Critical historians like William Appleman Williams played a key role in highlighting the US’s imperial record in Latin America. Now Donald Trump has cut out the middleman, bluntly stating the US’s imperialist agenda.
By Richard Drake, Jacobin
On December 17, Donald Trump spoke to reporters with refreshing candor, for a US president, about the motives behind his bellicose policy in Venezuela. Referring to the ousting of US oil companies dating from 1976, he bluntly declared, “[We wanted] all of the oil, land, and other assets that they previously stole from us.” Venezuela’s resources had not belonged to its people at all but to the United States. Trump was now simply taking back what had rightfully belonged to us. This was the policy that fueled his bombing attacks across Venezuela — and this weekend’s kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro.
As rationales for US foreign policy in Latin America go, President Trump’s statement about Venezuela fell well short of the moralizing standard that the peoples south of the border have come to expect from us. Washington’s goals in Latin America have usually come packaged in propaganda about our intentions to be a good neighbor or a partner in hemispheric prosperity. These traditional marketing strategies, however, generally have not produced the desired results on public opinion in Latin America. The problem all along with the US language of philanthropic uplift has been the Monroe Doctrine.
Hiram Bingham III, a pioneering professor of Latin American history at Yale University credited with drawing international attention to the Incan city of Machu Picchu, succinctly explained our Monroe Doctrine problem. His illuminating article, “The Monroe Doctrine: An Obsolete Shibboleth,” appeared in the June 1913 issue of the Atlantic Monthly.
He described this document as the country’s most universally accepted foreign policy — and conceded that it was conceived with at least some good intentions in 1823 by US leaders seeking to protect the hemisphere from the further encroachments of European imperialism. And yet even then, people in Latin America saw the document as “a display of insolence and conceit on our part.”
Recent Posts
Opposition of Nuclear Power ‘Revival’ in New York Holds its First Forum
Take Action Now This first forum, a webinar on Jan. 15, was titled a “Symposium for Safe and Affordable Energy in New York” as part of a series…
In Response to the Renee Good killing, Dems Propose ICE Reforms That Would Have Done Nothing to Prevent the Renee Good Killing
Take Action Now Good’s killer was a 10-year ICE veteran, himself a trainer, and recorded the killing. What good would more training and more cameras…
The Consequences Of Trump’s War On Climate In 7 Charts
Take Action Now Seven snapshots reveal how climate rollbacks altered the trajectory of U.S. energy, environmental protection, and economic security.……
Trump Received The Nobel Peace Prize From Maria Corina Machado. But Who Is She?
Take Action Now While Machado has played a pertinent and critical role for the US in causing chaos, disseminating propaganda, and pushing for regime…