Don't be so anti-something that you're pro bad things.

[Tahuti]

I think I see where the confusion is coming from. You actually, ridiculously think the US was responsible for Allende's fall from power at the hands of Pinochet. Is that correct?

There was in fact a popular call to dethrone him, which was answered by Pinochet with some aid from the CIA - who were worried that Allende was aligning to the Soviets. This is still far cry from the 'CIA dethroned a legitimate leader out of completely nowhere'. Pinochet was actually supposed to immediately hand over power to the Christian democrats.

 

[T C]

I think I see where the confusion is coming from. You actually, ridiculously think the US was responsible for Allende's fall from power at the hands of Pinochet. Is that correct?

No. I think you have not read my posts correctly. I am talking about all US involvement in helping to overthrow elected governments in Latin America. A clue should have been my use of words "Latin" and "America".

I assumed that because you supported the overthrow in Chile you supported the others too, but perhaps not? Of course I am not saying, and did not say, that the US is solely responsible, or that they acted alone. I am saying that they supported, politically, financially, militarily etc. the overthrow by other forces in those countries.

I am criticising you for supporting the overthrow of those governments, and suggesting that such support comes from your ignorance of the consequences, having never experienced them.

 

[Traitorfish]

I would argue that Marx does not account for one thing- the decency of humanity. We have eight hour work days, and such a thing as the minimum wage. So MArx isn't exactly wrong, he's just too negative.

Hm, usually Marx is accused of being altogether too optimistic about humanity's capacity for decency.

 

[kochman]

But some things are binary, one has to take a stand, now more than ever!

All this is a bit off topic of course, but you sensitive types have a way of revolving all discussions around your personal feelings.

This isn't to say don't take a stand... it's to say, don't turn into a Robespierre/Hitler/etc and start killing people over your stance.
What if you're wrong?

 

[Narz]

One should be flexible of course but no stance on anything worth anything is going to lead down an easy path.

For example, saving the planet for human habitation doesn't constitute simply quietly recycling your cans. Probably some form of violence will be necessary (against our short-term-gains-above-all corporatist system). Appealing to rich white people to "shop greener" isn't going to do much.

 

[kochman]

For example, saving the planet for human habitation doesn't constitute simply quietly recycling your cans. Probably some form of violence will be necessary (against our short-term-gains-above-all corporatist system). Appealing to rich white people to "shop greener" isn't going to do much.

Please, elaborate on your environmentalist terrorism?
Who are you suggesting execute the violence? The state? The greens? This really needs to be fleshed out.

I'm also not sure why the "rich(,) white people" part was necessary.

 

[Narz]

No comment. Except that future generations will wish we weren't such placated, self-deceiving cowards.

I include myself (for now) also. I post on the Internet as if it means something.

"Ah, what a great man, he posted his opinion online"

 

[Narz]

I'm also not sure why the "rich(,) white people" part was necessary.

The rich in general if you prefer. Chinese, black, rich people like to make a show of caring when actually it's only for themselves.

I just realized that saying "rich white people" or blaming whites in general is racist, implying that white people should know better (and others are merely victims), I'm going to stop doing that.

 

[warpus]

There was in fact a popular call to dethrone him, which was answered by Pinochet with some aid from the CIA - who were worried that Allende was aligning to the Soviets. This is still far cry from the 'CIA dethroned a legitimate leader out of completely nowhere'. Pinochet was actually supposed to immediately hand over power to the Christian democrats.

Every local I talked to in Chile while I was there 6 years ago blames the U.S. for what happened with Pinochet. It might not be (fully) warranted, but most of the anger stems from the fact that American fingers were in the pie to begin with. I don't think they accuse the U.S. of screwing them over fully, step by step, doing all the work themselves..

They feel about the same way you'd feel if your democratically elected government was ovethrown by a dictator and another country was involved in some way.

Chileans love to talk about politics by the way, at least to tourists.. and at least the people I talked to anyway. I chalk it up to the country still getting over its dark past. Obviously they're not going to look kindly at the U.S. (government).. What would people expect?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

What would people expect?

Well, we are talking about people who expected Iraqis to thank them for using a full scale invasion to topple their government, so this question opens a wide range of possibilities.

 

[onejayhawk]

The rich in general if you prefer. Chinese, black, rich people like to make a show of caring when actually it's only for themselves.

I just realized that saying "rich white people" or blaming whites in general is racist, implying that white people should know better (and others are merely victims), I'm going to stop doing that.

I would not go that far, though it is frequently true. If you have money, it is easier to give it than time. When they start using other people's money get suspicious.

J

 

[Phrossack]

One should be flexible of course but no stance on anything worth anything is going to lead down an easy path.

For example, saving the planet for human habitation doesn't constitute simply quietly recycling your cans. Probably some form of violence will be necessary (against our short-term-gains-above-all corporatist system). Appealing to rich white people to "shop greener" isn't going to do much.

Right now some of environmentalism's worst enemies are paranoid, fanatical idiots convinced that environmentalism is some elitist government plot. Using violence would only confirm their suspicions in their minds, would make environmentalism a toxic cause many would cease supporting, and would probably set the movement back for generations. Tempting though it is...

If you want to help, then do something. Recycle, avoid driving, eat local foods, avoid meat (admittedly I will never do this), massacre invasive species, vote for environmentalist laws, and for chrissakes, organize.

 

[Narz]

Right now some of environmentalism's worst enemies are paranoid, fanatical idiots convinced that environmentalism is some elitist government plot.

The reason there are so many right-wing fringe crazies is because people need to believe & organize behind a cause. The right has all sorts of crazy things they rally behind while the left is like "well, lets not get crazy now, we don't want to do more harm than good" & don't really rally around anything except maybe "acceptance"/tolerance. The left is a bunch of punanis & that's why we're screwed.

 

[Samson]

Right now some of environmentalism's worst enemies are paranoid, fanatical idiots convinced that environmentalism is some elitist government plot. Using violence would only confirm their suspicions in their minds, would make environmentalism a toxic cause many would cease supporting, and would probably set the movement back for generations. Tempting though it is...

This made me think, how long ago was it that environmentalism was some communist plot, and how many people are there that used to believe it was communist and now believe it to be government?

If you want to help, then do something. Recycle...

Though please start with reuse and repair, only at last resort recycle.

 

[Bootstoots]

I think I see where the confusion is coming from. You actually, ridiculously think the US was responsible for Allende's fall from power at the hands of Pinochet. Is that correct?

The vast majority of the coup itself was planned and executed by people within the Chilean military. The US did help organize a failed coup in 1970 shortly before he took office, and it was responsible for a substantial propaganda campaign throughout the election and his presidency, along with economic sanctions that helped to make the Chilean economic situation worse (although Allende did a fairly good job of wrecking the economy himself), in an attempt to get the Chileans to depose him one way or the other. The actual 9/11 coup, though, was almost entirely Chilean and the US was only given a few days' notice. The US diplomatic response was initially quite enthusiastic, but that faded as it became obvious that Pinochet intended to stay in office for a long time and the human rights violations (and assassinations on foreign, including US, soil) mounted.

Given this situation, can you see why there would be a substantial amount of resentment about the US role in undermining Allende and helping to bring about the conditions for the coup? It's plausible that it could have happened even without US "soft power" support, but US efforts made it much more likely. And people with strong democratic traditions tend to get irritated when a dictator overthrows the government, kills a bunch of people, tries out a radical (and disastrous in the period 1975-82) economic policy experiment implemented by ideologues educated in the country that helped undermine the government, and stays in power for 17 years.

 

[Phrossack]

The reason there are so many right-wing fringe crazies is because people need to believe & organize behind a cause. The right has all sorts of crazy things they rally behind while the left is like "well, lets not get crazy now, we don't want to do more harm than good" & don't really rally around anything except maybe "acceptance"/tolerance. The left is a bunch of punanis & that's why we're screwed.

I also suggested concrete actions like killing off invasive species, voting, and so on. My state's Department of Conservation has the Stream Team program, in which volunteers go out on float trips to clean and collect data on the health of rivers and streams. They pick up trash and thousands of tires that stupidity or accident dumped into the streams. It's a good idea.

Besides, what are you suggesting, that we form green militias and start shooting climate change deniers and blowing up coal plants?

 

[bhsup]

Phrossack! Our Conservation Dept is world class and I applaud you for mentioning them!

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Phrossack! Our Conservation Dept is world class and I applaud you for mentioning them!

I misread that as 'conversation dept' and it still made perfect sense...until I looked back at the Stream Team business and had to start over.

 

[Narz]

Besides, what are you suggesting, that we form green militias and start shooting climate change deniers and blowing up coal plants?

Probably wouldn't be wise to suggest such things.

Anyway, I don't think we should shoot climate change deniers, just relocate them to below sea-level cities & hurricane zones.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Sigh. I knew this would become a thread about communism before I even opened it.

I understand every time groups of people have tried to implement it, we end up with commie hellholes like the USSR, Cambodia, Mao's China, etc. They called themselves Communist for the love of Vlad, what more do you want?

They called themselves communists, but they did not call what they had created communism.

You know why? Because it wasn't. And outside of a few hardcore Tankies, communists today don't want a whole lot to do with the USSR or PRC, and are more than happy to pick apart the failings of both. They just aren't likely to agree with you on what those failings were.

Go ahead and stay in college and refuse to acknowledge the real world if you want, but in reality, they were communist because that is all communism can ever be if it's actually tried on a large scale. Brutal hellish governments oppressing their people. That 'theory' communism you learn in the nice pretty classroom... yeah, ha, good luck with that.

I learned communism in the real world, bub. College classrooms teach you about liberal ideals, but not communist ones. They are indeed stuffy academics full of theories, but many of those are liberal wet-dream nonsense; they readily regurgitate anti-communist propaganda, outside of a few departments and specialists in the know. It wasn't until I got out into the real world and saw it for what it was that realized that the people in charge were not on my side, and that the game was rigged against people like me.

Alright, back to the mouth foaming, people, there's still so much potential for communism-denunciation! We haven't even escaped Arendt-level totalitarianism-whining yet. Shoot for the [red] stars, fellas.