Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 343 posts

Re: Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries

#81

Post by snypher »

dventimi wrote: post #71
caycep wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

last 2? weren't they toppling latin American governments since Teddy Roosevelt?

Yes. That's why I wrote, "Through at least two administrations". Personally, I consider the scale of injustice in Latin America alone at the hands of U.S. policy to be vast and unsparing in the culpability it lays at the feet of every American. I recognize that not everyone will be joining me out on that limb, however, so I chose to make my opening bid smaller but more unassailable.

There's not really anything the average person can do to influence this policy, so by saying "of every American", the blame is diluted across the population, instead of held directly against those responsible.

So what is the answer? Large scale protests against imperialism are just shut down and the protestors get doxxed or arrested and the band plays on.

Re: Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries

#82

Post by o11c »

NicoJuicy wrote: post #32
cardiffspaceman wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Never underestimate people defending their home. Remember the Serbs going out with targets painted on their t-shirts when NATO (read “USA”) was bombing Belgrade? Of course that was the 90’s.

First protest of Iraq was in 1991, but a decades long dictator ofc. has severe military superiority. A lot of Iraqi's were a big fan of toppling Saddam. Note : not saying it was a good idea with what we know now. And about Serbia. The bombing from "NATO" with a focus on military targets made it possible for it's population to overthrow Milosevic by the citizens a year later. The boots on the ground in this case were…

> A lot of Iraqi's were a big fan of toppling Saddam.

The real problem with statements like that is that we can say it about literally any leader.

Re: Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries

#83

Post by dventimi »

snypher wrote: post #81
dventimi wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. That's why I wrote, "Through at least two administrations". Personally, I consider the scale of injustice in Latin America alone at the hands of U.S. policy to be vast and unsparing in the culpability it lays at the feet of every American. I recognize that not everyone will be joining me out on that limb, however, so I chose to make my opening bid smaller but more unassailable.

There's not really anything the average person can do to influence this policy, so by saying "of every American", the blame is diluted across the population, instead of held directly against those responsible. So what is the answer? Large scale protests against imperialism are just shut down and the protestors get doxxed or arrested and the band plays on.

> There's not really anything the average person can do to influence this policy, so by saying "of every American", the blame is diluted across the population, instead of held directly against those responsible.

Assign for yourself whatever share of the blame your conscience will allow.

> So what is the answer?

I have no idea, but whatever it is I suspect it's not yelling at strangers on the internet.

Re: Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries

#84

Post by refurb »

caycep wrote: post #64
dventimi wrote: post #47

Through at least two administrations, Republican and Democrat, Bush and Obama, the U.S. has funded anti-leftist militarism in Colombia, to the military and to paramilitary groups like AUC. It's not just a fruit company and it's not just a relic from the past. http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2013/12/21/co...

last 2? weren't they toppling latin American governments since Teddy Roosevelt?

Absolutely. The Monroe Doctrine was a clear statement that foreign influence in the Americas was a non-starter.

The USSR was funding leftist rebels in several central and South American countries throughout its existence - Argentina, Grenada, Guatemala, the list goes on.

Doesn’t seem odd to me for the US to come in and back the current government?

Even if those governments weren’t democratic, I don’t think anyone can argue the Soviet backed ones were going to be beacons of liberty either.

Re: Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries

#85

Post by NicoJuicy »

o11c wrote: post #82
NicoJuicy wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First protest of Iraq was in 1991, but a decades long dictator ofc. has severe military superiority. A lot of Iraqi's were a big fan of toppling Saddam. Note : not saying it was a good idea with what we know now. And about Serbia. The bombing from "NATO" with a focus on military targets made it possible for it's population to overthrow Milosevic by the citizens a year later. The boots on the ground in this case were…

> A lot of Iraqi's were a big fan of toppling Saddam. The real problem with statements like that is that we can say it about literally any leader.

That already encountered a coup? That barely happens in a democracy.

Re: Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries

#86

Post by dventimi »

refurb wrote: post #84
caycep wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

last 2? weren't they toppling latin American governments since Teddy Roosevelt?

Absolutely. The Monroe Doctrine was a clear statement that foreign influence in the Americas was a non-starter. The USSR was funding leftist rebels in several central and South American countries throughout its existence - Argentina, Grenada, Guatemala, the list goes on. Doesn’t seem odd to me for the US to come in and back the current government? Even if those governments weren’t democratic, I don’t think anyone can…

I'm willing to accept a lot of the blame, but that stops at the border. I may not have much political influence in America where I live, but I'm pretty sure I have no political influence in Russia.

Re: Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries

#87

Post by wmf »

stavros wrote: post #79
digging wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Certain there are others. Naomi Klein wrote about Ford paying to have its own Argentine employees murdered during the junta in the 70s, apparently to prevent unionization.

What the hell kind of corporate exec goes "well, I guess I have to get them murdered, there's shareholder value to protect"?

The kind that rises to the top. Time to watch Michael Clayton again.

Re: Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries

#88

Post by eyelidlessness »

snypher wrote: post #81
dventimi wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. That's why I wrote, "Through at least two administrations". Personally, I consider the scale of injustice in Latin America alone at the hands of U.S. policy to be vast and unsparing in the culpability it lays at the feet of every American. I recognize that not everyone will be joining me out on that limb, however, so I chose to make my opening bid smaller but more unassailable.

There's not really anything the average person can do to influence this policy, so by saying "of every American", the blame is diluted across the population, instead of held directly against those responsible. So what is the answer? Large scale protests against imperialism are just shut down and the protestors get doxxed or arrested and the band plays on.

Probably the best example I can think of where a vast injustice was halted, while assigning broad social culpability, with participation of some of those deemed culpable, and without substantial reliance on external force… would be the end of Apartheid in South Africa. Notably, the assignment of broad culpability was probably an essential component of that… and so probably was the limited application of consequences for that culpability.

There are other historical examples I can think of which involved mass violence as a significant part of the means to halt the vast injustice. Those examples are probably not what we’d want to model, but they’re notably more readily available for reference.

Re: Banana giant Chiquita held liable by US court for funding paramilitaries

#89

Post by krapp »

stavros wrote: post #79
digging wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Certain there are others. Naomi Klein wrote about Ford paying to have its own Argentine employees murdered during the junta in the 70s, apparently to prevent unionization.

What the hell kind of corporate exec goes "well, I guess I have to get them murdered, there's shareholder value to protect"?

The typical kind. Killing strikers and unionists used to be a standard mode of American capitalism.

Luckily no American corporation would ever murder someone who threatened their financial interests, nowadays.

Post reply on HN