An article about the brutal September 11th 1973 coup in Chile, the spread of neoliberalism, and US complicity with terrorism. [Repost of an article from the original AAV blog]
For some, socialism represents a failed ideology. For me, socialism represents hope. For many, capitalism represents the status quo. For me, capitalism represents a failed ideology. Fascism was not expunged by the second World War. It went underground and re-emerged as libertarianism. Sounds nice. But it is the ideology of me, me, me ....
Deregulation led to the Grenfell disaster and lack of government investment contributes to low levels of productivity. It is very convenient to keep blaming the workers for this but they have been screwed and the pips are squeaking, so to speak.
This is as clear and concise an unpacking of the past 50 years as I've seen, thanks for helping put events into context. Do you remember that film "Missing" about jack Lemon searching for his son in Chile after the coup and discovering the CIA were there too? We knew of our complicity even then but it gets rinsed through Hollywood.
Naomi Klein’s excellent The Shock Doctrine provides lots of detail about the Chicago School of Economics invention of Neoliberalism and its deployment in 70s South America. In particular it details Thatcher’s worship of one of the School’s founders, Milton Friedman, which in turn led to the popular student protest chant, Thatcher Thatcher Milk Snatcher!
I think it would take a severe level of self-deception to believe the official narrative of 9-11, that it was 'blowback', I mean.
You have correctly described an uninterrupted cooperation between America/CIA and Al Qaeda, starting with Operation Cyclone in 1979. And yet, are you seriously asking your readers to believe that 9-11 was the one blip on an otherwise unblemished historical record of association between CIA and Al Qaeda (and all its offshoots)?
That strikes me as what they now call 'cognitive dissonance'.
Perhaps it's that you are scared of being labelled as a 'conspiracy theorist'? Well, I would say that's pure cowardice. Place that cowardice against your responsibility and duty to wake people up and fully inform them about the evil monsters who have always been in charge of America (and, well, Britain too for that matter). It is totally naive and gullible to believe the monsters' version of 9-11 - to think that on this one occasion they were the 'victims' and 'the good guys', and that they wouldn't stoop to murdering 'their own' citizens/subjects in order to provide a pretext to murder millions of others.
And not just with war - with neoliberalism too. You have ably described the evil of neoliberalism, after all. Although you should remember that neoliberalism was never an 'economic' system - it is a system of social control (through enforced scarcity, especially of money) and exploitation, dressed up to look like an economic system.
So you just have to look at the evil things these monsters do in order to perpetuate their neoliberal system.
It would be psychologically unbelievable indeed if the official narrative of 9-11 was in any way true. We're talking about evil monsters here. And for evil to flourish, it only takes good people to do and say nothing. Being called a 'conspiracy theorist' - and by evil monsters themselves, ironically - is a small price to pay, and should not be seen as a deterrent to telling the truth and motivating people.
Aside from that one blip, I thought your article was both brilliant and timely.
Please provide a summary to these valuable screeds! This article discusses several interconnected themes related to U.S. foreign policy, terrorism, and economic ideology:
1. 9/11 and U.S. foreign policy:
- The article criticizes the U.S. commemoration of 9/11, pointing out American support for Islamist groups in the past (e.g., Afghanistan in the 1980s, Kosovo in the 1990s).
- It suggests that 9/11 was "blowback" from U.S. foreign policy decisions.
- The author notes the irony of the U.S. considering supporting Islamist groups in Syria in 2013, just 12 years after 9/11.
2. Chilean coup and neoliberalism:
- The article focuses on the U.S.-backed coup in Chile on September 11, 1973, which overthrew Salvador Allende and installed Augusto Pinochet.
- This coup is presented as the birth of neoliberalism, an economic ideology developed by the Chicago School economists.
- The Pinochet regime is described as brutal, with thousands killed, tortured, or detained without trial.
3. Operation Condor and U.S. support for dictatorships:
- The article discusses Operation Condor, a U.S.-supported plan to install right-wing dictatorships in South America.
- It mentions several countries involved, including Chile, Argentina, Paraguay, Bolivia, Brazil, and Uruguay.
- The Argentine junta is highlighted as particularly brutal, with an estimated 30,000 civilians killed.
4. Spread of neoliberalism:
- The article argues that neoliberal policies (deregulation, privatization, tax cuts for the rich, welfare cuts) were imposed in these countries, causing poverty and economic chaos.
- It suggests that state terrorism was used to suppress opposition to these economic policies.
5. U.S. historical narrative:
- The author criticizes the belief that the U.S. promotes democracy and freedom globally, arguing that its actions often undermine these values.
- The article calls for remembering victims of U.S.-backed dictatorships and neoliberal policies alongside 9/11 victims.
Overall, the article presents a critical view of U.S. foreign policy, particularly in Latin America, and argues that the spread of neoliberalism has had devastating consequences for many people worldwide.
Islamic fanatics in Kosovo? Maybe you should define Serbian mercenaries as Orthodox Christian fanatics ... Kosova was subjugated by Serbian Tchetniks and government for 100 years and they had the right to fught off the Serbian State terror. Calling them fanatics, and religious ones, shows how far off the mark you are. I am otherwise impressed by your work but on this issue you are an absolute moron 100%.
Would 'fascist' do? Less wishy-washy.
Hello Sam,
I appreciate the points you make. None 9f us are speaking the same language. The ring lies the problem.
Best wishes, Caroline
For some, socialism represents a failed ideology. For me, socialism represents hope. For many, capitalism represents the status quo. For me, capitalism represents a failed ideology. Fascism was not expunged by the second World War. It went underground and re-emerged as libertarianism. Sounds nice. But it is the ideology of me, me, me ....
https://youtu.be/_tUctFu46_c?si=G_gF_0fw80ZuAt75
Really?
Oxford English Dictionary definition:
"a political approach that favours free-market capitalism, deregulation, and reduction in government spending."
I'd say that's how most here are using the term
Deregulation led to the Grenfell disaster and lack of government investment contributes to low levels of productivity. It is very convenient to keep blaming the workers for this but they have been screwed and the pips are squeaking, so to speak.
Yes, this where it began, and how it has continued ever since. Remember Thatcher's sinister threat: "There is no alternative".
Contrary to the myth of "the iron lady", I think she was a stooge. Culpable nonetheless.
She was definitely selected and groomed by some very ruthless men.
This is as clear and concise an unpacking of the past 50 years as I've seen, thanks for helping put events into context. Do you remember that film "Missing" about jack Lemon searching for his son in Chile after the coup and discovering the CIA were there too? We knew of our complicity even then but it gets rinsed through Hollywood.
Naomi Klein’s excellent The Shock Doctrine provides lots of detail about the Chicago School of Economics invention of Neoliberalism and its deployment in 70s South America. In particular it details Thatcher’s worship of one of the School’s founders, Milton Friedman, which in turn led to the popular student protest chant, Thatcher Thatcher Milk Snatcher!
I think it would take a severe level of self-deception to believe the official narrative of 9-11, that it was 'blowback', I mean.
You have correctly described an uninterrupted cooperation between America/CIA and Al Qaeda, starting with Operation Cyclone in 1979. And yet, are you seriously asking your readers to believe that 9-11 was the one blip on an otherwise unblemished historical record of association between CIA and Al Qaeda (and all its offshoots)?
That strikes me as what they now call 'cognitive dissonance'.
Perhaps it's that you are scared of being labelled as a 'conspiracy theorist'? Well, I would say that's pure cowardice. Place that cowardice against your responsibility and duty to wake people up and fully inform them about the evil monsters who have always been in charge of America (and, well, Britain too for that matter). It is totally naive and gullible to believe the monsters' version of 9-11 - to think that on this one occasion they were the 'victims' and 'the good guys', and that they wouldn't stoop to murdering 'their own' citizens/subjects in order to provide a pretext to murder millions of others.
And not just with war - with neoliberalism too. You have ably described the evil of neoliberalism, after all. Although you should remember that neoliberalism was never an 'economic' system - it is a system of social control (through enforced scarcity, especially of money) and exploitation, dressed up to look like an economic system.
So you just have to look at the evil things these monsters do in order to perpetuate their neoliberal system.
It would be psychologically unbelievable indeed if the official narrative of 9-11 was in any way true. We're talking about evil monsters here. And for evil to flourish, it only takes good people to do and say nothing. Being called a 'conspiracy theorist' - and by evil monsters themselves, ironically - is a small price to pay, and should not be seen as a deterrent to telling the truth and motivating people.
Aside from that one blip, I thought your article was both brilliant and timely.
Ah - it’s the ‘I blindly believe whatever the MSM tell me to believe’ crowd.
Please provide a summary to these valuable screeds! This article discusses several interconnected themes related to U.S. foreign policy, terrorism, and economic ideology:
1. 9/11 and U.S. foreign policy:
- The article criticizes the U.S. commemoration of 9/11, pointing out American support for Islamist groups in the past (e.g., Afghanistan in the 1980s, Kosovo in the 1990s).
- It suggests that 9/11 was "blowback" from U.S. foreign policy decisions.
- The author notes the irony of the U.S. considering supporting Islamist groups in Syria in 2013, just 12 years after 9/11.
2. Chilean coup and neoliberalism:
- The article focuses on the U.S.-backed coup in Chile on September 11, 1973, which overthrew Salvador Allende and installed Augusto Pinochet.
- This coup is presented as the birth of neoliberalism, an economic ideology developed by the Chicago School economists.
- The Pinochet regime is described as brutal, with thousands killed, tortured, or detained without trial.
3. Operation Condor and U.S. support for dictatorships:
- The article discusses Operation Condor, a U.S.-supported plan to install right-wing dictatorships in South America.
- It mentions several countries involved, including Chile, Argentina, Paraguay, Bolivia, Brazil, and Uruguay.
- The Argentine junta is highlighted as particularly brutal, with an estimated 30,000 civilians killed.
4. Spread of neoliberalism:
- The article argues that neoliberal policies (deregulation, privatization, tax cuts for the rich, welfare cuts) were imposed in these countries, causing poverty and economic chaos.
- It suggests that state terrorism was used to suppress opposition to these economic policies.
5. U.S. historical narrative:
- The author criticizes the belief that the U.S. promotes democracy and freedom globally, arguing that its actions often undermine these values.
- The article calls for remembering victims of U.S.-backed dictatorships and neoliberal policies alongside 9/11 victims.
Overall, the article presents a critical view of U.S. foreign policy, particularly in Latin America, and argues that the spread of neoliberalism has had devastating consequences for many people worldwide.
That seems like a pretty good summary to me.
Islamic fanatics in Kosovo? Maybe you should define Serbian mercenaries as Orthodox Christian fanatics ... Kosova was subjugated by Serbian Tchetniks and government for 100 years and they had the right to fught off the Serbian State terror. Calling them fanatics, and religious ones, shows how far off the mark you are. I am otherwise impressed by your work but on this issue you are an absolute moron 100%.