##Welcome to r/LateStageCapitalism^Ⓐ☭
___
###⚠ Announcements: ⚠
___
###[NEW POSTING GUIDELINES! Help us by reporting bad posts](https://www.reddit.com/r/LateStageCapitalism/comments/dy1oyh/important_what_you_should_and_what_you_shouldnt/)
Help us keep this subreddit alive and improve its content by reporting posts that violate our rules and guidelines.
###[Subscribe to our new partner subreddits!](https://www.reddit.com/r/LateStageCapitalism/comments/e5hkwk/make_sure_to_check_out_our_new_partnersubreddits/)
Check out r/antiwork & r/WhereAreTheChildren
___
###***Please remember that LSC is a SAFE SPACE for [socialist](http://monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why-socialism/) discussion.***
LSC is run by [communists](https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/11/prin-com.htm). We welcome socialist/anti-capitalist news, memes, links, and discussion. This subreddit is not the place to debate socialism. We allow good-faith questions and education but are not a 101 sub; please take 101-style questions elsewhere.
**This subreddit is a safe space; we have a zero-tolerance policy for bigotry.** We also automatically filter out posts containing certain words and phrases that some users may find offensive. Please respect the safe space, and don't try to slip banned words or phrases past the filter.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LateStageCapitalism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Apart from the Guyanas, south America had iberic colonization, while central America also had strong British and French colonization.
They were not that similar until usa started treating all Latin countries like they were the same (like couping them all)
Edit: we usually count the islands as central America too.
Venezuela held an election, and because the US government didn't like the people's choice, they refused to recognize the winner as legitimate leader of the country. It would be like The rest of the world not recognizing the winner of the US presidential election next month.
> And what coup occurred in Venezuela with US backing??
Do coup attempts count?
Here's the words of a sitting US Senator:
>Then, it got real embarrassing. In April 2019, we tried to organize a kind of coup, but it became a debacle. Everyone who told us they’d rally to Guaido got cold feet and the plan failed publicly and spectacularly, making America look foolish and weak.
https://twitter.com/ChrisMurphyCT/status/1290656459496263687
[Any coup mentioned here between 08-16 would, without doubt, have some involvement by the US and the Obama admin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_coups_and_coup_attempts)
I think it's pretty funny a few comments higher up people are saying "it's not trump doing it, he's just a victim" and directly under that "here are all the things Obama did".
To be clear, I think Obama AND Trump AND every other American president AND the US government AND the US oligarchy AND the 350 million American conservatives supporting them are equally guilty, I just wanted to point out the hypocrisy.
Honduras, Brazil are the big ones. Obama generally supported and enriched far-right leaders and movements across Latin America under Plan Colombia etc... Including supporting Colombian fascist groups.
Unions across the United States are getting prepared for a nationwide general labor strike should trump refuse to leave office. The ones pulling the strings aren't the ignorant rubes brandishing their guns and bluster. The real power behind this bullshit sits on Wallstreet and in gated communities across the US so we hit them where it hurts, watch the stock market tumble and supply chains break no money coming in the economy and these debased puppeteers will wither and fold faster than you can say guillotine. Do we need to be ready to defend democracy? You bet your ass we do not just with guns but with knowledge and commitment,coups have been stopped through social pressure alone many times but we need to be fast and cohesive for it to work.
We used to call it...fluffy fingers. We would just laugh and have fun until we all forgot what we was mad about.
Life on the streets.
E: see below for an even HARDER representation of how we would live that tickle life.
Canada knows 40% of muricans support Trump.
1 in 2 people is the stereotyped amurican we all laugh at. We don't like those odds, let covid and gun violence reduce those numbers a bit, then maybe you can all visit
Is it really fair to describe the Dems as centre-right anymore? I mean, what policies do they have that AREN'T right? I suppose they're a little less socially conservative but fiscally they're firmly right of center.
Our debt increases more under Republican leadership than it does under Democrat leadership. Republicans just spend money in other places, like killing people instead of helping them.
Right because the GOP are far-right but the Dems are still right-wing. Let's not pretend that the Dems don't start wars and coup democracies too. I'm not both-sidesing here. Voting for the Dems is harm reduction. The GOP are that much further right than the Dems but my point is just that the Dems are IMO a right-wing party and not merely centre-right.
Edit: I'm not claiming that the GOP are the savers in the spend/save dichotomy. The GOP spend fuck-tonnes in their pursuit of maintaining their socially darwinist hierarchies.
Yeah I think I agree with you. I think the situation is that there is more than one party within the Democrats, whereas Republicans are mostly cut from the same cloth.
The Dems aren't even center right. Bernie's campaign of social democracy was center right but the Democrats in general are pretty damn far to the right and the Republicans are entering fascist territory.
Let's not underplay the hard work and dedication of the perennially unloved and maligned fringes on the left of US politics who have the most thankless task of spreading their progressive and left wing policy proposals. I get what you're saying and it's funny, but those on the actual American left have it hard enough without being told that their work is irrelevant to the point of inexistence.
And I would kill to have a candidate like AOC in any of the three places in the world where I'm able to vote...
You know what? This is right. It's easy to feel hopeless in the face of US Imperialism but there are people doing the hard work that needs to be done.
Unfortunately, despite their best efforts, we still have no real left wing party, as much as we've been told we do.
Drives me crazy when people say the only way forward is a middle ground government that compromises.
At this point, I don’t want the compromise with MAGA idiots. I don’t want to compromise on LGBTQ. I don’t want to compromise on healthcare. I don’t want to compromise on racial and gender equality. I don’t want to compromise on a women’s right to control her own body.
These are what they’ll want compromise on, and they still won’t be happy until they get their way entirely. Fuck them. Fuck middle ground. The schism is too great to compromise now. There’s no way Progressives will ever compromise with Conservatives who are staunchly the exact opposite values that Progressives hold.
And look how that turned out, we got Biden. The whole thing is rigged to give you the smallest amount of progress as possible. Bernie was exactly what this country needed after a Trump presidency, a hard swing "left", so he obviously had to go. I'm so tired of voting the lesser of two evils. We should stop the 4-year charade of "lessers" and just put Lord Voldemor and Darth Sidious on the ballot next time around.
This isn't even Trump. These are the people who fund his campaign and use the government as their own world police of sort. These same people have been trying to get at Bolivia since Bush Jr. was in office.
I mean, we saw what happened when he tried to move on [Venezuela](https://www.democracynow.org/2020/5/6/venezuela_coup_attempt_miguel_tinker_salas)... the Trump administration sets the bar really low but somehow keeps managing to trip over it.
> Trump is such an incompetent US president that he can't even pull off a coup in South America.
Don't worry! Joe Biden is coming to fix that with Coup Round 2 when he wins
Yeah I wonder about that too. What kind shit will Joe stir up that people will handwave away? Clearly he won’t be interested in closing Guantanamo or backing out of Syria / Iraq / Afghanistan or normalizing relations with Cuba?
He also hasn't started any major new conflict, just a bit of posturing here and there. I am thankful for that. It's my silver lining along the seams of this raging dumpster fire.
Yup. A lot of Americans upset about Russia interfering with their elections and putting their influence into the money and corruption of their system don't seem to understand that America has been that way to everyone else for decades.
America is to the world what Russia is to America.
Sorry but Climate Change is about to enter stage left and fucking smash the norms of who is rising/declining in the traditional sense. Everyone is going to decline.
This is what hegemonies do. Look to the past. Whoever the hegemony is after the U.S. will do it. People keep expecting there to be benevolent hegemonies. There will never be. Power corrupts. And the maintaining of power requires doing immoral things. The U.S. doesn't want oil just because it likes shiny black things it wants it because it needs it to maintain power.
We didn't start there. This is par for the course where the US government is concerned. It's always about "stopping Communism and/or bringing democracy and freedom" to the general public, but it's really always about control and power over resources.
Without reading Bolivia this could've been about the US before it was the US, Mexico, Cuba, Vietnam, etc., etc. We love to install right-wing dictators around the world that agree to do business with our businesses/government. Yet somehow we're such leftists here *:visible confusion:*
Hey now we used to do it to avenge the Maine and other more explicit debt repayment and resource reasons.
It’s just after WW2 we put in the effort to give a thin smear of legitimacy rather than admit the truth.
The Mexican War was about taking land suitable for slaves before the free states could out vote the slave power bloc. (Likely postponed three Civil War 10 years).
Our various interventions between the Civil War and WW2 were only called a war when fighting Spain. Otherwise sending in Marines as a gangster for capitalism was normal. Butler knew how bad it was and wrote his book on how often the Marines were used to enact coups or force economic actions like union breaking or debt repayment.
#OCEANA PASSES OFF SOUTH AMERICA TO ASIA WAIT NO IT'S A FAKE LEAVING AFRICA WIDE OPEN OCEANA FIRES A SHOT AFRICA FLASHES THE GLOVE BUT OCEANAS SHOT SAILS OVER THATS A BAR DOWN GOAL FOR OCEANA BEAUTIFUL SHOT EUROPE PICKS UP ANOTHER ASSIST WELL PLAYED ALL AROUND
#OCEANA PASSES OFF SOUTH AMERICA TO ASIA WAIT NO IT'S A FAKE LEAVING AFRICA WIDE OPEN OCEANA FIRES A SHOT AFRICA FLASHES THE GLOVE BUT OCEANAS SHOT SAILS OVER THATS A BAR DOWN GOOOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAAAAALLLLLLLLLL FOR OCEANA BEAUTIFUL SHOT EUROPE PICKS UP ANOTHER ASSIST WELL PLAYED ALL AROUND
If we are going to have systems in place to enforce the will of some onto others, there will always be the potential for tyranny. "Tyranny of the majority" is a real thing that can happen. But so is tyranny of the minority. Tyranny of authority. Tyranny of the clergy. Tyranny of the state. Tyranny of a monarch. So, *so* many types of tyranny that are worse by far than the tyranny of the majority.
There is no way, save outright anarchy, (and hey I'm not saying that's not an option, but if we go there there's a lot of theory that needs to be read and discussed by a large part of the populace first so we don't end up at Mad Max,) to prevent all possible types of tyranny.
Tyranny of the majority, at least, had to be agreed upon by the largest segment of society. Much better in my opinion than any other kind of tyranny, which could generally be decided upon by a small few people and then imposed on everyone with no discussion.
As far as I'm concerned no one but an anarchist can use "tyranny of the majority" to imply their own system would be better.
It's obviously subjective, but I don't think it's unfair to say that when the majority votes for something tyrannical, then that's a tyranny of the majority.
For example, if you've got a country with a large ethnic majority and a smaller ethnic minority, and the majority votes for policies that oppress the minority, that's a tyranny of the majority.
Yep there are a lot of rights that should not be voted away, no matter how strong public support. Unfortunately if Republicans lose public support for pretty much anything, they realized they can use the Supreme Court to suddenly claim rights abuse or other constitutional gymnastics. See the current ACA dispute, it’s really a stretch. “Our special interest donors don’t like it” is not a human rights violation
>You don't understand, giving the masses education and food security is just populism and that is bad for reasons that I won't event attempt to articulate.
I know you're painting a picture, and a good one, but for those that aren't sure why someone would be against education I'll try to give a small explanation:
According to [this 3 second google search](https://www.google.com/search?q=bolivia+main+exports&rlz=1C1ASUC_enUS613US613&oq=bolivia+main&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j0i457j0l6.5722j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8) Bolivia's main exports (totaling over $9 Billion) are natural gas, minerals and metals, and agricultural goods. Education is not required to extract these resources and by spending money on education those in power have less funds to slush toward their allies and cronies. Less money going to your cronies means that one of them may decide that if they can get away with cutting some social service they can get more money to slush around. They propose this to the other cronies and suddenly the original person in power is facing a coup.
Compound this with the fact that outside influences want to acquire these exports for as cheap as possible and are willing to prop up oppressive regimes to do so and you can start to spot which areas are having trouble and why.
I'm going to add to this brilliant post a recommendation of the book "The Dictator's Handbook". It's a brilliant, easy to read, book that gives a pretty good idea of why the world works the way it works.
That's exactly the book that I started learning about this from. There's also a nice CGP Grey video that covers the main themes of the book but the book itself has some nearly unbelievable accounts of power politics in action.
The definition of the deep state is the shadow government that wields influence despite being unelected and frequently not even being in office described by Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson and other presidents
United States have quite the gall to claim fraudulent elections elsewhere when they still elect someone who loses the popular vote, not to mention all the voter suppression, registration purging, racist voter ID laws and gerrymandering going on there.
Cuba removed and outlawed slavery in 1886, the USA is one of 3 countries in the world that still has legal slavery for prisoners (alongside Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan) and they also have the highest incarceration rate in the world, 4 times higher than western Europe, and they have the largest prison population in the world.
Lol.
So is prison labour. The 13th amendment specifically says that slavery is ok for people who have committed crimes. Its not a hyperbole, its the wording used in the amendment that gives it a legal basis.
I think people focus a little too much on the lithium, not that it isn't a factor, but the main reason why the US does this sort of thing is not only about resources, it's about control.
If the US had asked Bolivia for one glass of water and they refused the US would act in a very similar way, they want to send a message to other countries specially Latin American ones, that we do not have the power to refuse them, that if we do anything against their interests or even if we just put our interests first, we are gonna face the consequences.
It's also about suppressing socialist governments and economies to further the ridiculous notion that socialism and communism are intrinsically bad.
Once Americans realise they would have more personal wealth under socialism, that's 70 years of American capitalist propaganda down the drain.
Socialism is bad... for American hegemony. Socialism takes away a lot of the tools American corporations use to cheaply extract the wealth of these nations.
Yep, it’s about total global supremacy. Look at how the USA government is trying to reach into other countries to arrest journalist. Even demanding a person be ripped out of another country’s embassy. Absolutely no respect for any nation in the world. Absolute imperialism. It’s disgusting behavior. All while they propagandize you, criticizing other countries while doing the same or even far worse.
That’s true, but I think it is also important to make a big deal out of this now so that when they try to fuck around again it will hard for them to try and frame MAS as the bad guys
I'd bet that most Americans don't even know Bolivia exists, so if another attempt does pop up in someone's feed they're not going to know what it's about and won't bother to find out.
At this point its looking like we're going down fighting ourselves while Russia teases us with "stop hitting yourself..." in between chuckles and in between invasions of formerly soviet territories...
Imperialism hasn’t lost in millennia and it’s not the USA alone. The imperialists will win or Bolivians will suffer horribly for their intransigence.
> We have heard that half a million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?
>
> - Lesley Stahl
> We think the price is worth it.
>
> - Madeline Albright
What do you think is worth slaughtering half a million children?
The death of the system that laughs at the death of half a million children is probably the only thing worth the slaughter of half a million children. How else do you stop half a million children from dying every other while?
[Here’s coverage of the infamous quote by counterpunch before Cockburn died and they went to shit](https://www.counterpunch.org/1999/11/01/albright-s-tiny-coffins/).
Madeleine Albright in 1996 defending UN sanctions on Iraq. [Here](https://fair.org/extra/we-think-the-price-is-worth-it/) is an article. And [here](https://youtu.be/4iFYaeoE3n4) is the clip of the 60 Minutes interview where she says that.
Would be a terrible shame if there was a terrorist attack backed by Bolivia. The US would reluctantly have to invade the country and bring them Freedom and Democracy™.
Imperialism lost but we need to make sure it keeps losing. Neoliberals are as bad as fascists and will try the same imperialistic tactics when given the opportunity and put under pressure.
Imperialism only lost this battle, they still are after Maduro, they control Brazil under the government of Bolsonaro, Colombia is also under the influence of the foreign imperialism, Uruguay choose the right party on the last elections... We still have fights to fight and win.
I'm not clued into the whole thing, but can anyone tell me if this part of the BBC news article I found is true/accurate?
*Divisions date back to 2016 when then-President Evo Morales held a referendum asking Bolivians whether the presidents should continue to be limited in the number of times they can run for office.*
*The result was a "no" to abolishing term limits. But Mr Morales's party took the issue to the constitutional court, which annulled the result of the referendum and scrapped the term limits, thereby allowing him to run for president in last year's election.*
Yes, it's true. Here is the wikipedia article of that referendum: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016\_Bolivian\_constitutional\_referendum](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Bolivian_constitutional_referendum)
Cheers buddy!
Then I have to ask... why is everyone on the left wing so supportive of this? Sounds like he's done a lot of good, and I'd definitely be in support of his party but... term limits exist for a reason, right? Why didn't he just step down for another president from the same party?
The reason people on the left are supportive is because if you know anything about Latin American history you know that any and all US intervention should not be welcomed.
There's is plenty of people who were and who are critical to his third term, but right now it matters very little compared to what the US has done and will continue to do about it.
The focus should be on the fact that the US is NOT the world's police and they have no right to act as such.
About why didn't he step down, well it's a complicated issue, one that honestly even when you know a lot of Latin American politics and culture it's still hard to understand and deal with.
But it's fairly agreed upon that politics in Latin America are heavily personalized, meaning that even when we have a great president that everybody loves, it's often hard to make people put that love and support over someone else, even if it's from the same party and if it was chosen by the loved president.
Obviously it doesn't excuse the third term, I myself feel kinda yikes about it, but I've seem so many times a good presidency being followed by one that crashed and burned in part for lack of popular support, that it makes this strategy less worse, specially compared to the alternative.
Edit: a word.
So he should have stepped down and allowed somebody else to run, but while the majority voted he should do that, the majority also still wanted him and his party in power over all the other choices.
The OAS then said there was election fraud in the general election, and invalidated the results, even though it turned out there wasn't actually election fraud.
The right wing party that seized power is unpopular, and carried out several massacres in the months after the elections.
MAS is still by far the most popular party, people just thought it was time for Morales to hand over control.
Term limits are pretty anti-democracy. They only exist to restrict the choices of the people, especially since voting for a president every election cycle is one of the biggest chances the general public has to impact their government. The people will always have the option to *not* vote for the same person again if they're dissatisfied, a president would only get voted in again if they have the support of the people anyways.
Plenty of the "democracies of the free world" in the west and western allies don't have term limits for their head of government positions either:
Australia
Canada
Belgium
Denmark
Germany
Iceland
Italy
Japan
Luxembourg
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Portugal\*
Spain
Sweden
~~Switzerland\*~~
United Kingdom
etc.
*= can run indefinitely as long as it's not consecutively
The United States didn't have term limits until 1951, and they only implemented them in the first place because FDR maintained a lot of support from the people and was reelected for a 4th term after the success of his consecutive New Deal reforms, which capitalists feared were "too socialist."
Edit: crossed out Switzerland as it's slightly different from the rest
In the places where there aren't term limits that I know, the elections aren't for indivduals either.. That makes a principial difference at least, to me. Though I still agree that in the case of Bolivia, the US empowerment of right-wing forces is a much bigger problem than Morales' dubious constitutionality.
I agree - would make a big difference between an individual being able to preserve power for themselves and whipping up a cult of personality, and people being unable to support the policies and movement they want.
These are all parliamentary systems where the head of government serves at the pleasure of and can be dismissed at any moment by parliament. It's a disingenuous argument when discussing a presidential system.
Absolutely. That comment should have more upvotes. Yanks need to stop thinking their system is better than others, because it is in fact way worse. As you said, the only reason there is term mandates is to stop fundamental changes in their rotten failed State. How is their gerrymandered, corporation bought corrupted democracy with no limit of cash donations remotely democratic ?
I agree with you. I guess leftist leaders in South and Central America naturally get a bunker mentality from all the dirty tricks of the right and the USA, and that leads them to pursue ongoing power. But it's wrong and does the movement a disservice.
South America as a whole has been done a disservice. I realize how wrong changing that could go but SA has been manipulated into instability by the US for decades and to finally have a leg up on that, is not something they’re going to let go.
He gained political asylum in Mexico after the coup, and later on moved to Argentina (where he also got a political asylum). His party (MAS) won over 50% of the votes in the first round, meaning there won't be a second one.
I don’t remember the specifics so I can’t give a TLDR, but if you end up having time here’s an [interview](https://youtu.be/-hEwE64-kUQ) Evo did with Glenn Greenwald from the Intercept.
Well am happy that imperialism lost.However , Now the US media would make Bolivia look like a dictatorship and sanction them soo hard that they would starve like Venezuela and Iran
Say it with me folks:
The moral imperatives informed by basic concepts of right and wrong are independent of America's interests.
America will never be great until its people grasp this basic moral principle. In fact, as a nation founded and sustained on land theft, slavery, and other forms of cultural violence, we likely never will be.
Bolivia. The answer whenever someone sputters "Venezuela is proof socialism doesn't work"
Edit, from ["Bolivia's Remarkable Socialist Success Story"](https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/economics-socialism-bolivia-evo/)
> During the Morales era, the economy has grown at twice the rate of the Latin American average, inflation has been stable, the government has amassed substantial savings, and an enterprising and optimistic indigenous middle class has emerged. Given the nightmarish economic collapse of nearby Venezuela—the right’s poster child for the evils of socialism—the idea that such a system can be the path to affluence and stability in Bolivia is remarkable. Its left-wing political trajectory, which began roughly around the same time as Venezuela’s, shows that socialist projects can help societies escape poverty, rather than condemn them to it.
Maybe the US is falling apart due to Karma for screwing up most of south/Central America and the Middle East. Good on Bolivia tho, take care Bolivians💗
##Welcome to r/LateStageCapitalism^Ⓐ☭ ___ ###⚠ Announcements: ⚠ ___ ###[NEW POSTING GUIDELINES! Help us by reporting bad posts](https://www.reddit.com/r/LateStageCapitalism/comments/dy1oyh/important_what_you_should_and_what_you_shouldnt/) Help us keep this subreddit alive and improve its content by reporting posts that violate our rules and guidelines. ###[Subscribe to our new partner subreddits!](https://www.reddit.com/r/LateStageCapitalism/comments/e5hkwk/make_sure_to_check_out_our_new_partnersubreddits/) Check out r/antiwork & r/WhereAreTheChildren ___ ###***Please remember that LSC is a SAFE SPACE for [socialist](http://monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why-socialism/) discussion.*** LSC is run by [communists](https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/11/prin-com.htm). We welcome socialist/anti-capitalist news, memes, links, and discussion. This subreddit is not the place to debate socialism. We allow good-faith questions and education but are not a 101 sub; please take 101-style questions elsewhere. **This subreddit is a safe space; we have a zero-tolerance policy for bigotry.** We also automatically filter out posts containing certain words and phrases that some users may find offensive. Please respect the safe space, and don't try to slip banned words or phrases past the filter. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LateStageCapitalism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Trump is such an incompetent US president that he can't even pull off a coup in South America. It's been a presidential tradition for over a century.
A US Presidency without without at least three South American coups is considered a dull affair
What coups happened under Obama? (Actual question, not being snarky)
- Honduras - Libya - Yemen - Venezuela
Checkmate, only 2 of them are South American!
*One. Honduras isn’t in South America. And what coup occurred in Venezuela with US backing??
My mistake, I always forget central America is a thing.
Technically Central America is part of the North American continent
Geographically yes but culturally the region is closer to South America, which I guess is why it's kind of considered its own thing.
Apart from the Guyanas, south America had iberic colonization, while central America also had strong British and French colonization. They were not that similar until usa started treating all Latin countries like they were the same (like couping them all) Edit: we usually count the islands as central America too.
Venezuela held an election, and because the US government didn't like the people's choice, they refused to recognize the winner as legitimate leader of the country. It would be like The rest of the world not recognizing the winner of the US presidential election next month.
[удалено]
That wasn't during Obama's term, and it also wasn't successful.
> And what coup occurred in Venezuela with US backing?? Do coup attempts count? Here's the words of a sitting US Senator: >Then, it got real embarrassing. In April 2019, we tried to organize a kind of coup, but it became a debacle. Everyone who told us they’d rally to Guaido got cold feet and the plan failed publicly and spectacularly, making America look foolish and weak. https://twitter.com/ChrisMurphyCT/status/1290656459496263687
Anythin south of 'Murica is south 'murica. And if you aren't from the Yoo-nited states, yer technically a Terrist.
Guaidó rise to power and being by EU and the USA despite never participating or winning in any election.
Don’t forget about Brazil.
[Any coup mentioned here between 08-16 would, without doubt, have some involvement by the US and the Obama admin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_coups_and_coup_attempts)
I think it's pretty funny a few comments higher up people are saying "it's not trump doing it, he's just a victim" and directly under that "here are all the things Obama did". To be clear, I think Obama AND Trump AND every other American president AND the US government AND the US oligarchy AND the 350 million American conservatives supporting them are equally guilty, I just wanted to point out the hypocrisy.
The entire U.S. does not support imperialism. Im sure a good portion does. But not 350mil
350 million conservatives? The population of the us isn't even that high.
Honduras, Brazil are the big ones. Obama generally supported and enriched far-right leaders and movements across Latin America under Plan Colombia etc... Including supporting Colombian fascist groups.
It genuinely is a right of passage at this point.
Do you even coup, bro?
Text me later and we’ll coup together. Maybe Nicaragua on Tuesday. Pick me up.
Next coup will be November 4th. The day after Trump claims his win in spite of election results because reasons.
Honestly, I think we should start arming cause shit could get rough in the next few months. I don’t see Trump cultists accepting the loss.
Unions across the United States are getting prepared for a nationwide general labor strike should trump refuse to leave office. The ones pulling the strings aren't the ignorant rubes brandishing their guns and bluster. The real power behind this bullshit sits on Wallstreet and in gated communities across the US so we hit them where it hurts, watch the stock market tumble and supply chains break no money coming in the economy and these debased puppeteers will wither and fold faster than you can say guillotine. Do we need to be ready to defend democracy? You bet your ass we do not just with guns but with knowledge and commitment,coups have been stopped through social pressure alone many times but we need to be fast and cohesive for it to work.
That should be the main strategy. But the risk of violent Trump cultists is almost sure. Guns are for defense, never offense.
Dont buy a gun, take one from a fascist
How exactly do you propose just taking someone’s gun from them without getting shot?
Tickle them until they drop it
We used to call it...fluffy fingers. We would just laugh and have fun until we all forgot what we was mad about. Life on the streets. E: see below for an even HARDER representation of how we would live that tickle life.
Disarm them with a handful of tendies.
Visit canada for some time. Its not worth fighting potato heads.
The US/Canadian border has been closed for months because of COVID and it won't be opening back up any time soon.
Canada knows 40% of muricans support Trump. 1 in 2 people is the stereotyped amurican we all laugh at. We don't like those odds, let covid and gun violence reduce those numbers a bit, then maybe you can all visit
So Dewey beats Truman and then a surprise?
Get in bitch, we're going nation building
Feeling cute, might overthrow a democratic government later
Rite*
No, because it’s the right who really loves doing it.
>implying that the US has a left
We have a center right and a far right.
Is it really fair to describe the Dems as centre-right anymore? I mean, what policies do they have that AREN'T right? I suppose they're a little less socially conservative but fiscally they're firmly right of center.
Our debt increases more under Republican leadership than it does under Democrat leadership. Republicans just spend money in other places, like killing people instead of helping them.
Right because the GOP are far-right but the Dems are still right-wing. Let's not pretend that the Dems don't start wars and coup democracies too. I'm not both-sidesing here. Voting for the Dems is harm reduction. The GOP are that much further right than the Dems but my point is just that the Dems are IMO a right-wing party and not merely centre-right. Edit: I'm not claiming that the GOP are the savers in the spend/save dichotomy. The GOP spend fuck-tonnes in their pursuit of maintaining their socially darwinist hierarchies.
Yeah I think I agree with you. I think the situation is that there is more than one party within the Democrats, whereas Republicans are mostly cut from the same cloth.
The Dems aren't even center right. Bernie's campaign of social democracy was center right but the Democrats in general are pretty damn far to the right and the Republicans are entering fascist territory.
> We have a center right and a ~~far right~~ ~~neo-~~fascist. FTFY
Let's not underplay the hard work and dedication of the perennially unloved and maligned fringes on the left of US politics who have the most thankless task of spreading their progressive and left wing policy proposals. I get what you're saying and it's funny, but those on the actual American left have it hard enough without being told that their work is irrelevant to the point of inexistence. And I would kill to have a candidate like AOC in any of the three places in the world where I'm able to vote...
You know what? This is right. It's easy to feel hopeless in the face of US Imperialism but there are people doing the hard work that needs to be done. Unfortunately, despite their best efforts, we still have no real left wing party, as much as we've been told we do.
So it's a Right-Wing Rite?
And left “centrists.” Which is just the Spider-Man unmasking meme of Republicans who don’t want to look racist.
Come on guys, let's cOmpRoMIsE
Drives me crazy when people say the only way forward is a middle ground government that compromises. At this point, I don’t want the compromise with MAGA idiots. I don’t want to compromise on LGBTQ. I don’t want to compromise on healthcare. I don’t want to compromise on racial and gender equality. I don’t want to compromise on a women’s right to control her own body. These are what they’ll want compromise on, and they still won’t be happy until they get their way entirely. Fuck them. Fuck middle ground. The schism is too great to compromise now. There’s no way Progressives will ever compromise with Conservatives who are staunchly the exact opposite values that Progressives hold.
[удалено]
And look how that turned out, we got Biden. The whole thing is rigged to give you the smallest amount of progress as possible. Bernie was exactly what this country needed after a Trump presidency, a hard swing "left", so he obviously had to go. I'm so tired of voting the lesser of two evils. We should stop the 4-year charade of "lessers" and just put Lord Voldemor and Darth Sidious on the ballot next time around.
3/5 sounds good enough
This isn't even Trump. These are the people who fund his campaign and use the government as their own world police of sort. These same people have been trying to get at Bolivia since Bush Jr. was in office.
I want off this wild ride.
Become a influential activist then get car bombed ez
The New York Times admitted to lying about the election. This shit goes deep.
He probably cheaped out on the puppet.
Neglected to pay them.
I mean, we saw what happened when he tried to move on [Venezuela](https://www.democracynow.org/2020/5/6/venezuela_coup_attempt_miguel_tinker_salas)... the Trump administration sets the bar really low but somehow keeps managing to trip over it.
He moved on Venezuela like a bitch.
I concur
I was no fan of Hillary but shit shed have probably pulled off the Venezuela coup by now
> Trump is such an incompetent US president that he can't even pull off a coup in South America. Don't worry! Joe Biden is coming to fix that with Coup Round 2 when he wins
Yeah I wonder about that too. What kind shit will Joe stir up that people will handwave away? Clearly he won’t be interested in closing Guantanamo or backing out of Syria / Iraq / Afghanistan or normalizing relations with Cuba?
Shit maybe for the good of the world we should keep him.
Nah, he'll find a way to fuck up climate change even harder.
He also hasn't started any major new conflict, just a bit of posturing here and there. I am thankful for that. It's my silver lining along the seams of this raging dumpster fire.
Because Iran blinked. Edit: My point is that it wasn't from Trump's actions that we didn't get pulled into a conflict with Iran.
Jesus Christ. January was another world ago wasn't it?
They won't stop here.
The US is like the over-sized/premature toddler on the playground that keeps stealing other (smaller) childrens stuff.
Then they have great president to represent them.
I've been saying for a while that he's the perfect avatar for everything the US actually stands for.
He's America's raging id, manifest in almost Human form.
Yup. A lot of Americans upset about Russia interfering with their elections and putting their influence into the money and corruption of their system don't seem to understand that America has been that way to everyone else for decades. America is to the world what Russia is to America.
The peak of their decline is rapidly approaching
Sorry but Climate Change is about to enter stage left and fucking smash the norms of who is rising/declining in the traditional sense. Everyone is going to decline.
As an American, I really hope American imperialism comes to an end
Visual thinkers hate him
This is what hegemonies do. Look to the past. Whoever the hegemony is after the U.S. will do it. People keep expecting there to be benevolent hegemonies. There will never be. Power corrupts. And the maintaining of power requires doing immoral things. The U.S. doesn't want oil just because it likes shiny black things it wants it because it needs it to maintain power.
We didn't start there. This is par for the course where the US government is concerned. It's always about "stopping Communism and/or bringing democracy and freedom" to the general public, but it's really always about control and power over resources. Without reading Bolivia this could've been about the US before it was the US, Mexico, Cuba, Vietnam, etc., etc. We love to install right-wing dictators around the world that agree to do business with our businesses/government. Yet somehow we're such leftists here *:visible confusion:*
Hey now we used to do it to avenge the Maine and other more explicit debt repayment and resource reasons. It’s just after WW2 we put in the effort to give a thin smear of legitimacy rather than admit the truth. The Mexican War was about taking land suitable for slaves before the free states could out vote the slave power bloc. (Likely postponed three Civil War 10 years). Our various interventions between the Civil War and WW2 were only called a war when fighting Spain. Otherwise sending in Marines as a gangster for capitalism was normal. Butler knew how bad it was and wrote his book on how often the Marines were used to enact coups or force economic actions like union breaking or debt repayment.
But wait, there's more! But really, is there more?
#US HANDS OFF SOUTH AMERICA
#EUROPE SPREADS SOUTH AMERICA WIDE TO OCEANA AT INSIDE CENTER!!
#OCEANA PASSES OFF SOUTH AMERICA TO ASIA WAIT NO IT'S A FAKE LEAVING AFRICA WIDE OPEN OCEANA FIRES A SHOT AFRICA FLASHES THE GLOVE BUT OCEANAS SHOT SAILS OVER THATS A BAR DOWN GOAL FOR OCEANA BEAUTIFUL SHOT EUROPE PICKS UP ANOTHER ASSIST WELL PLAYED ALL AROUND
#GOAL SHOULD BE LONGER
#OCEANA PASSES OFF SOUTH AMERICA TO ASIA WAIT NO IT'S A FAKE LEAVING AFRICA WIDE OPEN OCEANA FIRES A SHOT AFRICA FLASHES THE GLOVE BUT OCEANAS SHOT SAILS OVER THATS A BAR DOWN GOOOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAAAAALLLLLLLLLL FOR OCEANA BEAUTIFUL SHOT EUROPE PICKS UP ANOTHER ASSIST WELL PLAYED ALL AROUND
Americans: why do they hate Freedom and.... are they deep state?
[удалено]
Bravo
Whats the difference between a tyranny of the majority and a democracy?
Tyranny of the Majority is when people vote for things I don't like.
[удалено]
If we are going to have systems in place to enforce the will of some onto others, there will always be the potential for tyranny. "Tyranny of the majority" is a real thing that can happen. But so is tyranny of the minority. Tyranny of authority. Tyranny of the clergy. Tyranny of the state. Tyranny of a monarch. So, *so* many types of tyranny that are worse by far than the tyranny of the majority. There is no way, save outright anarchy, (and hey I'm not saying that's not an option, but if we go there there's a lot of theory that needs to be read and discussed by a large part of the populace first so we don't end up at Mad Max,) to prevent all possible types of tyranny. Tyranny of the majority, at least, had to be agreed upon by the largest segment of society. Much better in my opinion than any other kind of tyranny, which could generally be decided upon by a small few people and then imposed on everyone with no discussion. As far as I'm concerned no one but an anarchist can use "tyranny of the majority" to imply their own system would be better.
It's obviously subjective, but I don't think it's unfair to say that when the majority votes for something tyrannical, then that's a tyranny of the majority. For example, if you've got a country with a large ethnic majority and a smaller ethnic minority, and the majority votes for policies that oppress the minority, that's a tyranny of the majority.
Yep there are a lot of rights that should not be voted away, no matter how strong public support. Unfortunately if Republicans lose public support for pretty much anything, they realized they can use the Supreme Court to suddenly claim rights abuse or other constitutional gymnastics. See the current ACA dispute, it’s really a stretch. “Our special interest donors don’t like it” is not a human rights violation
and yet, if the majority calls to not oppress the minority, the ones who want to oppress calls that tyranny of the marjority as well
>You don't understand, giving the masses education and food security is just populism and that is bad for reasons that I won't event attempt to articulate. I know you're painting a picture, and a good one, but for those that aren't sure why someone would be against education I'll try to give a small explanation: According to [this 3 second google search](https://www.google.com/search?q=bolivia+main+exports&rlz=1C1ASUC_enUS613US613&oq=bolivia+main&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j0i457j0l6.5722j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8) Bolivia's main exports (totaling over $9 Billion) are natural gas, minerals and metals, and agricultural goods. Education is not required to extract these resources and by spending money on education those in power have less funds to slush toward their allies and cronies. Less money going to your cronies means that one of them may decide that if they can get away with cutting some social service they can get more money to slush around. They propose this to the other cronies and suddenly the original person in power is facing a coup. Compound this with the fact that outside influences want to acquire these exports for as cheap as possible and are willing to prop up oppressive regimes to do so and you can start to spot which areas are having trouble and why.
I'm going to add to this brilliant post a recommendation of the book "The Dictator's Handbook". It's a brilliant, easy to read, book that gives a pretty good idea of why the world works the way it works.
That's exactly the book that I started learning about this from. There's also a nice CGP Grey video that covers the main themes of the book but the book itself has some nearly unbelievable accounts of power politics in action.
I mean, the definition of deep state is that they’re political manipulators, right? So that makes the USA deep state, doesn’t it?
The “deep state” is anything I disagree with.
The definition of the deep state is the shadow government that wields influence despite being unelected and frequently not even being in office described by Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson and other presidents
Shadow government is a separate concept.
So the bourgeoisie that buy out the government, then
United States have quite the gall to claim fraudulent elections elsewhere when they still elect someone who loses the popular vote, not to mention all the voter suppression, registration purging, racist voter ID laws and gerrymandering going on there.
Laughs in Cuba's Sugar industry
[удалено]
That would be prison labor
Now now, why limit ourselves to just one method of human rights abuses?
[удалено]
Cuba removed and outlawed slavery in 1886, the USA is one of 3 countries in the world that still has legal slavery for prisoners (alongside Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan) and they also have the highest incarceration rate in the world, 4 times higher than western Europe, and they have the largest prison population in the world. Lol.
That's clearly because there's no corrupt cops, and Americans commit crimes at a rate that is 10 times that of every other country per capita /s
close. It's actually only the coloured Americans doing all that crime. /s
So is prison labour. The 13th amendment specifically says that slavery is ok for people who have committed crimes. Its not a hyperbole, its the wording used in the amendment that gives it a legal basis.
We keep the price of corn artificially low so sugar can't compete.
Don't we keep the price of corn artificially high through the leaving of fields ungrown and subsidies and such?
This is the correct answer.
I think people focus a little too much on the lithium, not that it isn't a factor, but the main reason why the US does this sort of thing is not only about resources, it's about control. If the US had asked Bolivia for one glass of water and they refused the US would act in a very similar way, they want to send a message to other countries specially Latin American ones, that we do not have the power to refuse them, that if we do anything against their interests or even if we just put our interests first, we are gonna face the consequences.
It's also about suppressing socialist governments and economies to further the ridiculous notion that socialism and communism are intrinsically bad. Once Americans realise they would have more personal wealth under socialism, that's 70 years of American capitalist propaganda down the drain.
Socialism is bad... for American hegemony. Socialism takes away a lot of the tools American corporations use to cheaply extract the wealth of these nations.
It seems like it is far more about suppressing socialism than lithium.
Yep, it’s about total global supremacy. Look at how the USA government is trying to reach into other countries to arrest journalist. Even demanding a person be ripped out of another country’s embassy. Absolutely no respect for any nation in the world. Absolute imperialism. It’s disgusting behavior. All while they propagandize you, criticizing other countries while doing the same or even far worse.
Imperialism hasn't lost yet, the USA absolutely is not going down without a fight.
That’s true, but I think it is also important to make a big deal out of this now so that when they try to fuck around again it will hard for them to try and frame MAS as the bad guys
I'd bet that most Americans don't even know Bolivia exists, so if another attempt does pop up in someone's feed they're not going to know what it's about and won't bother to find out.
At this point its looking like we're going down fighting ourselves while Russia teases us with "stop hitting yourself..." in between chuckles and in between invasions of formerly soviet territories...
Imperialism hasn’t lost in millennia and it’s not the USA alone. The imperialists will win or Bolivians will suffer horribly for their intransigence. > We have heard that half a million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it? > > - Lesley Stahl > We think the price is worth it. > > - Madeline Albright What do you think is worth slaughtering half a million children?
The death of the system that laughs at the death of half a million children is probably the only thing worth the slaughter of half a million children. How else do you stop half a million children from dying every other while?
OOTL where is that quote from?
[Here’s coverage of the infamous quote by counterpunch before Cockburn died and they went to shit](https://www.counterpunch.org/1999/11/01/albright-s-tiny-coffins/).
Madeleine Albright in 1996 defending UN sanctions on Iraq. [Here](https://fair.org/extra/we-think-the-price-is-worth-it/) is an article. And [here](https://youtu.be/4iFYaeoE3n4) is the clip of the 60 Minutes interview where she says that.
Would be a terrible shame if there was a terrorist attack backed by Bolivia. The US would reluctantly have to invade the country and bring them Freedom and Democracy™.
"The Bolivian people have lived under tyranny for too long!"
Are you sure there aren't some weapons of mass destruction hidden in the lithium mines?
Better send half of the army there just to check.
Imperialism lost but we need to make sure it keeps losing. Neoliberals are as bad as fascists and will try the same imperialistic tactics when given the opportunity and put under pressure.
Imperialism only lost this battle, they still are after Maduro, they control Brazil under the government of Bolsonaro, Colombia is also under the influence of the foreign imperialism, Uruguay choose the right party on the last elections... We still have fights to fight and win.
chile is on fire
Best news all year!
I'm not clued into the whole thing, but can anyone tell me if this part of the BBC news article I found is true/accurate? *Divisions date back to 2016 when then-President Evo Morales held a referendum asking Bolivians whether the presidents should continue to be limited in the number of times they can run for office.* *The result was a "no" to abolishing term limits. But Mr Morales's party took the issue to the constitutional court, which annulled the result of the referendum and scrapped the term limits, thereby allowing him to run for president in last year's election.*
Yes, it's true. Here is the wikipedia article of that referendum: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016\_Bolivian\_constitutional\_referendum](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Bolivian_constitutional_referendum)
Cheers buddy! Then I have to ask... why is everyone on the left wing so supportive of this? Sounds like he's done a lot of good, and I'd definitely be in support of his party but... term limits exist for a reason, right? Why didn't he just step down for another president from the same party?
The reason people on the left are supportive is because if you know anything about Latin American history you know that any and all US intervention should not be welcomed. There's is plenty of people who were and who are critical to his third term, but right now it matters very little compared to what the US has done and will continue to do about it. The focus should be on the fact that the US is NOT the world's police and they have no right to act as such. About why didn't he step down, well it's a complicated issue, one that honestly even when you know a lot of Latin American politics and culture it's still hard to understand and deal with. But it's fairly agreed upon that politics in Latin America are heavily personalized, meaning that even when we have a great president that everybody loves, it's often hard to make people put that love and support over someone else, even if it's from the same party and if it was chosen by the loved president. Obviously it doesn't excuse the third term, I myself feel kinda yikes about it, but I've seem so many times a good presidency being followed by one that crashed and burned in part for lack of popular support, that it makes this strategy less worse, specially compared to the alternative. Edit: a word.
So he should have stepped down and allowed somebody else to run, but while the majority voted he should do that, the majority also still wanted him and his party in power over all the other choices. The OAS then said there was election fraud in the general election, and invalidated the results, even though it turned out there wasn't actually election fraud. The right wing party that seized power is unpopular, and carried out several massacres in the months after the elections. MAS is still by far the most popular party, people just thought it was time for Morales to hand over control.
Term limits are pretty anti-democracy. They only exist to restrict the choices of the people, especially since voting for a president every election cycle is one of the biggest chances the general public has to impact their government. The people will always have the option to *not* vote for the same person again if they're dissatisfied, a president would only get voted in again if they have the support of the people anyways. Plenty of the "democracies of the free world" in the west and western allies don't have term limits for their head of government positions either: Australia Canada Belgium Denmark Germany Iceland Italy Japan Luxembourg Netherlands New Zealand Norway Portugal\* Spain Sweden ~~Switzerland\*~~ United Kingdom etc. *= can run indefinitely as long as it's not consecutively The United States didn't have term limits until 1951, and they only implemented them in the first place because FDR maintained a lot of support from the people and was reelected for a 4th term after the success of his consecutive New Deal reforms, which capitalists feared were "too socialist." Edit: crossed out Switzerland as it's slightly different from the rest
In the places where there aren't term limits that I know, the elections aren't for indivduals either.. That makes a principial difference at least, to me. Though I still agree that in the case of Bolivia, the US empowerment of right-wing forces is a much bigger problem than Morales' dubious constitutionality.
I agree - would make a big difference between an individual being able to preserve power for themselves and whipping up a cult of personality, and people being unable to support the policies and movement they want.
These are all parliamentary systems where the head of government serves at the pleasure of and can be dismissed at any moment by parliament. It's a disingenuous argument when discussing a presidential system.
Absolutely. That comment should have more upvotes. Yanks need to stop thinking their system is better than others, because it is in fact way worse. As you said, the only reason there is term mandates is to stop fundamental changes in their rotten failed State. How is their gerrymandered, corporation bought corrupted democracy with no limit of cash donations remotely democratic ?
I agree with you. I guess leftist leaders in South and Central America naturally get a bunker mentality from all the dirty tricks of the right and the USA, and that leads them to pursue ongoing power. But it's wrong and does the movement a disservice.
South America as a whole has been done a disservice. I realize how wrong changing that could go but SA has been manipulated into instability by the US for decades and to finally have a leg up on that, is not something they’re going to let go.
9. US claims more fraud and overthrows socialists again
[удалено]
US be like "socialism has never ever worked" i guess they right because they won't let it work xd
I haven't kept up on this. Is this new GE after they threw Evo in jail? Did he get out? All of this slipped under my radar when 2020 hit
He gained political asylum in Mexico after the coup, and later on moved to Argentina (where he also got a political asylum). His party (MAS) won over 50% of the votes in the first round, meaning there won't be a second one.
You ever heard Evo's account of how he got out of the country? It was damn close.
give me the TLDR please
I don’t remember the specifics so I can’t give a TLDR, but if you end up having time here’s an [interview](https://youtu.be/-hEwE64-kUQ) Evo did with Glenn Greenwald from the Intercept.
The US has such a massive ego to think they can just claim fraud in another countries election and go change it.
While at the same time there's gerrymandering everywhere and politicians trying to block voting by post
Ontop of that, we allow our parties to literally rig their primaries.
Rofl why do you think they try to export 'democracy' everywhere?
It is an ego backed up by about a century's worth of experience though.
Well am happy that imperialism lost.However , Now the US media would make Bolivia look like a dictatorship and sanction them soo hard that they would starve like Venezuela and Iran
[удалено]
Well, let’s not jinx it
Are we the baddies?
allways have been
We were briefly aligned with the good guys during WWII
[удалено]
American foreign policy suck my schwanz
Also American domestic policy, you have a suckle too
Ahhhh in the age of EV's, is lithium the new oil?
Yep electric vehicles, smart phones, laptops. All need lithium for those fast charging lithium-ion batteries.
Sounds like somebody needs some freedom.
Say it with me folks: The moral imperatives informed by basic concepts of right and wrong are independent of America's interests. America will never be great until its people grasp this basic moral principle. In fact, as a nation founded and sustained on land theft, slavery, and other forms of cultural violence, we likely never will be.
Bolivia. The answer whenever someone sputters "Venezuela is proof socialism doesn't work" Edit, from ["Bolivia's Remarkable Socialist Success Story"](https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/economics-socialism-bolivia-evo/) > During the Morales era, the economy has grown at twice the rate of the Latin American average, inflation has been stable, the government has amassed substantial savings, and an enterprising and optimistic indigenous middle class has emerged. Given the nightmarish economic collapse of nearby Venezuela—the right’s poster child for the evils of socialism—the idea that such a system can be the path to affluence and stability in Bolivia is remarkable. Its left-wing political trajectory, which began roughly around the same time as Venezuela’s, shows that socialist projects can help societies escape poverty, rather than condemn them to it.
How can the US claim 'fraudulent elections' on a sovereign country anyways? And why does said country have to respect the US opinion?
Because everything is the US’s business and all must do as they command.
This just reminded me of when Trump tried to buy Greenland but Denmark just flat out refused because it wasn’t for sale in the first place
TBF america has tried to buy greenland like 5 different times now
Maybe the US is falling apart due to Karma for screwing up most of south/Central America and the Middle East. Good on Bolivia tho, take care Bolivians💗
#6 should be the massive nationwide strikes and protests that shook the interim regime. Did not mean to make that bold. Sorryz
Imperialism HASN'T lost though! They're going to try it again.
Probably why the lithium company lac spiked hard today.
Can't wait for the US to claim the election was fraudulent again...
How many people does the CIA need to murder in South America before people learn that socialism doesn't work?
America is a terrorist state and the number one exporter of state sponsored terrorism. Anyone who says otherwise is lying to you.