Skip to main content

View Diary: 40 Years of Neoliberal Attacks on our Societies (28 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  That's revisionist at best. The US had extensive (11+ / 0-)

    involvement beginning in the 1960s trying to manipulate elections and significant CIA involvement for many years.

    Chile, fairly unique among South American nations, had a long, solid tradition of democracy. Strong democracy went back over 40 years before the coup - to the 1930s.  It wasn't at all a given outcome that the Chilean military would carry out a coup without US encouragement and support. In fact, millions of dollars flowed to Chile for exactly that purpose.

    The USA supplied weapons and cash in 1970 specifically for the purpose of removing General René Schneider, head of the Chilean military, because he was a powerful constitutionalist who the CIA knew would oppose a coup. He was subsequently murdered trying to defend himself from being "kidnapped." With him now gone, others in the military had more power with which to conspire.  The CIA also paid "hush money" to Chileans involved, after the fact. How is that not material aid toward a coup?

    The CIA had advance knowledge of the 1973 coup planning against Allende for months.  They did nothing to warn his government, obviously, having encouraged the downfall of the military leader who would have blocked any later coups. At any rate, it was Kissinger's plan and his desire that Allende be deposed.

    It's just utterly false that the USA had no role in what was taking place. We'd spent millions for at least a decade to undermine democratic government in Chile.

    Here's someone who might disagree strongly with your commentary above.

    Kissinger is a war criminal and should be prosecuted. Your comment takes leave of the facts established in history.

    "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

    by YucatanMan on Sat Sep 14, 2013 at 11:40:47 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Aid (0+ / 0-)

      You're still making a broad assumption here that whatever US support for the coup that there was actually determined the outcome.  I'm pretty sure the Chilean military had sufficient weaponry and cash to kidnap Schneider and didn't need much to carry that out, but please do elaborate.

      I always think it's a bit rich when people say the US helped bring on the coup by blocking loans from the World Bank, which everyone here seems to believe has as its singular mission to destroy developing economies.  Funny how the logic breaks down there.

      MB's diary is pretty classic, calling Kissinger the architect of the coup because, you know, the Chilean military just couldn't figure out how to do it until Kissinger told them how.    There's this incredible desire to ensure the US is at the center of all stories, which simply isn't the case.  What do the Chileans think?  Have any of the coup plotters said they just couldn't have done it without us?

      Cynicism is what passes for insight among the mediocre.

      by Sky Net on Sun Sep 15, 2013 at 05:56:06 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Because you say so, is pretty much the evidence (5+ / 0-)

        you cite.

        The millions of dollars, the decades of shady elections activities including stoking anger against democracy, the weapons delivered in military pouches and the hush money delivered to coup conspirators, these count for nothing, because the Chilean military was going to depose the leader elected no matter what.  After 40 years of solid democracy, the lower ranks of the military just decided to usurp power for no reason at all.

        It wasn't that Nixon literally ordered the economic screws put to Chile for desiring their socialist -- not Communist -- government. It wasn't the coup planning of Track 1 and Track 2 that Kissinger put into place.

        None of those years of US interference, money, clandestine meetings, political and economic pressure or weapons had any influence at all.

        You tell a remarkable tale of US non-collusion. The problem is that none of it is based in facts.

        You made an extraordinary claim about history, but provided no sources or links, only your own repeated statements which contradict known facts, known history.

        Meteor Blades diaries are accurate.  My citations are directly from history. Where is your evidence?

        "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

        by YucatanMan on Sun Sep 15, 2013 at 08:30:10 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Evidence (0+ / 0-)

          Really, the burden of proof is on you.  Obviously the Chilean military did the coup for their own reasons, not because Kissinger ordered them to.  Like I said, if you find a coup plotter who said they undertook the coup to make Henry Kissinger happy, you let us know.  You need to demonstrate that whatever the US did had a material impact on the result.    And the fact that we didn't approve World Bank loans isn't going to convince anyone.  Allende didn't need our help to tank the Chilean economy.

          Cynicism is what passes for insight among the mediocre.

          by Sky Net on Sun Sep 15, 2013 at 12:18:59 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Proof? Do you have any of that to go along ... (7+ / 0-)

        ...with your opinion? You call my diary "classic." It is, in fact, your unsourced commentary that is classic. Try this from actual documents in the National Security Archive. And we don't even know what was destroyed:

        The coup against Allende occurred on this date 40 years ago. The posted records spotlight Kissinger's role as the principal policy architect of U.S. efforts to oust the Chilean leader, and assist in the consolidation of the Pinochet dictatorship in Chile.

        Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

        by Meteor Blades on Sun Sep 15, 2013 at 09:46:25 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  architect (0+ / 0-)

          Kissinger may have been the architect of US efforts, but that hardly makes him the architect of the coup, unless you believe everyone just follows Kissinger's orders everywherw in the world.

          But if you'd like a link, i'm happy to provide one.  If you can't get the whole piece let ne know and i'll try to cut and paste it when i'm not doing this on a mobile.

          Cynicism is what passes for insight among the mediocre.

          by Sky Net on Sun Sep 15, 2013 at 12:08:46 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Oh, FFS... (6+ / 0-)

            ...No need to cut and paste. I have been a subscriber to Foreign Affairs for 41 years, so I have acces. Until I moved a couple of years ago, I had stacks of the publication hanging around my house.

            You're citing something written by a man who was joined at the hip with Kissinger for decades since his service in the State Department and who worked for Kissinger & Associates, which he co-founded, for 25 years.

            You might note the imbroglio between Maxwell and Foreign Affairs regarding what you linked, a fight that led to Maxwell's resignation because the publication broke its own long-standing rules by refusing to give Maxwell approval to publish a letter in response.

            New documents have come to light since Rogers's self-serving piece confirming Kornbluh's original views.

            You are going to have to do better than that.

            Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

            by Meteor Blades on Sun Sep 15, 2013 at 12:36:32 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Foreign Affairs (0+ / 0-)

              Actually the piece has a response from Maxwell appended.  You didn't mention anything in the article that you disagreed with so can't respond to that.

              Rogers' defense of the Nixon administration's human rights policy is weak, but his analysis of the situation on the ground in Chile seems pretty solid.  Chileans carried out the coup for their own reasons.  US policy at the time was pretty crappy, bit I think you give far too much credit to Nixon and Kissinger for their ability to micro-manage the actions of Chileans.

              Cynicism is what passes for insight among the mediocre.

              by Sky Net on Sun Sep 15, 2013 at 12:55:16 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  The framing that its not a neoliberal support ... (4+ / 0-)

        ... for the Washington Consensus neoliberal policies unless the United State was the primary force in the coup itself is a phony framing.

        Its still neoliberal policy if other neoliberals outside the United States played a role in formulating the economic policies of the leader of the coup.

        Its still neoliberal policy if neoliberals in the United States merely welcomed the coup and took advantage of it to advance their agenda.

        Nobody can retain their credibility and also deny that South American military leaders were trained in neoliberal policy by the United States military. Given that Chile under Pinochet went adopted a full bore, nearly unadulturated neoliberal policy package, your argument devolves to whether we helped convinced the Chilean military of the validity of neoliberalism and they then overthrew the elected government with our documented support, or whether we drove the coup and then forced the Chilean military to adopt neoliberal policies.

        Chile offers in either case an example of the destruction done in support of neoliberal policies.

        Support Lesbian Creative Works with Yuri anime and manga from ALC Publishing

        by BruceMcF on Sun Sep 15, 2013 at 12:01:00 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site