Evo Morales Gets Bounced; Seeks Asylum in Mexico - Page 7 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties from Mexico to Argentina.

Moderator: PoFo Latin America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. This is an international political discussion forum, so please post in English only.
#15049958
The main point to remember about Bolivia, and other military coups/regime change actions the US has a hand in, is that what begins abroad eventually comes home.
#15050080
quetzalcoatl wrote:The main point to remember about Bolivia, and other military coups/regime change actions the US has a hand in, is that what begins abroad eventually comes home.



You said a whole lot in one sentence Quetzalcoatl. A lot.

Once they get a taste for just ousting people because they want the ability to just sweep in there for some resource or to destabilize a political system that is not into selling out to whoever comes along with a checkbook? They will bring that home. American voters want someone they don't want? Just kick his ass out of there...and put in a yes man. But the people's will is disrespected? Who cares? Democracy is for the birds anyway! The chickens will come home to roost.

Who said that famous line? Oh yes Malcolm X. Here he is:

#15050340
Malcolm X talked about chickens coming home to roost.

And Mark Twain mentioned how harmful Wars of Imperialism were for the American spirit.

But in both cases, it seems that what they are implying is that ONLY when the chickens come home to roost, will anyone in the USA care about what their military/state department/corporations are doing all over the rest of the world.

This is a bit like those signs you see in suburbia that say:" Watch our children - they may be your own!", adding the "may be your own" to capture all the incredibly selfish, insular people who really don't care about other people's chlidren being damaged by them in their vehicles.

What kind of soul-less monster of a driver ONLY cars about killing his own children?
And what kind of soul-less monster of a human only cares about the human rights of the humans he identifies with as an identity group?

How long can a completely amoral population continue to pretend to live in a society together?
#15050347
QatzelOk wrote:Malcolm X talked about chickens coming home to roost.

And Mark Twain mentioned how harmful Wars of Imperialism were for the American spirit.

But in both cases, it seems that what they are implying is that ONLY when the chickens come home to roost, will anyone in the USA care about what their military/state department/corporations are doing all over the rest of the world.

This is a bit like those signs you see in suburbia that say:" Watch our children - they may be your own!", adding the "may be your own" to capture all the incredibly selfish, insular people who really don't care about other people's chlidren being damaged by them in their vehicles.

What kind of soul-less monster of a driver ONLY cars about killing his own children?
And what kind of soul-less monster of a human only cares about the human rights of the humans he identifies with as an identity group?

The "free individual" of the capitalist free market. And by "free", they mean free from remorse, free from morals, free from conscience, and free from knowledge about the mayhem they cause around the world....

How long can a completely amoral population continue to pretend to live in a society together?

For as long as the salary keep flowing into their bank account and the bank doesn't foreclose on their McMansion, that's how long. If the money stops flowing and the bank forecloses, then watch out....
#15050355
QatzelOk wrote:Malcolm X talked about chickens coming home to roost.

And Mark Twain mentioned how harmful Wars of Imperialism were for the American spirit.

But in both cases, it seems that what they are implying is that ONLY when the chickens come home to roost, will anyone in the USA care about what their military/state department/corporations are doing all over the rest of the world.

This is a bit like those signs you see in suburbia that say:" Watch our children - they may be your own!", adding the "may be your own" to capture all the incredibly selfish, insular people who really don't care about other people's chlidren being damaged by them in their vehicles.

What kind of soul-less monster of a driver ONLY cars about killing his own children?
And what kind of soul-less monster of a human only cares about the human rights of the humans he identifies with as an identity group?

How long can a completely amoral population continue to pretend to live in a society together?


Compassion is a hard thing to find among any humans. The further removed we are from one another, the less we identify and can empathise, the more callous we become towards their existence. This is unfortunately not a sole American trait though it seems to be in excess at times.

Framing moral questions in terms of self-interest is the best we can do given our species tendencies of ego-driven character development.
#15050476
QatzelOk wrote:Malcolm X talked about chickens coming home to roost.

And Mark Twain mentioned how harmful Wars of Imperialism were for the American spirit.

But in both cases, it seems that what they are implying is that ONLY when the chickens come home to roost, will anyone in the USA care about what their military/state department/corporations are doing all over the rest of the world.

This is a bit like those signs you see in suburbia that say:" Watch our children - they may be your own!", adding the "may be your own" to capture all the incredibly selfish, insular people who really don't care about other people's chlidren being damaged by them in their vehicles.

What kind of soul-less monster of a driver ONLY cars about killing his own children?
And what kind of soul-less monster of a human only cares about the human rights of the humans he identifies with as an identity group?

How long can a completely amoral population continue to pretend to live in a society together?


You know I know quite a lot of Mexicans here who have relatives who live in the USA in different states. Sisters, brothers, parents, friends, relatives, inc.

I asked them consistently what it is they found in the USA that was different than in Merida? They all said consistently that Americans are not about helping. They don't help and they don't really go out of their way for others. That might be a weird criticism for those who live in the states? But the truth of the matter is that the First World nations are wealthy enough to lose any sense of obligation to others. Eventually it alienates them and they lose any sense of social empathy with other people's children, other people's families, etc. They are wealthy enough and live in a system that is so incredibly controlled down to the last brick in a house that no one thinks helping others is important. You have enough and if others don't? That is their problem. In the Third World Q? If you don't help others? You are basically seen with incredibly bad eyes and the social pressure is incredibly bad. No one respects you in Mexico if you don't give a damn about anyone but yourself. They find that incredibly distasteful. But in the USA the narcissism is accepted. You see it in many ways.

Poorer countries you got to pull together to get practically anything accomplished the lone ranger by himself never works in societies with a lot of problems one finds with low salaries and not enough to solve issues. A lot of do-it-yourself and calling the neighbors.

Reciprocity becomes a way of thinking. And so does compassion and dealing with others.
#15050563
Tainari88 wrote:You know I know quite a lot of Mexicans here who have relatives who live in the USA in different states. Sisters, brothers, parents, friends, relatives, inc.

I asked them consistently what it is they found in the USA that was different than in Merida? They all said consistently that Americans are not about helping. They don't help and they don't really go out of their way for others. That might be a weird criticism for those who live in the states? But the truth of the matter is that the First World nations are wealthy enough to lose any sense of obligation to others. Eventually it alienates them and they lose any sense of social empathy with other people's children, other people's families, etc. They are wealthy enough and live in a system that is so incredibly controlled down to the last brick in a house that no one thinks helping others is important. You have enough and if others don't? That is their problem. In the Third World Q? If you don't help others? You are basically seen with incredibly bad eyes and the social pressure is incredibly bad. No one respects you in Mexico if you don't give a damn about anyone but yourself. They find that incredibly distasteful. But in the USA the narcissism is accepted. You see it in many ways.

Poorer countries you got to pull together to get practically anything accomplished the lone ranger by himself never works in societies with a lot of problems one finds with low salaries and not enough to solve issues. A lot of do-it-yourself and calling the neighbors.

Reciprocity becomes a way of thinking. And so does compassion and dealing with others.

The truth is that the American people have been the most generous nation in the past 100 years, but it seems very little appreciated. It is nearly always not enough. I used to do much more to help those I thought were in need, but sometime found out I was just being taken advantage of. I got sick and tired of it. So now, I have to know for sure that someone is in need before I give a dime. If you see that as distasteful, then so be it.
HalleluYah
#15050598
Hindsite wrote:The truth is that the American people have been the most generous nation in the past 100 years, but it seems very little appreciated. It is nearly always not enough. I used to do much more to help those I thought were in need, but sometime found out I was just being taken advantage of. I got sick and tired of it. So now, I have to know for sure that someone is in need before I give a dime. If you see that as distasteful, then so be it.
HalleluYah


American generosity in the past and present was also that driven by geopolitical and ideological self-interest. It spun copious amounts of goodwill and propaganda as American culture, commerce and political convictions encompassed the globe. 'Soft power' as it is refered to is the true power of influence that America exerts.

The bedrock of any Empire however is still 'Hard power' with the US Navy protecting global trade routes, the US Air Force and offensive missile capacity enforcing "Pax Americana" or Peace by Terror. Cyber warfare is the new frontier of international belligerence, delivering unto us a second Cold War.

The American Empire sometimes engages in overt (or covert) military actions too ensure that most of the worlds States are in the hands of 'friendly' political regimes. Most of the time it uses non-military actions as offensive weapons too ensure this; economic sanctions, trade embargos, political destabilization, disinformation campaigns and what many call 'Coercive diplomacy'. This has been the US Foreign Policy template for decades. Latin America has long been a recipient of these... terror tactics.

Remember this well; As American might more and more relies on 'Hard power' tactics, its 'Soft power' will increasingly lose its effectiveness.

The demise of American soft power

Hardening of Soft Power

MAGA mindset proves toxic for U.S. soft power
#15050601
Hindsite wrote:The truth is that the American people have been the most generous nation in the past 100 years, but it seems very little appreciated. It is nearly always not enough. I used to do much more to help those I thought were in need, but sometime found out I was just being taken advantage of. I got sick and tired of it. So now, I have to know for sure that someone is in need before I give a dime. If you see that as distasteful, then so be it.
HalleluYah


I don't care about what you think is true Hindsite.

For Christ he thought you had to give everything you had in this world and follow him. Give it all away and live off of faith and his fellow Christians alone. He died without owning a damn thing. Not even a pair of sandals did he have on in the end on the cross. Material wealth was not for him. He got angry the most when they defiled the Temple with moneychangers and he overturned tables. If he is God manifested in the flesh and he is the most perfectly sinless human to ever have walked the face of the Earth? And he got very angry over greed and wanting to make money in a sacred place supposedly dedicated to spirituality? The message was clear. Wealth is not good.

You hating on Mexicans and on liberals and on x, y or z....means you are a fake Christian. You are headed for the lake of Fire with all your stupid possessions staying behind and serving no use for anyone. The young ones have different tastes, your spouse will have to sell it off to pay the bills if she is not your beneficiary, and eventually all the material things go off into the night and no one knows why they were so important. But how you treated the most poor and humble among the many? Is how you treated your Savior.

It looks like you were insincere. Live with it.
#15050604
MadMonk wrote:American generosity in the past and present was also that driven by geopolitical and ideological self-interest. It spun copious amounts of goodwill and propaganda as American culture, commerce and political convictions encompassed the globe. 'Soft power' as it is refered to is the true power of influence that America exerts.

The bedrock of any Empire however is still 'Hard power' with the US Navy protecting global trade routes, the US Air Force and offensive missile capacity enforcing "Pax Americana" or Peace by Terror. Cyber warfare is the new frontier of international belligerence, delivering unto us a second Cold War.

The American Empire sometimes engages in overt (or covert) military actions too ensure that most of the worlds States are in the hands of 'friendly' political regimes. Most of the time it uses non-military actions as offensive weapons too ensure this; economic sanctions, trade embargos, political destabilization, disinformation campaigns and what many call 'Coercive diplomacy'. This has been the US Foreign Policy template for decades. Latin America has long been a recipient of these... terror tactics.

Remember this well; As American might more and more relies on 'Hard power' tactics, its 'Soft power' will increasingly lose its effectiveness.

The demise of American soft power

Hardening of Soft Power

MAGA mindset proves toxic for U.S. soft power



This is very true. Also the majority of the refugees and immigrants from Latin America to the USA are economic migrants. They are. The economies in Latin America are incredibly bad in many nations and it forces people from their hometowns and cities looking for stable incomes. The USA used to be able to absorb them effectively over time. If you stayed clean and did not get into any serious crime and worked hard and paid taxes? You got your path to citizenship or permanent residency status.

The problem now is that the USA doesn't need working class people who do working class work that doesn't require many tech skills. The economy has changed. And Americans resent the student loan debts, the high mortgages, credit card debts and problems. They don't want to deal with some working class, non-English speaking immigrants from Latin America. They want well educated, English speaking high tech savvy and science, etc savvy people. They don't want to invest in educating the sons and daughters of the lower class Latin Americans. If you study the demographics of the top ten major USA cities k-12 public school systems? There are huge quantities of Latin American kids who's parents are here as first generation working class people. If you ignore them and don't invest time and money in educating them in what is going to be needed for future workers in the future? The USA has no real future MadMonk. You can talk platitudes and bullshit about they are not high IQ or some bullshit racially questionable opinions on why not to invest in those kids? But the truth is? You either work with the people who are here and have kids to contribute to the USA's future? Or you accept the USA will not have enough educated people to compete with the rest of the world in the future....

Other nations are not going to be losing their well educated youth to a nation that is negligent with their own kids and their own future.

No one cares about the reasons why you did not educate them. They will just say, "That is not my problem."
#15050620
MadMonk wrote:Compassion is a hard thing to find among any humans. The further removed we are from one another, the less we identify and can empathise, the more callous we become towards their existence. This is unfortunately not a sole American trait though it seems to be in excess at times.

Framing moral questions in terms of self-interest is the best we can do given our species tendencies of ego-driven character development.


New studies in cooperative models belies this as the truth about human beings MadMonk. Have you ever had to deal with a drug addict? They are problematic people. They steal, they lie, they cheat, they are unemployable, they can't be productive. Because their brains are physically altered by the drug. A society that has emphasized extremely bad value systems acts the same. But if you change the brain chemistry of a drug addict? You change the value system of an entire economic and social system? You get different results.

The way to do that is simple enough. You de-emphasize individualism and you re-emphasize collective service. You give individuals what they need to be productive and you also bring great social rewards to them. Other societies in this world are not as selfish by far MadMonk. Many sociologists and anthropologists have dedicated enormous research to studying human beings. So have the psychological sciences. Human beings are a product of both biology and social environments. What you nurture as a whole for an entire system is what you will glean from it. If you go for the awful values of consumerism, waste, dog-eat-dog, look out for number 1, racial and class privileges, private property over serving the society as a whole? You shall have tremendous problems. Just as in a society in which healthy habits are not feeding a short term profit goal? You emphasize take a pill for something, take a drug, numb yourself, self medicate, ignore underlying issues, etc. You get a nation of drug addicts. A nation of narcissists, a nation of selfish people who are worthless spouses, worthless parents, worthless children, worthless workers, worthless citizens, and who are apathetic or so distorted in value systems that they can't understand how it felt like to feel connected.

You know the Unabomber was a loner and socially inadequate, but he was also the recipient of intense psychological torture at a very young age while he studied at Harvard University. He had enormous difficulty cultivating human connections. He had no girlfriends and was a virgin at the age of 53 when they imprisoned him for life. He was a genius with an IQ score of 167. A math professor at University of California at Berkeley. He was a very very interesting man. He said that the industrial revolution and industrialization was a failure. He lived off the grid with no running water or electricity in some cabin in a tiny town in Montana named Lincoln. In some tiny house/shed he had built to perfect mathematical proportions with his younger brother David.

In the end, he basically said all he had truly wanted was a wife a son, a family. CONNECTION. But he never got it. Never had a sense of empathy and all the people he wanted to connect to emotionally? He could not feel anything. He said, if he could feel connected to them and love and a sense of belonging? The anger that triggered all the madness would have been avoided. People need to feel loved, connected, respected and integrated into a society of fellow humans who give them that sense of being a part of a human family. If they don't get that? And too much distortion of anything that is natural, like being out in nature, bathing in water from a river, looking at trees, eating food that tastes like it was grown close by? Warm skin and kisses and hugs and being taken care of? Concern and caring being showed to them? Respecting their thoughts and opinions, appreciating their contributions, and being present in their hour of need? It is the difference between life or death.

Not just for the person who feel disconnected? But for all of us who are touched by the ones affected by the madness of becoming alienated and numb and unfeeling towards others.

You see it in this forum. People who write to other people and they are mostly not really seeing the other person who thinks differently as a person with feelings and thoughts....but as the ENEMY. Once they do that? They dehumanize them. We become objects. Do you respect objects? Not really. They just become a means to an end.

We do that in political foreign policy too. Bolivia is not a real country, with real people with real human needs. They are just some ignorant Indians who speak Quechua or speak Spanish or Aymara, etc and are just unimportant. The important thing is to CONTROL and dominate and who cares what they go through.....it is part of that evil sense of lack of connection. To our own selves and to each other.

If that is not changed MadMonk? We got serious problems. Because the Earth is not a dead, passive thing. It is alive and we depend on it to live. Other humans are not passive objects to be used and abused with impunity. To think we are not connected and our actions don't have deep repercussions over time? Is FALSE. And the consequence of not realizing that is severe. Severe.
#15050622
Tainari88 wrote:...First World nations are wealthy enough to lose any sense of obligation to others.

But the means by which they "lose" there humanity and community is universal and also affects the rich of any country.

Rich people get all the damaging technology BEFORE others, and at a much higher rate of universal distribution. So the nobodies who live in rich Westerners were universally damaged by mass ideology, the assembly-line, war propaganda, suburbia, mass media, gadget collection, and whole host of modern ills in a way that has destroyed all normal human relations between these unlucky people. (And these modern, rich nations have made life miserable and precarious in most of the world, wherever their media has pointed them before pulling their collective, brain-washed trigger.)

By the same process, the rich of any country are more affected by all of the above powerful modern poisons at a much higher rate than the normal or poor or any country. So they are always the most damaged by modern technologies.

So the loss doesn't just come from the power of having a credit card. It also comes from living in societies (or classes) that have been much more damaged by powerful toys, which includes credit cards.

Hindsite wrote:The truth is that the American people have been the most generous nation in the past 100 years...

Thanks for the gifts of:
All-you-can-absorb napalm for Asia, and scholarships to the School of the Americas for Juan and Juanita.

MadMonk wrote:Framing moral questions in terms of self-interest is the best we can do given our species tendencies of ego-driven character development.

As mentionned just above, the theories about whether humans are "naturally selfish" or "naturally cooperative" point to cooperation. But the "selfish" corporations can obviously fund a lot more "studies." All the PR development that went into defending cigarattes, car companies, oil, etc. has severely curtailed the trustworthiness of "studies," especially when they point to "corporate greed" as a "solution."

The coup in Bolivia is explained by many Western media through the lens of "protecting corporate greed," as if to underscore the contamination of the media. Our media show how incestuous and blinkered they are when they show revference to all the fake studies that they themselves print like so much toilet paper. "Here's another study proving McDonalds is healtheir than home-made..."
#15050719
Hindsite wrote:I am not going to read the rest of your crap, because I don't give a shit about what you say either, so stop replying to my posts.


Lol. Thank you.
#15050724
Red Rackham wrote:You're far too polite.



You have to be with people who have a twisted opinion about who Jesus Christ was.

One guy in another forum swore up and down that Jesus was in the USA and he was a businessman and only blessed rich people.

One has to realize that not everyone who is 'praising the Lord" actually are sincere. Praise the Lord, but I am a racist, and I hate poor people and liberals, Praise the Lord, but I like making money and can't be bothered to help others out because that means giving something I want up. Praise the Lord, and etc etc. Anyone who is a fake Christian can run around and profess any real religion.....like Christianity but if they hate their whole lives, and attached to money and do everything against the principles of a truly Christian life because it is too hard to do? They should be honest and tell the truth. I love Christ but only when it is convenient to do so. If it means accepting a Black person or a Mexican as my equal? No. I won't do it.

If you say you are something? Stick to it and be true to that. Don't lie to yourself above all else. Own up to who you become. It is the only way to improve.

Lol. Hindsite thinks he is fooling anyone in this place? He is not. At least people who know the difference and have dealt with devout and SINCERE Christians versus FAKE ONES.

The fake ones are easy to spot. They are intolerant and not loving and not kind. In general. It is all about vanity and attachments.

And they prefer to be left to their own devices and not deal with people who point out the obvious problems with their Fake Christianity.

You would think they would learn to be truthful with who they are after reaching a certain age? But, some? Would rather keep lying to themselves.

It is like that Chickens coming home to roost statement. If you got a government that is willing to topple other governments and put in puppets in order to dominate? You have to realize that that same behavior is going to affect the people in the home country. Eventually.

The ones who say they hate liberals and are racists and are discriminators? But Jesus is on their side? Whatever. Instead of respecting the message of the New Testament? They want to play God on the most vulnerable.

It is highly hypocritical. But they don't see it. Too busy praising the Lord while hating others who are not like them.
#15050732
I have no problem with god botherers as long as they leave me alone, each to his own. If belief in some god or juju brings a modicum of comfort then so be it. But when religion gets extreme, as it always has and always will, then normal people have to be prepared to step up the plate and say, enough. I'm a live and let live type of chap, until someone starts shoving religion at me.
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
The Irishman...

I don't think DeNiro's politics played into it, at[…]

Man, imagine if I'd never done hallucinogens. I c[…]

Bunk. As chair of an impeachment inquiry, Schiff […]

Julian Assange arrested in London

Tories will most def extradite Assange, they've n[…]