NationStates Jolt Archive

Please tell me, why it is America has to endorse right wing dictators, when trying to defend democracy etc, without actually realising the paradox. Ok, fair enough be Anti-Communist, but there is no need to support Right-wing Fascists, and Military dictatorships! then if 'democracy' is installed, it has to be free market economics , not even a sniff of social democracy! I mean Arbenz was hardly a communist, or even a radical lefty!
The same type of paradox can be found from them there righties that support Mr.Bush jnr. while claiming the land of the free etc, they then wish to restrict peoples freedom to abortions, or to a secular education, devoid of any political sway?!
Please explain!

Because they have a screwed up vision of how to protect liberty and freedom.

Many of us ask the same thing. The response I hear the most is the 'better than' argument...as in, our dictator was 'better than' what 'could have' happened to Guatemala, Chile and so on.

Yet Cuba is somehow more evil than Pinochet?

It doesn't add up.

good shout, but i mean really, if they are just goin to turn these places into Satellite economic colonies then why bother with being nice about, jus invade....show the world their true colours!

Many of us ask the same thing. The response I hear the most is the 'better than' argument...as in, our dictator was 'better than' what 'could have' happened to Guatemala, Chile and so on.

Yet Cuba is somehow more evil than Pinochet?

It doesn't add up.

Cuba's a haven compared to what US sponsored Iraq was.

I can totally see your point here. I believe that in the 60s, 70s and 80s, Operation Condor, which, even though it was created by the governments of five Latin American dictators, had the full backing of the CIA, and toppled over 40 democratically elected leaders in Latin America.

Even to this day, with the Muslim world the US supports totallitarian regimes, like those in place in Saudi Arabia, Syria, Jordan, while they keep a "safe" distance from young, democratically elected governments in places like Turkey and Malaysia.

Personally, I can't foresee the end of this double standard in the near future.

Please tell me, why it is America has to endorse right wing dictators, when trying to defend democracy etc, without actually realising the paradox. Ok, fair enough be Anti-Communist, but there is no need to support Right-wing Fascists, and Military dictatorships!
I agree. America does not and never did have any goal to install democratic states worldwide. Its goal has always been to install pro-American states worldwide.

For example, look at Venezuela. Chavez was democratically elected, yet the USA is working hard to undermine his government and support base. Same with Haiti. The US supports the new right-wing military dictatorship there. In fact they have refused to meet or work with any country in the Carribean region that protests against this dictatorship.

The thing that bothers a lot of people the most is the hypocrisy of the American government. Just admit you're out there serving your own interests, and damn everyone else. Don't sugar coat it with bullsh*t about 'spreading democracy'. Just proclaim, 'I want to rule the world, MUAHAHAHAH!' and get it over with already. Jeez.

no defenders of the US then???!

I agree. America does not and never did have any goal to install democratic states worldwide. Its goal has always been to install pro-American states worldwide.

For example, look at Venezuela. Chavez was democratically elected, yet the USA is working hard to undermine his government and support base. Same with Haiti. The US supports the new right-wing military dictatorship there. In fact they have refused to meet or work with any country in the Carribean region that protests against this dictatorship.
The U.S is trying to change its tactics...instead of installing dictators and creating economic stability in favour of US business interests, they cram treaties and the IMF down the throats of countries, forcing them to open markets and deregulate. Much more effective, I think, and their hands are less conspicuously bloody. Just look at Brazil...they have the highest external debt in the world, and despite the fact that President Lula is semi-socialist, his hands are tied by the terms of debt repayment. So, go ahead and have your democracy, as long as the cake belongs to us....

Please tell me, why it is America has to endorse right wing dictators

You lose.

Tell me, is America a democracy?

no defenders of the US then???!
They'll be here, and the feathers will fly. Be prepared to be namecalled.

im not talkin about the US itself, im talkin about their international activites!

You lose. Is this a game? Who wins?

Tell me, is America a democracy?Depends on what you mean by democracy. Point?

Is this a game? Who wins?

Depends on what you mean by democracy. Point?

America is not a dictatorship, regardless of what you think. It has a Congress, and if you hadn't noticed, we had an election a couple months ago. Therefore, calling it a dictatorship is idiotic and shows your complete lack of intelligence.

Second, answer the question. Is America's government classified as a democracy?

You lose.

Tell me, is America a democracy?
Does it matter? This thread is about how America claims to be spreading democracy, while in many instances at the present time it quite clearly is not.

that is a good point, is the US a proper democracy, surely more of a plutocracy???
but anyway, thats sidetracking....could the American's not accept the situation of democratically elected govts. Wot did the Sandinistas ever do to the US?
What did Fidel do?
Please, i want a pro-US person to answer the American FP thing, please....for my sanity

You lose.

Tell me, is America a democracy?
Yes, elected members of the government, system of checks and balances, bicameral legislature, etc.

Now our government doesn't speak for us. They SAY they do, but they don't.
(That's the pro-American view you wanted)
I support America, I hate my government. We don't think like our President says we do. Get that buried deep in your head and remember that. It's pretty annoying hearing that U.S. Government = U.S.

good shout, but i mean really, if they are just goin to turn these places into Satellite economic colonies then why bother with being nice about, jus invade....show the world their true colours!
Physical colonialisation is expensive and time consuming, and stretches domestic resources to their limits. It is easier to enforce draconian trade agreements that strip social programs, force economies to rely on primary exports, and deregulate labour. The whole Iraq thing is a little weird...more like a family feud carried on by Bush Jr...they were doing much better with things like NAFTA...but then again, war is good for the economy, maybe it was just time to grease the wheels again.

You lose.

Tell me, is America a democracy?

It really depends on your idea of what a democracy is.

One could argue that the democratic choice and values in America are actually very weak. There is no real choice in most elections (the Democratic and Republican parties may have their differences, but they essentially stand for much the same thing). Gerrymandering of constituancies in the arguably undemocratic first past the post system is widespread and accepted. And the President of the country isn't elected by a true popular vote.

America is not a dictatorship, regardless of what you think. It has a Congress, and if you hadn't noticed, we had an election a couple months ago. Therefore, calling it a dictatorship is idiotic and shows your complete lack of intelligence.

Second, answer the question. Is America's government classified as a democracy?

A representative or indirect democracy, yes.

Yes, elected members of the government, system of checks and balances, bicameral legislature, etc.

Now our government doesn't speak for us. They SAY they do, but they don't.
(That's the pro-American view you wanted)
I support America, I hate my government. We don't think like our President says we do. Get that buried deep in your head and remember that. It's pretty annoying hearing that U.S. Government = U.S.
I think most people realise the difference...at least I hope they do:). I can't hate someone I've never met...and even upon meeting them it is difficult to have that kind of strong feeling based on surface understandings.

By the way, I don't think that was the kind of pro-American, anti-American government response he/she is looking for.

Teranius could you please actually answer the question about foreign policy, we arent talkin about the American system!

America is not a dictatorship, regardless of what you think. It has a Congress, and if you hadn't noticed, we had an election a couple months ago. Therefore, calling it a dictatorship is idiotic and shows your complete lack of intelligence.
Now that you have used ad hominem to deal with an assertation that was never made (re: America as a dictatorship), perhaps you'd like to retract the above?

Maybe you should reread the posts first.

Teranius could you please actually answer the question about foreign policy, we arent talkin about the American system!
See what I said about the name calling? :D
I should start a career as a psychic.

Now that you have used ad hominem to deal with an assertation that was never made (re: America as a dictatorship), perhaps you'd like to retract the above?

Maybe you should reread the posts first.

Indeed. Nowhere did the post accuse the US of being a dictatorshuip.It merely said that the governments they were/are setting up were not.

No1 wants a debate, boohoo!
well, i do find it quite pathetic when people refuse 2 defend themselves by answering imaginary questions. But the ORIGINAL question remains...how can they justify it

Teranius could you please actually answer the question about foreign policy, we arent talkin about the American system!
....waiting...

I've got to admit, this is a little like baiting...I apologise in advance.

Some of our usual U.S-backers might be out right now...Johnny Wad, Whispering Legs and so on...or maybe everyone is tired of rehashing this conversation:).

No1 wants a debate, boohoo!
well, i do find it quite pathetic when people refuse 2 defend themselves by answering imaginary questions. But the ORIGINAL question remains...how can they justify it

Good point.

America is not a dictatorship, regardless of what you think. It has a Congress, and if you hadn't noticed, we had an election a couple months ago. Therefore, calling it a dictatorship is idiotic and shows your complete lack of intelligence.
Who called it a dictatorship? You are the only one here who said anything about America itself being a dictatorship, which it is not.

Who called it a dictatorship? You are the only one here who said anything about America itself being a dictatorship, which it is not.

Mayeb he's gone to bed. Two year old statement he made would suggest so.

I guess no one IS justifying it. Hmmm...interesting...

Mayeb he's gone to bed. Two year old statement he made would suggest so.
Ah ah...don't get sucked into ad hominem too...some of that mud gets splattered on he who throws it.

I agree. America does not and never did have any goal to install democratic states worldwide. Its goal has always been to install pro-American states worldwide.

For example, look at Venezuela. Chavez was democratically elected, yet the USA is working hard to undermine his government and support base. Same with Haiti. The US supports the new right-wing military dictatorship there. In fact they have refused to meet or work with any country in the Carribean region that protests against this dictatorship.

Well it is their backyard. *rolls eyes*
I watched a really good doco last night about the rise of the Christian right. Apart from economic policy, they make me sick with their absurd idea that the world needs conservatism forced upon it. Bloody evangelicals... And the disturbing thing is that they have gained sooo much political power. (obviously- look at the Prez)

NOT EVERYONE AGREES WITH YOU AND WANTS TO LIVE ACCORDING TO YOUR VALUES!!! And they seem to think that the democrats are "radical leftists." *snort*

Sorry for that little rant...

I think that in the real world it is sometimes necessary for governments to support dictatorships, despite the incompatability of the ideologies. This was especially the case in the Cold War, where I think too much was at stake to put principles before pragmatism. However, I wish the US would stop harping on about how it wants to spread democracy when it's clearly a lie. The US only likes democracy when it suits them.

American liberalism is conservatism in my books.

Yeah for the rise of a theocracy!

Hey, did you know that Bush has slated funds to support religious explanations of natural phenomena, such as the Grand Canyon? In many national parks, creationist theories abound in the bookstore area of the souveneir shops...while scientific descriptions are often absent.

The main reason (and I admit it isn't a very good reason) that the US supported dictatorships during the cold war years was because of the worries about our primary enemy, the Soviet Union. We may trivialize the worry that existed at the time as being petty, but then it did seem fairly justified. We didn't want Russia getting a foothold in our hemisphere. The essence of containment.

And in response to that we did everything we could do, even supporting brutal dictators out of the fear that some of the less hardline leaders would cave. It has to be viewed against the light of the cold war, and the death struggle the world was in at the time. It's basically as was said earlier: this is better than Soviet troops.

Meanwhile, we are seeing a similar situation in the middle east. We are supporting dictatorships there that are repressive, but we view as more tolerable than having islamic extremists in power. And, why I say that it is mostly the same, is because we are being a little bit better about it. We are putting some pressure on regimes to democratize, but clearly not enough.

So, yeah, it's a shitty reason, but that's why.

Aw...this is so one-sided it's boring.

American liberalism is conservatism in my books.
Agreed

Yeah for the rise of a theocracy!

Hey, did you know that Bush has slated funds to support religious explanations of natural phenomena, such as the Grand Canyon? In many national parks, creationist theories abound in the bookstore area of the souveneir shops...while scientific descriptions are often absent.
What a bunch of morons. Some guy on that show last night was going on about how people were "too logical" and how they basically shouldn't believe in science...

So we should just believe what you tell us? uh-huh...
But here in Australia things aren't looking too good either. There are conservative politicians such as Tony Abbot who want to ake Australia back decades. For instance, they want to re-open the issue of abortion...

The main reason (and I admit it isn't a very good reason) that the US supported dictatorships during the cold war years was because of the worries about our primary enemy, the Soviet Union. We may trivialize the worry that existed at the time as being petty, but then it did seem fairly justified. We didn't want Russia getting a foothold in our hemisphere.

And in response to that we did everything we could do, even supporting brutal dictators out of the fear that some of the less hardline leaders would cave. It has to be viewed against the light of the cold war, and the death struggle the world was in at the time. It's basically as was said earlier: this is better than Soviet troops .

Meanwhile, we are seeing a similar situation in the middle east. We are supporting dictatorships there that are repressive, but we view as more tolerable than having islamic extremists in power. And, why I say that it is mostly the same, is because we are being a little bit better about it. We are putting some pressure on regimes to democratize, but clearly not enough.

So, yeah, it's a shitty reason, but that's why.
I agree it was a life and death struggle between ideologies...one one hand, the capitalistic model (not necessarily democratic) versus the socialist economic model. One was a hold-over from colonialism with a desire to create a global economy, and the other was an experiment with a different model. It was about much more than military might. If socialism had been allowed to succeed, globalism would never happen...a global economy can not exist if some countries choose to opt out of this model of 'development'. That puts sizeable resources (human and environmental) out of reach. I think this is a major reason Cuba is such a target...it is one of the last hold-outs...a market that has not yet been integrated into the global system.

I think this is a major reason Cuba is such a target...it is one of the last hold-outs...a market that has not yet been integrated into the global system.
That and it could be a 'spark' for similar ideological movements elsewhere. Not that Cuba is particularly 'Communist...'

Agreed


What a bunch of morons. Some guy on that show last night was going on about how people were "too logical" and how they basically shouldn't believe in science...

So we should just believe what you tell us? uh-huh...
But here in Australia things aren't looking too good either. There are conservative politicians such as Tony Abbot who want to ake Australia back decades. For instance, they want to re-open the issue of abortion...
The world is going through a very conservative phase right now, fundamentalism in religion is not just found in the Islamic world, and many countries are bending rules out of a need for security. The terrorist threat has been a great tool for those who wish to turn back some of the gains made. Feminist groups around the world, for example, have warned their organisations not to enter into any negotiations with goverments, at any level because it could mean a serious rollback of hard-won rights. I think that is also the case for immigration and other human rights groups. Hopefully this will pass....before I'm 90.

That and it could be a 'spark' for similar ideological movements elsewhere. Not that Cuba is particularly 'Communist...'
Well yes, that is of course still the danger (though the American administration doesn't want to put it that baldly...it would show their hand). Not that communism is a very attractive ideology anymore, but rather that a country CAN survive on somewhat different terms than what the IMF and WTO are pushing internationally. Development is tied to a western-consumer model that isn't in full effect in Cuba because of the embargo. Yet Cuba has not collapsed. This is a dangerous example to countries that may be considering pulling out of the global economic model. Venezuela and the recent leftist victory in Uruguay are a sign of this...they are not communist...but neither are they neo-liberal, which is what developing nations are told they must be in order to achieve wealth.

If guns are dangerous, and we don't let our enemies have guns, why would we let them have ideas? - Joseph Stalin

If you think about it, Cuba is doing the "We are the last great communist nation!" stuff, but where do they earn their money from?
Selling cigars to and allowing tourism by "the enemy". Isn't this a little odd?
I know they couldn't survive if they didn't, but I guess any American President since then didn't think about this when they smoked a Havanna.

1. Most Americans are not radical Christians.
2. Most Republicans don't give a darn about Christianity.
3. Bush is not the evangelical Christian that is trying to force everyone to be Christian.


MOST Americans make their decisions based on moral values...they just have different ideas about what is moral.
Liberals:
1. People should not be let through the cracks
2. The US should not resort to war on the international scene
Conservatives:
1. People should not be expected to prop up unsuccesful programs
2. The US should utilize its military might to defend itself

All people make decisions based on a certain set of morals; just because they have different morals than you does not mean they are uneducated morons.

That being said...


Of course. Nixon's foreign policy was a policy of subversion as opposed to actual military might(and Nixon's foreign policy was truly what brought about all these dictators)
Why?
People in America who thought war was "bad" because we withdrew from Vietnam.
The United States still had to oppose communism, so we had to fight unconventionally. And we couldn't take any chances, since we already had too high of a risk by trying to depose governments through unconventional means.
Thus, the toppling of South American governments, the upped support for the Shah, the upped support for Israel, some truly violent policies in Indochina to undermine communism there, the opening of trade relations with China to subvert the Soviet Union's strength, etc...


By the time Reagan rolled around, America was getting rid of its notion of "war=bad", and we committed our military to more places worldwide. We still had to do some underhanded things in Latin America and Afgahnistan, because the Democrats at home were whining about Grenada.
Bush I rolled in, and took out Panama and a few other places, like Iraq.
Clinton came in, sent troops into Bosnia, bombed Serbia, and even had peacekeepers in Somalia for some time.
Bush Jr. came in and sent our boys to Afghanistan and Iraq.

Complain about "preemptive strikes" all you darn well please, but the empirical data is proving that, over the past 25 years, when the US has launched a full scale invasion of a state to take out a government, that country has come out with a democratic state when we stay the course. Sometimes, like in Haiti, it goes awry, but we send soldiers back to reinstall order anyways.

On the other hand, when the United States does not invade, we must resort to underhanded tricks to ensure global order.
And global order is an important asset...the consequence of anarchy is, well anarchy.