US pledges more aid to Colombia

[RedAnarchist]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4033069.stm :angry:

I wish the US would keep it&#39;s imperialistic, capitalist nose out of Latin America. Columbia is not, and never will, a colony of America. Neither is any other country (although a certain T. Bliar might disagree <_< ).

Uribe, by accepting this aid, is a whore. He sells his country to the Yanks and in return gets American financial help to fight the FARC and other leftist freedom fighters.

[h&s]

This war against narco-terrorism can and will be won, and Colombia is well on its way to that victory," he said.

"The drug traffickers who practice violence and intimidation in this country send their addictive and deadly products to the United States," he added.

"Defeating them is vital to the safety of our peoples and to the stability of this hemisphere."


Bollocks. Terrorism? :rolleyes:
And ensuring the safety of the people of Columbia? Thats rich coming from the country that bombs them with carcinogenic pesticide&#33;

[LSD]

wish the US would keep it&#39;s imperialistic, capitalist nose out of Latin America. Columbia is not, and never will, a colony of America.

I&#39;m afraid the United States would disagree with that sentiment.

It is an essential part of US foreign policy that Latin America remain firmly under US control. It&#39;s been that way since the 19th century, for God&#39;s sake, they&#39;re certainly not going to change now&#33;

[fernando]

Then they also have to accept the consequences of their actions...the Imperialist want to keep oppressing us, keep stealing from us, no longer...we are a grand people who live in this part of the world. No longer will we kept down, the time to arise is soon, the Revolution is near&#33; left wing governments are rising up, still a bit too friendly towards the US for my taste, only Chavez and Castro seem to be be truly anti Imperialistic.

[colombiano]

Unfortunately Colombia will never fall into a complete Marxist state. The FARC has severly damaged their name and cause due to their actions.

[h&s]

Then why do the Marxists in Columbia not create a new revolutionary movement?

[fernando]

I dont think that a movement like that should be limited to Colombia...I want to see a large movement rising up throughout Latin America.

[h&s]

Any movement should be based in the working class and the trade unions. These guerilla uprisings never seem to get anywhere, and (in my opinion) when they do they never involve the working class enough in proceedings.

[fernando]

That is why these movements have to change, not just in the worker class or trade unions, but also the students and other parts of society. That is what bothers me about Marxism or communism for that matter...it only talks about the working class and not the rest of society...I mean the Revolution should not be exclusive to the working class, I think a doctor who sees what&#39;s going on in his land will realise things have to change as well (we all know the doctor who became a legandary revolutionairy). Everybody should rise up.

[chebol]

And bollocks to Uribe&#39;s inane chatter about victory too.
(Despite their best spin, and hardware, they just can&#39;t erase reality.)
The revolution in Venezuela (which is internationalist- naturally) is deepening, the left is beginning to re-arise in Latin America, and in Colombia...- what?

colombiano suggests that the FARC have lost some credibility. True. It&#39;s mostly amongst armchair socialists in comfy countries, but they have also lost cred in Colombia.
They have also regained it, and more. The role the FARC play as a counter to the government&#39;s violence has secured them a key position in any future of the country. And this is not only in the countryside, as they are also in the cities in the PCCC. Alongside the ELN and others, they form a part of the Bolivarian Movement, which bears great ideological similarity to the Bolivarian Revolution (albeit with, shall we say, "Santanderist" differences).

In answer to h&s- while there currently is a project of regrouping the Colombian (non-guerrilla) left, any real attempt at this faces 2 stumbling blocks- firstly the near inevitability of state-sponsored violence and aggression against it; and secondly, the necessity of the FARC involvement in this process, due to their size and influence, control of half the country, and ability to defend at least some of the left from reactionary terror- the reason they formed in the first place. The FARC is actually involved with the working class (presence in cities), rather than being simply a rural fighting force. Most people&#39;s understanding of a Guerrilla tends to be a bit off the mark (including, and especially in Cuba).
The fact that the FARC have been able to hold about half the country for so long now comes down to the issue of undeniable support amongst the population. Furthermore, much of the rural population which the FARC covers are semi-proletarianised, or ex-urban proletariat. The situation was much the same in Cuba, with a large proportion of the J26M&#39;s rural support coming from the sugar workers, who were only part-employed, and whose occupation was well divorced from peasant/ petty bourgeois production. This is not to make the usual mistake in regards to Cuba- which is to ignore the thousands of urban workers of the J26M who were the real backbone of the revolution and overthrow of Batista. And the FARC, as I have said, have a similar urban base. (BTW, I am not making direct comparisons of the FARC and the J26M.)
The FARC are so stable that they currently extract taxes from international corporations functioning in their territory&#33; (No names will be mentioned)
While it might be preferable to have someone other than the FARC rule Colombia, the future may come as a bit of a surprise.

fernando, the working class are usually the largest and most exploited section of a society. That is why they are so important to a revolution. Noone is excluding students or doctors if they want to help the revolution (although Pol Pot had different ideas), it&#39;s just that they aren&#39;t the decisive element.
That said, the people will always need doctors, and engineers, and so on. But they can BE those things, rather than be artificially separated from such roles by economic and political forces.
Take Venezuela as one example. The revolution there is constantly being described as "inclusive". This currently includes the opposition, amongst whom are terrorists and highly exploitative groups and individuals, as well as much of the middle class, which includes most of the doctors, lawyers, teachers, etc. As the process deepens, those who are antagonistic and harmful to the revolution (one which is concerned with everyone&#39;s welfare) can no longer be tolerated, as they react against their loss of privilege in often violent ways (the coup of April 2002, or the assassination of a Public Prosecutor a couple of days ago). They have chosen to align themselves with a small group that is concerned primarilly with money and power.
That famous doctor you mentioned aligned himself with the majority of people and their collective interests- and those people were the working class. I can&#39;t recall the last time a mass movement of millions of doctors led any kind of revolution (although there was some earth-shattering work done by Doctors&#39; Wives in John Howard&#39;s electorate during this federal election).

In Spain, by the way, Chavez recently declared that the working class is the vanguard of the revolution. The next period in Venezuela is looking very interesting.

[h&s]

Thanks for that post chebol. Its always good to hear stuff that the propaganda doesn&#39;t tell you. I can&#39;t say I support FARC, but my opinion of them has certainly been raised a bit.