Category Archives: Guyana

The Success of America’s Longstanding Propaganda War Against the Concept of Socialism

Socialism, the very concept, especially in its social democratic and democratic socialist varieties, is the ho-hum status quo on most of the planet.

The war on the very concept of socialism has probably been worse in the US than anywhere else in the West. It has a 3rd World death squad tinpot dictatorship feel about it. I keep wondering when the rightwing death squads are going to show up in the US. They show up everywhere else in states with a US-style reactionary and Left-hating culture.

The difference between the US war on socialism and the war on socialism waged in various death squad democracies is that the war on socialism has been more successful in the US than anywhere else on Earth other than Colombia, but the Left is armed to the teeth there. The war on socialism was just as bad if not worse due to the death squads and all of the imprisonments, beatings, tortures, murders and genocides all over Latin America and in the Philippines and Indonesia.

These countries differ from the US however in that all those Latin American countries and SE Asian countries have gone Left in recent years.

Even in the Philippines, Duterte calls himself a socialist and had friendly relations with the Maoist NPA  guerrillas when he held office in Mindanao.

In Indonesia, the female elected President recently ran on a socialist ticket.

To the south, Mexico has been officially socialist since the Revolution. The Left in Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Colombia, Peru, and Argentina was armed to teeth and fought vicious wars against reactionary regimes. That has to count for something.

In El Salvador, the former Left guerrillas are now running the country.

In Honduras, a leftwinger was recently elected President only to be ousted in a coup sponsored by the CIA and Hillary Clinton.

Nicaragua of course had a successful Leftist revolution, and those revolutionaries have been holding office now there for quite some time.

Haiti elected a Leftist in Jean Bertrande Aristide, only to be ousted by Bush Administration officials via a contra death squad army from the Dominican Republic. Aristide himself was arrested at gunpoint in his mansion by armed Blackwater mercenaries acting under the command of the Pentagon.

A number of the island states in the Caribbean have gone Left in recent years and most were members of the Chavista Bolivarian Movement. Most political parties in the Caribbean have words like Left, Socialist, Workers, Progressive, etc. in their party names regardless of their ideology because any party that wants to get anywhere in the Caribbean has to at least dress  itself up in Left garb.

Grenada had a successful Leftist revolution that was subsequently overthrown on illegal grounds by Reagan.

Venezuela of course has been voting Leftist since 1999 when the Chavistas took power. They have never left.

In Ecuador, a Leftist, Rafael Correa, ruled for many years. Recently a man named Lenin Moreno ran on a Leftist ticket of continuing Correa’s Left reforms, but as soon as he got into office, he immediately shifted gears and went hard Right.

Right-wing parties run as fake Leftists all the time in Latin America because generally rightwingers running on a rightwing agenda cannot get elected down there because most Latin Americans hate rightwingers and don’t want them in power. Hence the Right obtains power by contra wars and fascist mob violence in the streets, waging wars on economies and currencies, judicial, legislative, and military coups, and even open fraud.

The definition of conservatism is aristocratic rule. It is the antithesis of rule by the people or democratic rule.

The definition of liberalism is democratic rule by the people, not the aristocrats.

Not many Latin Americans want to be ruled by aristocrats, so the Right down there has to seize power by extra-democratic means.

The Opposition in Venezuela recently ran on an openly social democratic platform, but most people thought it was fake they would turn Right as soon as they got in.

In Brazil, the Left has been running the country for some time under the PT or Worker’s Party until it was removed by a rightwing legislature in an outrageous legislative coup. They even imprisoned a former president, Lula, on fake corruption charges. A female president was recently elected who was an armed urban guerrilla in the 1960’s.

In Paraguay, a Leftist former priest was elected President, only to be removed in an outrageous legislative coup.

In Chile, not only was Leftist Allende elected in the 70’s, the Left was not only armed  all through Pinochet’s rule and once came close to assassinating him. In recent years, a socialist named Michele Bachelet has won a number of elections.

In Bolivia, Leftist Evo Morales has been in power for a long time.

Uruguay recently elected a Leftist, a former armed urban guerrilla in the 1970’s.

Argentina recently elected two Leftist presidents, the Kirchner, a husband and wife. A rightwiger was recently elected after a rightwing Jewish billionaire named Singer obtained a court judgement against Argentina in a US court. That judgement bankrupted the economy, so you could say that the Right destroyed the economy in order to get elected.

So with the exception of Peru, Costa Rica, Panama, and the Guyanas, all other countries have since gone full Left at one time or another recently. Costa Rica’s already a social democracy, and Peru had an ultra-radical murderous Left for a very long time. Panama’s been reactionary since the CIA murdered Omar Torrijos by sabotaging his helicopter and killing him via a fake copter crash. The Dominican Republic and Jamaica have not gone Left since the 60’s and 70’s.

But the war on socialism has been so much more successful here in the US than even in the above named backwards countries because even the world norm of social democracy was so demonized here in the US that it never even got off the ground.

In some ways, the US is one of the most rightwing countries on Earth at least in terms of political economy.

 

2 Comments

Filed under American, Americas, Argentina, Asia, Bolivarianism, Brazil, Caribbean, Central America, Chile, Colombia, Conservatism, Costa Rica, Culture, Democrats, Dominican Republic, Economics, Ecuador, El Salvador, Fascism, Geopolitics, Government, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Indonesia, Jamaica, Latin America, Latin American Right, Left, Liberalism, Maoism, Marxism, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Peru, Philippines, Political Science, Politics, Regional, Republicans, Revolution, SE Asia, Socialism, South America, Uruguay, US Politics, USA, Venezuela

An Example of Anti-White Propaganda: “White Men Raped Their Way around Most of the World”

Chinedu: And yet hundreds of millions of people, populating entire continents and regions, are the products of white rape.

That was a long time ago though, was it not? Anyway, the newest theory on Black-White mixes in the US is that most came after the Civil War and most were consensual even before the Civil War. Yes there were rapes but they were not common. Heading up until the Civil War, in the 1830’s-1860’s, there were many White men working for money in the fields next to the slaves. There were many unions derived from this close contact. Further, many Black females desired to have sex with the slaveowners in order to become house Negroes, etc. Southern White culture was very conservative and Southern wives did not take well to their husbands taking up Black mistresses. Most White Black unions post Civil War were obviously consensual.

There is no reason to think that things were any different in Mexico, Honduras, Belize, Nicaragua, Panama, anywhere in the Caribbean, Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, Argentina or even Brazil.

We have no reports of mass rapes of Black women by White men in any of those places.

I am not aware of any mass rape of Black women by White men in Colonial Africa, even in South Africa. The problem in the East was exacerbated by Islamic slavery, and I suppose many of those were rapes, or maybe they were consensual. No one seems to be able to figure this out when it comes to slaves. Probably your best case for mass rape of Black women by White men would be in the Middle East, especially Arabia and then Mesopotamia and the Levant. And I am quite sure this was the case in North Africa as well.

There isn’t any more raping of Black women by White men anywhere on Earth and certainly there is no mass raping.

As far as raping Indian women, this is very hard to figure. I know that here in California, many Whites simply married Indian women and become squawmen who were much derided by their fellow men. These unions were quite consensual. There were some rapes in this area and maybe some enslavement but it was mostly consensual. Before we had Spaniards and missions run by priests in which there was almost zero rape. The Spaniards did not even do much to Indians other than capture them and send them to missions.

As far as the rest of the US, I have no idea, but I have not heard a lot of reports of mass rape of Indian women by White men in the records. The breeding seems to be once again White men taking Indian brides and becoming squawmen. In Canada there was little to no rape or mass rape.

It is often said that the mass unions of Mexico were the product of rape but no one knows if this was true. There were very few Spaniard males and many Indian women. The Spaniards hardly had to rape with 100-1 or 1000-1 ratios.

I do not know much about the colonization of Central America to comment. However, Costa Rica tried to keep itself delberately White for a long time. Also the Indians were wiped out very early. Obviously there was mass mixing through this whole region, but I know nothing about the details.

I have not heard many reports of rape or mass rape in the Caribbean. Yes there was mass rape in the beginning in the context of a genocide, but Caribbean people now have little Indian blood. Barbadians are 1% Indian. Cubans are probably even less. Jamaicans, Haitians, Dominicans, Dominican Republicans, etc. have almost no Indian blood. Puerto Ricans have a lot of Indian blood, but I do not know how it got there.

Yes Whites conquered Indian nations in South America. Obviously a process of mestizisation occurred there, but I have no details on it. The wars were short and over with quickly. The mestizisation process appears to have been slow and I have no details on how it even worked. In Colombia, Venezuela, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Paraguay, the Guyanas, I have no details at all. In Brazil what little I heard was that it was mostly consensual. An early Brazilian colonist, a Portuguese man, was reported to have twenty quite happy Indian wives. This was said to be pretty normal. In the 1800’s there was a Banquismo campaign, a very racist compaign intended to mass import Whites from Europe to swamp out and breed out Indians but mostly Blacks. Apparently it worked quite well.

In Argentina, the Black-White mating was so unrapey that many Blacks present in Argentina in the late 1800’s seem to have vanihsed into thin air. Argentines are now 3% Black, so you can imagine what really happened to the Blacks. Much the same happened in Uruguay.

In Mexico it was much the same thing. Mexico was pretty Black in 1820. In 100 years, there was little left. Now there’s almost nothing left and Mexicans are 4% Black. They are quite Blacker in other areas such as Veracruz. It doesn’t sound like a lot of rape went on in these “vanishings.”

In Chile the Indians were slowly bred in after the wars in the late 1800’s and now Chileans are maybe 20% Indian. In Argentina, the Indians were also defeated but many remained in the Pampas and the gaucho was typically a mostly White mestizo, the product of unions between Whites and Indians on the Plains.

Peru and Guatemala are still heavily Indian. Bolivia is probably mostly Indian.

There is not much evidence of mass White rape of non-Whites in Asia either. We have no reports of such from the Russian East or Siberia. We have no such reports from Malaysia, Indonesia or India either, and there were few Whites or Dutchmen anyway. Nor do we have reports of such from Vietnam, Laos or Cambodia. Nor do we have mass rape reports from the Philippines, where Spanish colonists were apparently few in number. There are also no reports from the US colonization of the Philippines.

Although it would not surprise me, I would like to see some data that the mass mixing of Aborgines and Whites in Australia was the result of rape. Aborigines are now 50% White on average and their 85 IQ’s reflect that. The 64 IQ reports are from unmixed Aborigines.

I have not heard any reports of mass rapes of Maori women by Whites in New Zealand.

Hawaii was indeed colonized by Whites, but I have not heard any reports of mass rape.

I do not know much about the history of Polynesia.

Central Asia is mass mixed between Mongol type Asians and Whites but there is no evidence that Whites mass raped Asians. In fact, much of the mixing may have been the other way around, as Mongols mass raped the Iranid Whites already present in those places. So in one place on Earth where we do have evidence of mass rape producing White-non-White mixes, it was the Whites who were getting raped and not the other way around!

Possibly the best case for mass rape of non-Whites by Whites may have been with Aryan Whites and Australoid South Indians in India. There was a lot of interbreeding, but there was also a Hell of a lot of rape especially were South Indian women were enslaved and made to serve as temple prostitutes for Aryan men. Even today Australoid Dalit women are commonly raped by more Aryan and higher caste men.

All in all, I do not think there is much remaining evidence for mass rape of non-Whites by Whites. There were a lot of unions in the last 500 years for sure but most were consensual.

334 Comments

Filed under Aborigines, Africa, Americas, Amerindians, Argentina, Argentines, Asia, Australia, Black-White (Mulattos), Blacks, Brazil, Cambodia, Canada, Caribbean, Central America, Chile, Christianity, Colombia, Colonialism, Cubans, Dominicans, East Indians, Ecuador, Eurasia, Europeans, Guatemala, Guyana, Haitians, Hispanics, History, India, Indonesia, Islam, Jamaicans, Jamaicans, Laos, Latin America, Malaysia, Maori, Mestizos, Mexicans, Mexico, Middle East, Mixed Race, NE Asia, North Africa, North America, Oceanians, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Political Science, Polynesians, Race Relations, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Religion, Russia, SE Asia, Siberia, Sociology, South America, South Asia, South Asians, Spaniards, Uruguay, US, USA, Venezuela, Vietnam, Whites

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

Caucasian/Non-Caucasian Mixing Zones Around the World

The heavy Caucasian-non-Caucasian mixing zone is from North Africa across Arabia, and then in a belt from the Urals in the north down through the Stans to Afghanistan, Pakistan and North India in the south and all the way to Siberia and even East Turkestan in China to the east.

One can say that there is a White/non-White mixing zone of recent origin in the Americas mostly from Mexico south in Mesoamerica down to Latin America all the way down to Chile, Uruguay and Argentina in the south, with more admixture to the north and much less at the south. Mesoamerica is quite thoroughly admixed or mestized as is Colombia, Venezuela, Peru and Paraguay. In Colombia, the Whites are also quite admixed with Black.

There is a White/Black mixing zone in the Caribbean and the Guyanas down to Brazil. In the Caribbean, White genes have been pretty much washed out by Black ancestry, and the Caribbean is quite a Black place. The same has occurred in Belize and to a lesser extent in Panama, both of which are seriously mulattized. Even Dominican “Whites” would probably not qualify as White to most people as they seem to have too much Black in them to be considered White. There are definitely White Puerto Ricans though and there are many White Cubans. The Guyanas are so mulattized that there are not many Whites left, similar to the Dominican Republic.

In North America, there has not been a lot of White/non-White mixing. The heavily mixed people are mostly recent immigrants from Mesoamerica, mostly from Mexico. Otherwise, Whites in the US, Canada and even Alaska have not mixed much with Indians, Inuits or Blacks.

Hawaii can be considered a White/non-White mixing zone of extremely recent origin as by this time most of the population is seriously admixed. The admixture is generally White/Asian mixes of all different sorts.

The Whites in New Zealand, Australia and even Europe are not much admixed other than recent immigrants in Europe, though there is some Asian/White admixture in the Sami. Nevertheless, I regard the Sami as Whites. Black-White mixing in Southern Europe is very negligible, despite the rantings and false science of Nordicists. Iranians are White. Turks are a bit admixed, but still they are overwhelmingly White.

There has been quite a bit of White/Black mixing in South Africa and Namibia, more than you might ever expect. The Namibian Whites in particular are quite admixed. Quite a few are so admixed that one wonders if they could be properly called White anymore as they tend to be in the “border zone” of Whiteness.

49 Comments

Filed under Afghanistan, Africa, Americas, Argentina, Asia, Australia, Belize, Brazil, Canada, Caribbean, Central America, Chile, China, Colombia, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Europe, Europeans, French Guyana, Guyana, India, Iranians, Latin America, Mexico, Middle East, Mixed Race, Namibia, NE Asia, Near Easterners, North Africa, North America, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Puerto Rico, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Siberia, South Africa, South America, South Asia, Southwest Africa, Turks, Uruguay, USA, Whites

Latin America Is a Very Socialist Region: South America

Peron set up an extensive social democratic structure in Argentina when he was in power as some sort of an odd sort of Left populist. Chile had an extensive social democracy already set up even when Allende took power. Chile is already a pretty socialist place, but the newly elected President Bachelet has promised more socialist changes. Leftwing generals seized power in Peru in 1968 and undertook a number of leftwing changes.

Socialists were in power in Guyana for a time and Cheddi Jagan, a socialist, is still a major political figure. Even much of the opposition in Venezuela consists of a large formally socialist party. In Brazil, the opposition is in the process of throwing out the Left government via a phony legislative coup. The opposition party that doing this has “social democratic” in its name and social democracy is stated as one of its principles.

The Left is currently in power in Chile, Uruguay, Brazil, Peru, Ecuador and Venezuela. They were recently in power in Argentina and Paraguay but were overthrown by a legislative coup in Paraguay and probable economic sabotage in Argentina.

The Right is in power in Colombia, but they have only stayed in power by killing 200,000 people. The Left is kept out of power via death squads and the army and police. Furthermore, the Left is armed to the teeth.

2 Comments

Filed under Americas, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Economics, Ecuador, Fascism, Government, Guyana, Latin America, Latin American Right, Left, Peru, Political Science, Politics, Regional, Socialism, South America, Uruguay, Venezuela

IQ and Behavioral Outcomes in Mulatto Versus Pure Black Populations

jm8 writes:

Do you believe the average is is (about) 76, or do you no longer believe this, and now believe it is closer to 70? 76+12-15 would be more than 82.

Do you no longer agree with what you stated here?

“US Blacks have a 15 point gap to close between Blacks and Whites. That is quite a bit more than the 8 points that separated Bermudian Blacks and Whites. However, if Bermudians could close the gap by 8 points, perhaps it is not beyond the capability of US Blacks to close the gap by a similar amount. US Blacks would certainly function a lot better at 93 IQ than at 85 IQ.”

This would seem to imply a potential IQ of Africans of about 90 or so.

There is also the Bahamas score.

I am not certain the 86 figure for UK blacks is reliable (at least for UK born blacks, and those arriving before adulthood). The achievement test data on g-lodes tests (which correlates with IQ from the UK CAT at matched ages, and does not tend to show a widening with age) seems to suggest otherwise.

What was the Bahamas score again? ~90?

Those Bermudian Blacks are half-White. Obviously there will be some dramatic effects, mostly positive, on a Black population that becomes mixed to a 50% White level. Differences in achievement, drive, aggression, reactivity, impulsiveness, forward thinking, planing, time preference, responsibility, inhibition, and all sorts of things. Perhaps there is something special about Blacks who are half White that enables them to get jacked up enough to match Whites on an IQ test. A 50% White population of Blacks is going to be so different than a 100% Black population of Blacks that there is almost no comparing them.

On the other hand, the behavior of mulattized populations in Guyana, Mexico, Dominican Republic, Puerto Rico, Brazil, Venezuela, and Colombia is not very impressive.

I am not sure that mulattization is a way forward for Black people, though there are clearly some benefits to Blacks in obtaining White admixture.

22 Comments

Filed under Americas, Bahamas, Bermudans, Black-White (Mulattos), Blacks, Brazil, Caribbean, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Guyana, Intelligence, Latin America, Mixed Race, Psychology, Puerto Rico, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, South America, Venezuela, Whites

There Are Good Ruling Classes and Bad Ruling Classes

William Playfair Web writes:

TJF –

The ruling classes of Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras leaves lower and middle income people few options but to leave

The ruling class is typically descended from the people of the European nation of Spain who are white or at least whiter than the native inhabitants of those countries. Hence, they are of higher IQs.

Do you believe higher IQ people rising to the top to become a ruling class is a good thing? I take it you are not a libertarian?

Yes, ruling classes exist all over the world. China, Iran, the Arab World, all of Europe including Norway, Sweden, Finland, etc. Japan, South Korea and Taiwan have ruling classes. As do New Zealand and Australia.

The difference is that the ruling classes of Latin America are stone evil. Those are the most evil ruling classes on the face of the Earth. I am convinced that the only way to deal with them is simply to eliminate them altogether, to take them out. That’s what the Cubans did, and they did the right thing. They wiped the Cuban ruling class off the face of Earth. Yes, they went to Miami, where they are now the ruling class of Miami, but the ruling class of Cuba was simply exterminated. That’s the only way to deal with these monsters. You just need to flat out get rid of them.

I include the ruling classes of Haiti, Dominican Republic, Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Colombia, Venezuela, Brazil, Colombia, Peru, Ecuador, Chile, Argentina, and Paraguay in this category. However, the elites in Peru and Venezuela often ruled via fake “socialist” parties that were actually members of the Socialist International!

These people are just evil. They do not believe in democracy, much like our vile and despicable conservative ruling class. Whenever the Left comes into power, these ruling classes overthrow it in some way or another. They used to do it by military coup, and they still do (see Honduras) but now they have other methods (fake impeachment in Brazil and Paraguay, fake corruption scandal in Brazil, economic sabotage and street rioting in Venezuela and Brazil, fake claims of human rights abuses/dictatorship and assassinations in Venezuela).

So there is really no peaceful road to socialism (or even social democracy) in Latin America. Maybe Lenin was onto something with his talk of parliamentary cretins. The Leninists have always said that it would be nice if the Left could take power peacefully, but the ruling classes will not allow the Left to come to power peacefully because power does not give up without a fight. Therefore the ruling class has to be overthrown by force. I really do believe that they are correct. Look what happens when you try to do it peacefully: Allende, Chavez, Gaitan, Zelaya, Juan Bosch, Cheddi Jagan, Dilma Rouseff, Arbenz, Father Aristide. It doesn’t work.

I would put the ruling classes of Mexico and Costa Rica in a different category.

Mexico’s ruling class is actually part of a revolutionary party that is a member of the Socialist International. The reason Mexico did not have a Leftist revolution in the 1980’s was because, as my mother put it when I asked her why not, “They already had their revolution.” Mexico has long had great relations with Cuba and for the entirety of the war, the Marxist FMLN guerrillas of El Salvador had their head offices in Mexico City itself. They have national health care, free education to the university level and most of the rural land is owned by the state as “ejidos,” which are rented out for use by any peasants who wish to farm them.

However the elite did steal an election from a Left candidate in 1988, 25 years ago. The Mexican ruling class will only go so far with their shabby socialism.

The ruling class of Costa Rica for some reason made a class compromise and a social contract with the people sometime after WW2. They also decided to get rid of their military altogether. The fact that Costa Rica has historically been one of the Whitest countries in Latin America may have been one of the reasons that they were able to put in a social democracy. Reagan ordered them at gunpoint to destroy their social democracy in the 1980’s. I understand that they took much of it apart, but a lot of it still exists.

I have not heard a lot of bad things about the ruling classes of Panama, Belize, most of the Caribbean islands, the Guyanas and even Uruguay.

14 Comments

Filed under Americas, Argentina, Belize, Brazil, Caribbean, Central America, Chile, Colombia, Conservatism, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Economics, Ecuador, El Salvador, Fascism, French Guyana, Government, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Latin America, Latin American Right, Left, Marxism, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Political Science, Politics, Regional, Revolution, Socialism, Sociology, South America, Uruguay, Venezuela

Yankee Go Home!

How can anyone read this and say there is no such thing as US imperialism. Yet that is what most Americans will tell you.

How can anyone read this and say there is no such thing as US imperialism. Yet that is what most Americans will tell you.

Yes, Latin Americans have ruined Latin America, but they haven’t done so alone. They had a lot of help. One of the principal problems in Latin America now for a very long time has been the presence of the United States. Working in tandem with Latin American elites, the US has, over the last 100 years, probably done more to destroy that continent than any other factor.

Others have not been so innocent. As you can see, Britain ruined Guyana. All Guyana wanted was a social democracy like the UK had at the time, but the imperialist scum in the UK ruined that. Social democracy is good enough for the British, but we can’t let our neo-colonies (our slave states) have it.

The US mentality is similar. A typical reason for overthrowing a government in Latin America is that the President raised the minimum wage. Presidents both Democratic and Republican alike have overthrown Latin American governments for the simple crime of raising the minimum wage.

Barack Obama “liberal,” overthrew the government of Honduras. The main reason was because Zelaya raised the minimum wage. Barack Obama supports raising the minimum wage in the US, but in our neo-colonies, they don’t get that option because those are our slave states. Barack is no socialist, Communist, Maoist, Third Worldist or even anti-colonialist. What sort of socialist overthrows a government for the crime of raising the minimum wage?

Reactionary US foreign policy is a bipartisan project the world over, but this is especially true in Latin America. Democrats only pursue relatively liberal politics in the USA. Overseas, our foreign policy has always been far rightwing reaction. US Presidents never work for the people of the world. All US Presidents are the employees of the large US corporations and the rich, the 1%. The 1% call the shots in the US. The President listens, takes notes, stands up, salutes, and says, “Yes, sir.” That’s called “democracy.” LOL.

17 Comments

Filed under Americas, Britain, Conservatism, Democrats, Economics, Europe, Geopolitics, Guyana, History, Imperialism, Latin America, Liberalism, Modern, Obama, Political Science, Politics, Regional, Republicans, South America, The Americas, US Politics, USA

Murder Capitals of the World

People assume that murder capitals of the world would have to look like Detroit – more or less bombed out ruins. Not so at all. Some of the world’s murder capitals:

Belize City, Belize
Georgetown, Guyana
Johannesburg, South Africa

If you go to any of these places or look at them on Google Earth, they don’t look anything like Detroit at all. Georgetown and Belize City look pretty nice, plenty of pretty old Victorian houses. Johannesburg is nothing like a bombed out wreck at all; though clearly some areas are terrible, nevertheless, many neighborhoods look very good.

South Africa reportedly recently set a world record for homicides – going over 100 per 100,000. That’s 10/10,000 and 1/1,000. Imagine that. In a small town of 15,000 people, 15 of them would be murdered every single year. Every year, you would probably personally know one of the murder victims.

The 100/100,000 rate seems to be some sort of a ceiling effect. Once you go that high, you really can’t go any higher in peacetime. If it does go any higher, you probably don’t even have peacetime anymore, you have something like Somalia – warlordism with warlord gangs going at it all the time. Whatever the Hell that is, it’s not really peacetime anymore. Since South Africa hit that ceiling effect, the homicide rate has been declining.

All of these cities, of course, share a high% Black population. The epicenter for Georgetown’s homicides is Tiger Bay, 100% Black.

12 Comments

Filed under Africa, Americas, Belize, Central America, Crime, Guyana, Latin America, Regional, South Africa, South America

Alfonso Cano, Leader of the FARC, Killed in Colombia

Alfonso Cano, leader of the Colombian FARC, has been killed in Colombia. There was a long operation going after him in Cauca, where he was known to be hiding. It was probably just a matter of time before they found him and killed. Unfortunately, they ranks of the FARC around Cano had been penetrated by rebel defectors who were spying for the government. The FARC will now have to clean out this nest of spies, and some people are going to have to be executed. Unfortunately, this sort of thing can lead to some serious and deadly purges.

Former rebels have been turning on the leadership and defecting to the state for a few years now. I don’t understand what it’s all about, unless they want money or they just want to be on the side that is winning. The FARC has been on the run since Plan Colombia initiated in 2002. 8 billion in US military and intelligence aid has been poured into the country. That’s 100% responsible for the change in the state’s fortunes.

I can’t see anything good coming out this killing, nor out of any of the other recent killings or deaths of FARC leaders. The state is demanding total and unconditional surrender for the FARC, which has always been the state’s position. That’s obviously not the base for any negotiated solution.

If the FARC surrenders, how will Colombian society be any better off? Will the Colombian state stop threatening, arresting, beating, torturing and murdering the opposition? Of course not. The only reason why the state is limited in their repression so far is that when the government comes around to kill the people, a FARC column usually moves in to defend the people and drive the government forces away. So the FARC are the only force that is protecting the people.

The Colombian state is complete garbage, same as it has always been. That won’t change with the defeat of the FARC. The state will be just as evil as ever, in fact, they will probably act even worse. It says volumes about America and what it stands for that Israel and Colombia, two of the sickest and evillest countries on Earth, are the top recipients of US aid. The worst nations on Earth are America’s best friends.

I don’t believe news reports saying that FARC only has 8,000 fighters. True, they have lost a lot of defectors lately. I think the number is probably closer to 18,000, maybe a bit less. Further, in recent years, a 30,000 man urban militia has been activated. They wear no uniforms and operate right out of their homes. They’ve also been very hard to catch.

The state’s base of support is in the big cities, where the FARC have never done well. But I don’t understand why any decent non-wealthy Colombian could ever support that shithole of a state. There’s still no room for peaceful organizing on the Left, and almost all Colombian parties are rightwing parties. Foreign investment has grown in recent years, but that’s never done anything for Colombians anyway, so I don’t see what good it is.

The offensive that has been launched against the FARC is the largest military offensive that has ever been launched against any guerrilla force in the history of Latin America. Of course it’s done some damage.

The FARC has branches in all neighboring countries.

The FARP operates in Peru all the way down to south of Iquitos. They have over 1,000 members in Peru alone. The FARE operates on the border of Ecuador. The FARV operates in Venezuela. The FARB operates in the Dog’s Head region of Brazil. The FARC also operates all the way over in Guyana, where they tax the gold mines. There is a significant FARC grouping in Panama. In recent years, a FARC group has been in Paraguay, helping to organize an armed group there. There are also reports of the FARC operating in Bolivia.

Saying that the FARC has been on the verge of defeat in recent years is preposterous for a variety of reasons. First of all, attacks have been increasing about 20% per year for the last few years. Government casualties have been rising for the past three years. Government casualties are now at their highest level since the peak of the war around 2002. Somehow this is all being spun as the last desperate moves of an army on the verge of defeat.

This is still one Hell of a badass, kickass rebel army, one of the deadliest rebel armies on Earth. Underestimate them at your peril.

1 Comment

Filed under Americas, Brazil, Central America, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Latin America, Left, Maoism, Marxism, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Politics, Regional, Revolution, South America, US Politics, Venezuela