame them? If the government was going to come out and try to kill me, first of all I would try to hide and second of all, I would arm myself very heavily and if and when the government did come out to kill me, I would open fire on the state forces and try to defend myself or at least take out as many of them as possible. Even if they killed me, I at least stand a chance of taking out some of them in the process.

We all agree that a tiny white minority in Mexico and Central America have the indigenous people and mestizo under their thumb.

Sure, and that’s why you had revolutions in every single one of those places. Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, and Nicaragua have all had very bloody revolutions.

Mexico’s revolution lasted 10 years, and 10 million people died.

200,000 died in Guatemala’s unfinished revolution that in a sense goes on to this day.

75,000 died in El Salvador’s unfinished revolution.

80,000 died in the revolutions and counterrevolutions in Nicaragua.

Hundreds and possibly thousands were killed in Honduras in a revolution that is ongoing.

Really what is happening in Guatemala, El Salvador and especially Honduras is that the Left, formerly armed to the teeth especially in the first two countries, has disarmed and the Right is heavily armed and is killing the Left.

The Left in Honduras were hardly armed at all, but there were a few groups in the 1980’s including a revolutionary group of 300 men who were led by an Irish Catholic priest! There is a long tradition of priests allying themselves with armed revolts down there, especially in recent years with Liberation Theology. The ELN in Colombia, heavily armed and still waging war to this day, was founded by a Catholic priest! A Catholic priest and poet, Ernesto Cardenal, was one of the top leaders of the Sandinista revolutionaries who presently rule that country.

Although the Left has disarmed, the Right has not, and in Latin America, the Right is always armed either via the state and police or via the private armies, paramilitaries, death squads and contras of the rich. The death squads of the Right continue to operate in Guatemala, El Salvador (to a much lesser extent) and especially in Honduras. Death squads continue to rampage across Colombia. Fascist contra paramilitaries, assassins and street fighters are common in Venezuela.

The FMLN revolutionaries presently rule El Salvador or at least have captured the presidency. The Sandinista and FMLN governments are limited in what they can do to better their countries, mostly by the US, the IMF and the World Bank.

The Sandinistas have had to considerably moderate their program from when they ruled, and many Sandinistas are leaving the party and claim that the party has grown totalitarian and corrupt.

There is a long tradition of this in Latin America and for that matter in other places (see Nepal) – of revolutionary parties growing corrupt and/or totalitarian.

The PRI which long ran Mexico became very corrupt and authoritarian. They stole elections down there for decades, and a victory by the Left in 1988 was only prevented by massive fraud. However, the PRI’s name means the Party of the (Mexican) Revolution, so this party grew out of the Pancho Villists of the 1910’s.

To this day, the PRI is a member of the Socialist International, but in Latin America that does not mean much. The region is full of lousy “social democratic” parties that are hardly socialist at all, especially in Peru (APRA – another party with revolution in its name) and Venezuela, where the social democratic party became a party of the corrupt and brutal elite. Both of those parties are members of the Socialist International!

The Socialist Party has been running Chile for most of the last decade, continuing a long tradition, but they are very limited in what they can do.

3 Comments

Filed under Americas, Catholicism, Central America, Chile, Christianity, Colombia, Economics, El Salvador, Fascism, Government, Guatemala, Honduras, Latin America, Latin American Right, Left, Mexico, Nicaragua, Political Science, Politics, Regional, Religion, Revolution, Socialism, South America, Venezuela

Latin American Whites: A Mirror of the Future of America

RL: Keep in mind that some of the most vicious White priders and White supremacists of all say that if you are 75-85% White, you are White? So you disagree with these Latin American Nazis I guess?

Gay State Girl: Isn’t that because South America was a Nazi haven?

The only association with Latin America and Nazism is because of some German immigrant communities in Chile, Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia and Paraguay who were Nazi sympathizers. They didn’t treat the local Indians very well, and there were notable attempts at genocide especially in the Bolivian Chaco. However, there is no evidence that Latin American Nazis were Nordicists or that they had anything against non-Nordic Whites.

Your average Latin American White, while surely a White prider, is usually not a Nazi by any stretch of the imagination. This is because White pride in Latin America takes a very different and more subtle form in Latin America than it does here. Yes, Latin Whites are racist, but this is diluted by the fact that most of them are not pure White anyway, as the vast majority have non trivial amounts of Indian or even Black in them.

So “Whiteness” is more of a question of degree than purity. The fact that Latin Whites are not pure themselves tends to leaven their racism. Mestizos are often tolerated or even regarded as White although Peruvian and especially Argentine Whites have always been racist towards what they call mestizos. However, half of Argentine Whites have Indian blood in them themselves.

Latin American White White pride goes all the way down to Mexican Harnizos. I know a Mexican Harnizo who is 60-70% White, and he loves to claim White. He’s basically a Latin American White prider. Although there are some Latin Americans on Stormfront, most Latin American Whites find European White nationalism highly distasteful. Almost no Whites down there talk about splitting off to form their own White country. There is some talk of that in the South of Brazil, but even there, they would just split off the south which is already full of non-Whites as it is. The movement to split off the south of Brazil as its own nation appears doomed and has very little support.

All Latin American White countries like Uruguay, Argentina, Costa Rica and the south of Brazil are rapidly darkening. Costa Rica is full of 1-2 million illegal aliens, mostly from Nicaragua. The government doesn’t care, and they will probably be legalized as is the case with almost all illegal alien waves in Latin America.

Argentina is rapidly filling up with illegals, mostly mestizos from Bolivia, Peru and Paraguay. There are forming an underclass gang-type subculture in the cities, and there are complaints that Argentine girls are running off with the thuggish mestizos. However, the government seems to want to legalize the illegals there also. The problem in Latin America is that the illegal aliens are generally the same race as the natives, so there does not seem to be any logic to not legalizing them. They are just more of “our people.”

Most Latin Americans are not big environmentalists and much of the continent is underpopulated anyway.

White men running off to marry mestizos is a problem in White communities all over Latin America. The racial purists wring their hands, but there seems to be nothing they can do. White Mexican men continue to marry light skinned mestizas, and there doesn’t seem to be any way to stop them.

A similar phenomenon is occurring in Argentina. There does not seem to be anything stopping the darkening process down there either as much as the purists throw up their hands. If you ask a White Argentine what he feels about the mestisization of his country, they will tell you that they don’t like it, but then they will throw up their hands and say, “What can you do?” They act like the situation is hopeless, not to mention inevitable.

A gradual darkening of the White race appears to be an inevitability not only in Latin America where it has been an ongoing process for centuries but also in the US. The mestizization of the US, which is really all that the darkening process or decline of the White majority is, is simply the same mestizization process that has been going on forever in the rest of the Americas.

So what is happening is that at long last North America, the eternal aberration and odd man out, White and English speaking, is beginning to join the rest of the continent to become just another country in the what I would call “the Americas.”

Race in the Americas is typically mestizo or in some cases mulatto and mass mixing has characterized Mesoamerica, Central America and South America from the start.

Language in the region has tended to be Spanish, though there is a large Portuguese component (really just another Iberian Romance language) and some smaller outposts of English and French, often creolized. The English and French speaking regions tend to be mulatto or even Black and most are in the Caribbean.

The US curiously has avoided these dual phenomena of mestizization and Hispanophonization.

In addition to a mestizization process, the US is also becoming a significantly Spanish-speaking land, once again in tandem with the rest of the continent which overwhelmingly speaks an Iberian Romance language.

Canada is a holdout, but possibly the mestizization process and development of the Spanish language is not long for that land either. Canada has a large Indian population, but they have not married in much with the Whites for some odd reason, unlike in Latin America. Settlers to North America tended to bring women with them while Iberian settlers did not, hence the Iberians took native wives, so this may explain the lack of much mestizization there. French is present in Canada as it is in the Caribbean.

Nordicism is generally absent in Latin America probably because most Latin Whites are Meds. There are some Nordicists in the south of Brazil, but they are not very popular.

The bizarre socially transmitted disease (STD) called Nordicism is mostly only found in the US and Northern Europe. There are hints of it in the north of Spain and Italy, but there is little hatred towards Southern Spaniards from the northerners, who often think of themselves as Celts. Italy is another story. Other than that, Nordicism has no support anywhere.

Nordicism has permanently alienated all East Europeans and Slavs because of its association with Hitler. There are Nazis in Eastern Europe and Russia, but they are not Nordicists. In some parts of the globe such as Eastern Europe and Russia, Nazi symbols and identification have instead been co-opted as general White pride symbols, and there is often an attempt to distance themselves from the actual Nazi regime. There are Nazi types in Mongolia where it simply represents some Mongolian racial purism in the form of a racist fascist (national socialist) politics.

The case of the Whites of Latin America seems to show that not only is the notion of forming racially pure states of Whites or any other race seemingly hopeless, but further, the general darkening trend of Whites (in the US a mestizization process) appears to be an unstoppable force.

White separatists and White nationalists are a premature anachronism. They are fighting a race against time. Wars against time, as with wars against nature, have a tendency to be lost by men.

124 Comments

Filed under Americas, Amerindians, Argentina, Argentines, Asia, Black-White (Mulattos), Blacks, Brazil, Brazilians, Canada, Caribbean, Central America, English language, Environmentalism, Ethnic Nationalism, Eurasia, Europe, Fascism, French, Hispanics, Illegal, Immigration, Italy, Latin America, Linguistics, Mestizos, Mexicans, Mexico, Mixed Race, National Socialism, Nationalism, Nazism, Nicaragua, Nordicism, North America, Paraguay, Peru, Political Science, Portuguese, Race Relations, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Romance, Russia, Social Problems, Sociolinguistics, Sociology, South America, Spain, Spanish, USA, White Nationalism, White Racism, Whites