Why do Latinos blame America for Latin America's failures?
Here's a start
http://listverse.com/2013/11/13/10-ways-the-us-screwed-over-latin-america/
>>72928979
History of CIA-led/funded coups and dictatorships
>>72928979
Truth be told, CIA has overturned more than one of their best governments and supported some of their more corrupt ones.
>>72928979
Why do whites blame blacks and Hispanics on Americas failures?
>>72929059
pretty sure everything that happens in South America happens because the CIA instigated it
>>72929059
Why didn't you pay more attention in English class?
>>72929016
>http://listverse.com/2013/11/13/10-ways-the-us-screwed-over-latin-america/
they forgot Operation Northwoods, rip south america
>>72929033
>>72928979
Also, American consumption/market for drugs is the reason why cartels exist down there, which is an entire subject unto itself
Because the US fucked with it so they wouldn't turn into dirty communists and then they turned into dirty communists that continually fucked themselves
>>72929314
Holy shit /pol/ Scroll down on the comments
>My sons mother
>Mfw
>>72928979
We installed genocidal dictatorships in order to have cheaper bananas. I'm not saying the United States is bad, but it did some pretty fucked up shit in the Cold War.
>>72930172
Top kek
>>72930346
We also installed dictators in South Korea, but their country turned out fine.
It's kind of a confusion of cause with effect.
The US has interfered with Latin American nations a lot throughout history. But I don't see much evidence that this made them shittier countries.
If anything, the US was fucking around down there in the first place because there was already a lot of instability and disorder. That made intervention a lot easier.
It's kind of the same as We Wuz Kangz theory - taking slaves from Africa didn't fuck Africa up. We took slaves from Africa because it was primitive and fucked-up to begin with.
The absence of our actions would change certain things, but not the overall quality-of-life, which is determined by more important factors such as national IQ.
>>72930671
Don't give me that shit. Funding terrorist, shitting on coco. SA did a lot to itself but the U.S. played a big role in fucking it up.
>>72930845
Not really. Funding one side or another in a war is done all the time by everyone; European powers were doing the same thing during the US civil war. But the US didn't end up looking like Guatemala as a result.
Mainly because it didn't look like Guatemala to begin with.
It's a causation fallacy. There is a condition X (poverty, etc.) an event Y (US intervention), but where is the causality between Y and X? You can't just assume causality without a lot more evidence.
>>72928979
can you provide examples of when they do?
and not citizens mouthing off... government officials.
>>72930172
>my sons mother
/pol/ is always right
>>72928979
Ever heard of the Monroe doctorine? Retard.
>>72932198
it's different when you set up a fascist dictator that caters to corporate needs and corruption. They just put shitty people to run afterwards. They just used less shitty people for their own country onviously
>>72928979
You obviously never researched the topic with that kind of question
>>72928979
Because Spain and Portugal are, surprise, surprise, really shitty at the societies they set up in the New World vs the other colonizers - socially, economically, politically, militarily. The real, horrible, unfortunate part is that Spain and Portugal were there first, so they got to claim and do with most of it.
It goes back to the root. There is a reason Simon Bolivar's grand project failed, and that he basically hated his people by the end of his life, thinking them only suitable for forever being fodder for instability.
More or less every British colony turned out great.
More or less every Iberian colony turned out to be shit.
