Doug wrote:
>
>
>> 'Cause now it's clear that Bush/IMF would prefer a full blown social
>> crisis, followed by military coup
>>
>
> Really? After almost two decades of crap about "democracy"? I
> realize the propaganda machine doesn't adhere to the highest
> standards of consistency, but wouldn't they have a wee bit of a
> problem handing a coup?
>
> Doug
A wee bit, but not much more than a wee bit. It's already under way if you look at FT etc. In Argentina Menem will front for the generals, after "chaos", "breakdown", "anarchism", and "terrorism" - accompanied by some cluckclucking about how it was unfortunate but necessary given how "irresponsible" the Argentine people are.
It's also happening in Venezuela, where classic CIA destabilization is underway using oligarch-controlled media & corrupt union bosses etc, and the repeatedly elected government of Chavez is already being called "authoritarian" & accused of endangering "freedom of the press" and so on.
It will be interesting to see who - if anyone - here will start spouting this stuff when the going gets rougher, as it's about to - starting in Colombia. The US is on the offensive in Latin America, and relations between liberals and lefties are put under a lot of strain when US imperialism is in its military phase. Happened in WWI, VietNam...
Quoting the very knowledgable Jim Petras (in a piece to be published in MR in May) on the question that Doug asks: "The reversion to client military dictatorships with a civic facade will not prevent the Bush Administration from claiming to be 'defending democracy and free markets'. The U.S. mass media can and will embellish on this and any variety of related motifs."
john mage