Letter to a South American friend concerning U.S policy in South America
Joseph McHugh
July 08, 2009
One of my great friends lives in the gorgeous country of Brazil. She is a bright young girl with fiery political opinions tending to the left. Recently, I e-mailed her asking her about the situation in Honduras with their president being exiled.
My friend used the occasion to criticize the U.S government in general, mainly because of its policies in South America, where she said we supported a brutal dictatorship in her country, Brazil, and other countries South of the border for many years.
I respect her, and her view is legitimate. I started to craft a response which became longer and more involved than I thought it would be. My slightly edited reply to her is below.
"Dear Fernanda,
Undoubtedly it is true that throughout the twentieth century the U.S funded and supported dictatorships in Latin America.
I don't necessarily applaud this policy, but we should not forget the historical context.
The first question is what choices did the U.S have? Hasn't the choice in Latin America historically been a choice between leftist monsters or rightist monsters? People in the middle always seemed to get swallowed up by a leftist thug. This is not a rhetorical question. Were there VIABLE moderate movements that we could have supported? It's an important question.
In a seeming choice between the two sides the United States chose the rightists-not because we liked them, but because the leftists were committed to stealing the property of American citizens in these countries. It is the responsibility of the U.S government to protect her citizens wherever they are, as it certainly is the responsibility of the Brazilian government to protect her citizens. In this respect, the U.S was acting completely within her rights.
Later, with the rise of the collectivist state the Soviet Union, the United States faced an opponent that threatened its very existence. (Castro tried to put Soviet missiles in Cuba.) The Soviet Union certainly wanted to exploit the suffering of Latin people's to gain an advantage over the United States. The United States had the right to do all that it could to prevent leftists from taking over Latin countries. That probably meant that we had to turn to the rightists.
An analogous case is World War 2, although slightly reversed; we worked with the leftist monster Stalin to defeat the more immediate rightist monster Hitler.
Also, remember that with an AUTHORITARIAN rightist dictatorship there is at least the chance of reform. There are SOME freedoms that are recognized which allow human rights to get a foothold faster. In a TOTALITARIAN leftist state no freedoms are allowed. Brazil was able to reform itself; Cuba has not.
Also, remember, too, the context of your criticism. You criticize the U.S policies, based on U.S ideals. The oldest constitution in the world is here; the ideals of the Declaration of Independence inspire human rights advocates everywhere.
When people criticize the U.S, they often are using language that they never would have discovered if it weren't for the existence of the U.S.
And in defeating Communism, the U.S defeated one of the most vicious and evil ideologies known to man.
And let's not forget the TRILLIONS of dollars the U.S government (that's my money) has given to Latin countries to alleviate poverty and to support development there.
And letīs not forget the MILLIONS of Latinos who come here every year because we do not have a high level of corruption, but we do have a high level of freedom.
These people are able to come to the U.S and become successful parts of our society. I meet them all the time. Recently, I taught English to Brazilian immigrants. More than a few said to me: "I am so grateful for what this country has done for me."
And, until very recently, the U.S economy has fueled economic progress around the world (in places where trade is not against the law.)
It is seldom, if ever, that one hears a "Thank you" to us from Latin leaders and public people-only long lectures from the likes of Daniel Ortega.
I'm not sure there has been another country in the world that has done more to promote human rights than the U.S.
All that being said, I do not necessarily support historical U.S policies in South America. Too often the policies were blundering, cruel, racist. I also don't support lying, which the U.S government often did in pursuing these policies.
I don't believe in lying by any individual including government officials.
We could easily have said in these cases: "So and so is terrible, but we have to work with him." Or, we could have found other more direct means of fighting the vicious ideology of Communism, and protecting the rights of U.S people abroad.
But criticism (like everything else) must always be placed in its proper context.
Let's keep talking!
Love, Your friend Joe"
My friend used the occasion to criticize the U.S government in general, mainly because of its policies in South America, where she said we supported a brutal dictatorship in her country, Brazil, and other countries South of the border for many years.
I respect her, and her view is legitimate. I started to craft a response which became longer and more involved than I thought it would be. My slightly edited reply to her is below.
"Dear Fernanda,
Undoubtedly it is true that throughout the twentieth century the U.S funded and supported dictatorships in Latin America.
I don't necessarily applaud this policy, but we should not forget the historical context.
The first question is what choices did the U.S have? Hasn't the choice in Latin America historically been a choice between leftist monsters or rightist monsters? People in the middle always seemed to get swallowed up by a leftist thug. This is not a rhetorical question. Were there VIABLE moderate movements that we could have supported? It's an important question.
In a seeming choice between the two sides the United States chose the rightists-not because we liked them, but because the leftists were committed to stealing the property of American citizens in these countries. It is the responsibility of the U.S government to protect her citizens wherever they are, as it certainly is the responsibility of the Brazilian government to protect her citizens. In this respect, the U.S was acting completely within her rights.
Later, with the rise of the collectivist state the Soviet Union, the United States faced an opponent that threatened its very existence. (Castro tried to put Soviet missiles in Cuba.) The Soviet Union certainly wanted to exploit the suffering of Latin people's to gain an advantage over the United States. The United States had the right to do all that it could to prevent leftists from taking over Latin countries. That probably meant that we had to turn to the rightists.
An analogous case is World War 2, although slightly reversed; we worked with the leftist monster Stalin to defeat the more immediate rightist monster Hitler.
Also, remember that with an AUTHORITARIAN rightist dictatorship there is at least the chance of reform. There are SOME freedoms that are recognized which allow human rights to get a foothold faster. In a TOTALITARIAN leftist state no freedoms are allowed. Brazil was able to reform itself; Cuba has not.
Also, remember, too, the context of your criticism. You criticize the U.S policies, based on U.S ideals. The oldest constitution in the world is here; the ideals of the Declaration of Independence inspire human rights advocates everywhere.
When people criticize the U.S, they often are using language that they never would have discovered if it weren't for the existence of the U.S.
And in defeating Communism, the U.S defeated one of the most vicious and evil ideologies known to man.
And let's not forget the TRILLIONS of dollars the U.S government (that's my money) has given to Latin countries to alleviate poverty and to support development there.
And letīs not forget the MILLIONS of Latinos who come here every year because we do not have a high level of corruption, but we do have a high level of freedom.
These people are able to come to the U.S and become successful parts of our society. I meet them all the time. Recently, I taught English to Brazilian immigrants. More than a few said to me: "I am so grateful for what this country has done for me."
And, until very recently, the U.S economy has fueled economic progress around the world (in places where trade is not against the law.)
It is seldom, if ever, that one hears a "Thank you" to us from Latin leaders and public people-only long lectures from the likes of Daniel Ortega.
I'm not sure there has been another country in the world that has done more to promote human rights than the U.S.
All that being said, I do not necessarily support historical U.S policies in South America. Too often the policies were blundering, cruel, racist. I also don't support lying, which the U.S government often did in pursuing these policies.
I don't believe in lying by any individual including government officials.
We could easily have said in these cases: "So and so is terrible, but we have to work with him." Or, we could have found other more direct means of fighting the vicious ideology of Communism, and protecting the rights of U.S people abroad.
But criticism (like everything else) must always be placed in its proper context.
Let's keep talking!
Love, Your friend Joe"
Print
Email
