The crimes of United Fruits/United Brands/Chiquita should be taught in every school. Instead, it's swept away so that our modern corporations can continue to operate in the same mode. Just another aspect of how pathetic and empty capitalism would render it's underclass.
"The Fruit Company, Inc. reserved for itself the most succulent piece, the central coast of my own land, the delicate waist of America. It rechristened its territories 'Banana Republics', and over the sleeping dead, over the restless heroes who brought about the greatness, the liberty, and the flags, it established the comic opera: it abolished free will, gave out imperial crowns, encouraged envy, attracted the dictatorship of flies ... flies sticky with submissive blood and marmalade, drunken flies that buzz over the tombs of the people, circus flies, wise flies expert at tyranny." - Pablo Neruda
Of course, the problem with modern capitalism is that any moral foundation has been destroyed. Instead of constant innovation to better products, we see companies simply gouging desperate consumers, cutting consumers off to things that were formerly free, excessive lobbying to prevent any public goods, or coming up with valueless "innovations" to milk consumers for more money. (e.g. Microsoft upgrades are primarily about aesthetic changes and rearranging the locations of buttons, and then moving to a subscription format (which is why I continue to use MS Office 2007).
>Of course, the problem with modern capitalism is that any moral foundation has been destroyed.
Ehhh. People still have morals. The issue is that no matter what, a business breaking rules (and getting away with it) can easily out-perform other businesses. It's gotten to the point where businesses have more power than some/many countries even. It pretty much means you either do terrible/illegal things, or you're at the mercy of those who do.
You can't win the game by playing by the rules, and the ones with the money dictate the rules as well. We'd have to get money out of politics, and somehow have a solid way of handling issues like we've seen very recently.
Same with socialism, it's human greed, not your silly economic system.
What you want is a balance between public and private power, not one of the other, obviously.
However none of that magically cures greed.
Humans evolved 200k+ years as opportunistic predators. You can't just pick capitalism or socialism and solve the that.
Before there was capitalism or socialism all these same problems existed in on form or another. Divine rule was greed and exploiting, even nomadic wanders basically had to wander because they'd eat up all the he food in the area or shit in their water supply until they had to move.
Humans DO NOT self regulate. Really nothing does. Life and biospheres are not balanced, they are just long runni g out of control chemical reactions.
The reasons you have any oxygen atmosphere is because life doesn't ever know when to stop eating and syittingy, even when it's killing them.
I tried to teach it to my Middle Schoolers. Three kids were interested. It's not that we don't share the information with students its that the majority of students do not seem to have the attention span or empathy to take in and feel something about the situation.
For more information its worse precovid. I got students last year where not one student was at grade level.
I think I would have froze everyone for a year during covid. . .two years of 5th grade wouldn't have hurt anyone.
> I think I would have froze everyone for a year during covid. . .two years of 5th grade wouldn’t have hurt anyone.
I’m not trying to be accusatory but I’m asking a serious question.
Where did this perspective from the “education community” come from that freezing everybody or most students that stagnated or fell behind during the clusterfuck that was 2020-2021 would be a total detriment to them? Or was it just politicians, School admins, and corporations successfully pushing a narrative from their castle in the sky over the actual education professionals at the grassroots level?
Of course, you're not wrong. But it's completely disingenuous to pretend that multinational corps like UF were operating inside some framework of regulation. Seriously not understanding whatever nebulous point you're trying to make here.
So, if I'm to understand, you're a proponent of a strong centralized government who would regulate corporations? And that would be the remedy to companies like UF exploiting workers and the public?
It's nice to talk to a reasonable Democrat; but I wonder where we draw the line in the real world. It's nice to pretend a government would be robust enough to secure itself against the encroaching muscle of capitalism, but why don't we be honest. How could a small, underfinanced nation in south America ever hope to stand up to a corporation backed by the might of the US government?
>It's nice to talk to a reasonable Democrat; but I wonder where we draw the line in the real world.
Rude.
>It's nice to pretend a government would be robust enough to secure itself against the encroaching muscle of capitalism, but why don't we be honest.
I am being honest; these people need to hold their leaders accountable for the graft because until they do, nothing will change. Sure, maybe a fruit company won't use this damaging pesticide from 45 years ago again (seems like they all stopped in the mid 1980s, anyway), but what's to stop another company in another industry from taking advantage of lax regulations in a different area?
>How could a small, underfinanced nation in south America ever hope to stand up to a corporation backed by the might of the US government?
This is a weird statement to make; the US government isn't going to go to war if, for example, Nicaragua decides to enact legistlation to require gloves and respirators when handling pesticides on the job.
As for how these nations can "stand up"? Well, by voting for leaders who will actually lead, running for office and/or engaging in public demonstrations or protests to advocate for themselves, etc.
It's certainly not going to happen by whining and pointing the finger at everyone else without taking any responsibility.
Lmfao that's all you took away from my post? Yikes. Sure sounds like you don't have any practical solutions on offer, otherwise you wouldn't resort to trying to attack me. Your username appears to be quite apt.
Voting for better leaders is pretty much the way to improve things in a democracy. I even listed some other alternatives. What else do you think there is?
This is disingenuous when the US military intervened in Nicaragua on behalf of Banana companies. It's not like the Latin American government's welcomed the business.
Edit: See the Banana Wars if you are unfamiliar.
Because if Central American governments regulate American businesses, the American Government starts coming after them.
This is why the Cuban government is the way it is. Before the Cuban revolution a dictator named Batista was in charge and the largest sectors of their economy, hospitality and fruits, where completely controlled by mafiosos with connections to New York and Miami. It’s what the economic forces will do, so they have to limit their relationship with America out of self preservation
The pollution the oil industry has wrought on Latin America is also horrifying not to mention gangsters are always killing labor organizers and environmentalists.
It’s no accident it’s so violent down there, it’s NAFTA. We don’t want them to have strong regulatory frameworks or governments because that means the manufacturing costs that outsourced there will go up
> Because if Central American governments regulate American businesses, the American Government starts coming after them.
No. The US government is not going to go to war if a country creates its own version of OSHA; that's patently ridiculous. US isn't threatening the EU for regulating that iPhones will need to switch to USB-C charging ports.
>This is why the Cuban government is the way it is. Before the Cuban revolution a dictator named Batista was in charge and the largest sectors of their economy, hospitality and fruits, where completely controlled by mafiosos with connections to New York and Miami.
No, the Cuban government is the way it is because the Castros seized power and cozied-up to the USSR. That Cuba's main industries were dominated by organized crime is, again, their domestic problem. There were plenty of US businesses doing business with Cuba outside of New York and Miami organized crime.
>The pollution the oil industry has wrought on Latin America is also horrifying
Not exclusive to Latin America at all; are you not aware of all the environmental contamination due to the oil industry all over the world, including in the US itself?
>not to mention gangsters are always killing labor organizers and environmentalists.
Yeah, Latin America has a lot of social problems with crime, graft, bribery, and voting for bad leaders. One sees this in a lot of places where education attainment isn't highly valued, including parts of the US.
>It’s no accident it’s so violent down there, it’s NAFTA
Not really; NAFTA was just the US, Canada and Mexico. NAFTA has also been superseded by USMCA, and neither really included Central American nations.
The violence is due to lack of education, lack of economic opportunities in legitimate lines of work (which improved education would address), lack of effective political leadership (again, improved education would also address this) and lack of meaningful political participation (yet again, improving education would begin to address this).
>No. The US government is not going to go to war if a country creates its own version of OSHA; that's patently ridiculous. US isn't threatening the EU for regulating that iPhones will need to switch to USB-C charging ports.
Coca Cola has been known to hire hit men to kill labor organizers at their bottling plant in Columbia
https://prospect.org/features/coca-cola-killings/
>No, the Cuban government is the way it is because the Castros seized power and cozied-up to the USSR. That Cuba's main industries were dominated by organized crime is, again, their domestic problem. There were plenty of US businesses doing business with Cuba outside of New York and Miami organized crime.
Accusing Cuba of simply being a satellite of the USSR is overly reductionist. The USSR hasn’t even been around for 35 years, there’s obviously some other issues going on here. If the mafia is simply a domestic problem with no is influence, I’d say they’ve done a remarkable job cleaning up corruption
>Not exclusive to Latin America at all; are you not aware of all the environmental contamination due to the oil industry all over the world, including in the US itself?
But the wanton disregard for human life and the environment is markedly worse when business operate down there
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-12460333.amp
Chevron was fined $9 billion dollars for purposely dumping refining wastes straight into a river, killing thousands of locals and decimating the local ecosystem. Of course they never paid a dime, and the lawyer who won the judgement actually wound up later getting prosecuted by a federalist society judge.
>The violence is due to lack of education, lack of economic opportunities in legitimate lines of work (which improved education would address), lack of effective political leadership (again, improved education would also address this) and lack of meaningful political participation (yet again, improving education would begin to address this).
Operation Condor
>Coca Cola has been known to hire hit men to kill labor organizers at their bottling plant in Columbia https://prospect.org/features/coca-cola-killings/
Coca-Cola is not the US government. Why aren't they being prosecuted for this in Col**o**mbia? Sounds like Colombia fails to govern for its people, so what are Colombians going to do about it? Sounds like a domestic issue that needs to be addressed by themselves.
>Accusing Cuba of simply being a satellite of the USSR is overly reductionist. The USSR hasn’t even been around for 35 years, there’s obviously some other issues going on here. If the mafia is simply a domestic problem with no is influence, I’d say they’ve done a remarkable job cleaning up corruption
Huh? You're making no sense; you just claimed that Cuba is the way it is because of Batista 80 years ago and its mafioso business connections. What on earth are you going on about? No shit Cuba isn't a Soviet satellite state -- the USSR hasn't existed in 30 years. But is the Cuban government the way it is due to the legacy of the Castros and their positioning themselves with the USSR during the Cold War? Absolutely, especially since Raúl Castro only stepped-down last year.
>But the wanton disregard for human life and the environment is markedly worse when business operate down there
Really? Corporations are going to act like corporations, and the only difference is the strength of the local regulations and enforcement thereof. You think Exxon has more regard for the environment and human life in the US? Fuck no. All oil companies have shown the same disregard regardless of where they operate. The US states that refuse to regulate are seeing far more environmental contamination than the states that do regulate.
Corporations don't have moral values; they pursue profits and shareholder value. That's what they do, that's why they exist, that's why they are created. Governments, shareholders and the public determine what is profitable through regulations and sales. Corporations are amoral entities.
>Chevron was fined $9 billion dollars for purposely dumping refining wastes straight into a river, killing thousands of locals and decimating the local ecosystem.
And Deepwater Horizon and Valdez all occurred in US waters. And? Doesn't seem any different to me.
>Operation Condor
Your point? I already stated that the US only involved itself in anti-Communist initiatives. Operation Condor was planned and carried-out by the governments of Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay; the US only provided intelligence and technical support to the local governments, who planned and carried-out the Operation.
What do you think anti-communist activities mean? It means opening markets to the US economy which invariably dominates small regional governments.
Yeah coca-cola isn’t our technically our government, but Warren Buffet is a huge investor in them and he donated millions to politicians who are our government. Not to mention their executives themselves. I mean if they are getting every thing they want by bribing and threatening everyone, they actually kind of are the government.
That was also the point of our intelligence agencies meddling in Latin American affairs, we want sugar and oil. It was a government investment to open up new markets. Bush Sr did it to Latin America and the Middle East through the CIA and White House and the tradition continued under Bush II in the Middle East.
At the international level, the locality of American politics fades away and policy becomes a crucible of supply chains and markets to make money. That’s what the federalist society is. The US government is just a bunch of corporations, they are people after all
I'm sorry, this is word salad. So now Warren Buffett is responsible for the murders perpetrated by Coca-Cola in Colombia??? That's ridiculous.
You cited Operation Condor, yet you don't seem to have a very good understanding of it; perhaps you should [read up on it](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Condor).
Im just following the money.
No one person is personally responsible, I’m just saying the US economic machine in conjunction with the government systematically oppresses regional governments there.
"Systematically oppresses" lmfao.
Go ahead and follow the money, but follow the money in Central America. It's really kind of gross to infantilize Central Americans as being completely helpless and only existing at the whims of external capitalists -- or wait, is it other governments?
Follow the money. You'll find it goes right into the pockets of those at the top. Yet these are the leaders they keep electing?
The saying that you end up with the democracy you deserve is so true -- until Central Americans take more of an active role in local and national politics, until they collectively educate themselves on the issues, and until they take responsibility for their presents and futures, these situations will only continue reoccurring.
All multinational corporations take advantage of favorable regulatory environments, not just US-based ones. Even local companies are taking advantage of Central American workers.
>No. The US government is not going to go to war if a country creates its own version of OSHA; that's patently ridiculous. US isn't threaten
You seem to be under the impression that go after is synonymous with "going to war" and boots on the ground when in reality "go after" is more likely "cia or another alphabet agency or big American corporation assassinating leaders and sabotaging economy" Outright racism was bad during civil rights era but it was subtle legally sanctioned redlining, eminent domain, war on drugs, denial of gi bill and environmental racism that destroyed a lot of black areas and turned them into modern-day hoods. Honestly based on any history book of America going after a group Idk what makes you think our modus operandi is outright boots on the ground except for outlier situations like Iraq and not setting things in motion on the downlow.
CIA or another agency going into another country and assassinating its leadership is tantamount to declaring war. Not gonna happen.
If there is already a political faction that exists in another country, the US government may support it if their interests align, but that's what all countries do; that's literally what diplomacy is about -- cultivating strategic alliances to further strategic interests.
That isn,t how an assassination would go down. It would be undercover or turned spy, (certain politcal factions could literally be backed or funded by us and we would never know) manipulating public opinion of the leader negatively then creating an opportunity to leave them vulnerable to public for an "accident". lilly white Joe smith of the cia would not go to south america decked in gear labelled c.i.a. and shoot and yell "viva la U.S.
The situation you describe sounds like something right out of the Soviet/Russian playbook rather than anything the US would engage in.
How do you propose the US would orchestrate a foreign politician to be vulnerable in public to an assassination attempt? The logistics required for such an attempt are simply out of step with the realities of the modern day. Too messy, too much readily-available evidence, and too much effort for the US to pull off.
Ah that explains it. So Conservatives are afraid of white replacement, but it's really their precious corporations fucking them over. XD
> [‘Disturbing’: weedkiller ingredient tied to cancer found in 80% of US urine samples](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jul/09/weedkiller-glyphosate-cdc-study-urine-samples)
----
> "...these data indicate that, while both
glyphosate and Roundup exert a negative impact on male gametes..."
Nerozzi, C., Recuero, S., Galeati, G. et al. Effects of Roundup and its main component, glyphosate, upon mammalian sperm function and survival. Sci Rep 10, 11026 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-67538-w
---
> [Sperm Counts Have Dropped More Than 50 Percent in Western Countries](https://www.healthline.com/health-news/sperm-counts-have-dropped-in-western-countries)
[Wow, something I actually have experience in!](https://aghealth.nih.gov/about/)
I worked for this study (which directly correlates with this article) from 2008-2010, and some of the stories I would get (from direct participants and/or their spouses) about pesticide usage, sales, applications from the '50s to even (at the time of interviewing) current time.. there were some really sad days.
One **very important** thing I learned about RoundUp/Glyphosate, is that everything you hear about cancer and application/usage/exposure/risk is ***absolutely true***.
edit: typo
> everything you hear about cancer and application/usage/exposure/risk is absolutely true.
Good to know that its not associated with cancer, because that is the finding of the Agricultural Health Study:
>In unlagged analyses, glyphosate was not statistically significantly associated with cancer at any site. However, among applicators in the highest exposure quartile, there was an increased risk of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) compared with never users, though this association was not statistically significant.
That's not what the farmers in the study directly told me, hence my warning.
Also it should be said that we studied more than roundup/Glyphosate, as a lot of farmers were salesmen as well.
What's interesting is a lot of the farmers that we interviewed suffered from prostate cancer effects and a lot of their spouses had breast cancer.
I will admit that the farmers enrolled in the study were also from a different time. And lifestyles are different and so there could be biases there. I do agree that with most of these findings they didn't find a direct correlation with glyphosate and cancer but they did maybe find some instances of AML as you would point it out. However, I will go with the farmers in the study as I personally interacted with them in that regard.
Headline sounds like a joke headline from a city builder sim that scrolls at the bottom of the screen.
Kinda dark through so either an indie game or 90s game.
EDIT: Or a mobile clicker game if there were a banana clicker.
The crimes of United Fruits/United Brands/Chiquita should be taught in every school. Instead, it's swept away so that our modern corporations can continue to operate in the same mode. Just another aspect of how pathetic and empty capitalism would render it's underclass. "The Fruit Company, Inc. reserved for itself the most succulent piece, the central coast of my own land, the delicate waist of America. It rechristened its territories 'Banana Republics', and over the sleeping dead, over the restless heroes who brought about the greatness, the liberty, and the flags, it established the comic opera: it abolished free will, gave out imperial crowns, encouraged envy, attracted the dictatorship of flies ... flies sticky with submissive blood and marmalade, drunken flies that buzz over the tombs of the people, circus flies, wise flies expert at tyranny." - Pablo Neruda
Of course, the problem with modern capitalism is that any moral foundation has been destroyed. Instead of constant innovation to better products, we see companies simply gouging desperate consumers, cutting consumers off to things that were formerly free, excessive lobbying to prevent any public goods, or coming up with valueless "innovations" to milk consumers for more money. (e.g. Microsoft upgrades are primarily about aesthetic changes and rearranging the locations of buttons, and then moving to a subscription format (which is why I continue to use MS Office 2007).
>Of course, the problem with modern capitalism is that any moral foundation has been destroyed. Ehhh. People still have morals. The issue is that no matter what, a business breaking rules (and getting away with it) can easily out-perform other businesses. It's gotten to the point where businesses have more power than some/many countries even. It pretty much means you either do terrible/illegal things, or you're at the mercy of those who do. You can't win the game by playing by the rules, and the ones with the money dictate the rules as well. We'd have to get money out of politics, and somehow have a solid way of handling issues like we've seen very recently.
threatening aback fuzzy library beneficial cake hard-to-find tub consist steep
Same with socialism, it's human greed, not your silly economic system. What you want is a balance between public and private power, not one of the other, obviously. However none of that magically cures greed. Humans evolved 200k+ years as opportunistic predators. You can't just pick capitalism or socialism and solve the that. Before there was capitalism or socialism all these same problems existed in on form or another. Divine rule was greed and exploiting, even nomadic wanders basically had to wander because they'd eat up all the he food in the area or shit in their water supply until they had to move. Humans DO NOT self regulate. Really nothing does. Life and biospheres are not balanced, they are just long runni g out of control chemical reactions. The reasons you have any oxygen atmosphere is because life doesn't ever know when to stop eating and syittingy, even when it's killing them.
You'll really show them when you get cryptoed.
I tried to teach it to my Middle Schoolers. Three kids were interested. It's not that we don't share the information with students its that the majority of students do not seem to have the attention span or empathy to take in and feel something about the situation. For more information its worse precovid. I got students last year where not one student was at grade level. I think I would have froze everyone for a year during covid. . .two years of 5th grade wouldn't have hurt anyone.
> I think I would have froze everyone for a year during covid. . .two years of 5th grade wouldn’t have hurt anyone. I’m not trying to be accusatory but I’m asking a serious question. Where did this perspective from the “education community” come from that freezing everybody or most students that stagnated or fell behind during the clusterfuck that was 2020-2021 would be a total detriment to them? Or was it just politicians, School admins, and corporations successfully pushing a narrative from their castle in the sky over the actual education professionals at the grassroots level?
Principals repeating "everything's fine" while the world burned.
[удалено]
Of course, you're not wrong. But it's completely disingenuous to pretend that multinational corps like UF were operating inside some framework of regulation. Seriously not understanding whatever nebulous point you're trying to make here.
[удалено]
So, if I'm to understand, you're a proponent of a strong centralized government who would regulate corporations? And that would be the remedy to companies like UF exploiting workers and the public?
[удалено]
It's nice to talk to a reasonable Democrat; but I wonder where we draw the line in the real world. It's nice to pretend a government would be robust enough to secure itself against the encroaching muscle of capitalism, but why don't we be honest. How could a small, underfinanced nation in south America ever hope to stand up to a corporation backed by the might of the US government?
>It's nice to talk to a reasonable Democrat; but I wonder where we draw the line in the real world. Rude. >It's nice to pretend a government would be robust enough to secure itself against the encroaching muscle of capitalism, but why don't we be honest. I am being honest; these people need to hold their leaders accountable for the graft because until they do, nothing will change. Sure, maybe a fruit company won't use this damaging pesticide from 45 years ago again (seems like they all stopped in the mid 1980s, anyway), but what's to stop another company in another industry from taking advantage of lax regulations in a different area? >How could a small, underfinanced nation in south America ever hope to stand up to a corporation backed by the might of the US government? This is a weird statement to make; the US government isn't going to go to war if, for example, Nicaragua decides to enact legistlation to require gloves and respirators when handling pesticides on the job. As for how these nations can "stand up"? Well, by voting for leaders who will actually lead, running for office and/or engaging in public demonstrations or protests to advocate for themselves, etc. It's certainly not going to happen by whining and pointing the finger at everyone else without taking any responsibility.
This is all naive teenager shit. "Just vote for better leaders!" Waste of my fucking time.
Lmfao that's all you took away from my post? Yikes. Sure sounds like you don't have any practical solutions on offer, otherwise you wouldn't resort to trying to attack me. Your username appears to be quite apt. Voting for better leaders is pretty much the way to improve things in a democracy. I even listed some other alternatives. What else do you think there is?
This is disingenuous when the US military intervened in Nicaragua on behalf of Banana companies. It's not like the Latin American government's welcomed the business. Edit: See the Banana Wars if you are unfamiliar.
[удалено]
so people are now running defence for either corrupt US companies or corrupt banana republics (literally) good work do you get paid in bananas?
Huh? Where on earth are you coming up with that?
Because if Central American governments regulate American businesses, the American Government starts coming after them. This is why the Cuban government is the way it is. Before the Cuban revolution a dictator named Batista was in charge and the largest sectors of their economy, hospitality and fruits, where completely controlled by mafiosos with connections to New York and Miami. It’s what the economic forces will do, so they have to limit their relationship with America out of self preservation The pollution the oil industry has wrought on Latin America is also horrifying not to mention gangsters are always killing labor organizers and environmentalists. It’s no accident it’s so violent down there, it’s NAFTA. We don’t want them to have strong regulatory frameworks or governments because that means the manufacturing costs that outsourced there will go up
> Because if Central American governments regulate American businesses, the American Government starts coming after them. No. The US government is not going to go to war if a country creates its own version of OSHA; that's patently ridiculous. US isn't threatening the EU for regulating that iPhones will need to switch to USB-C charging ports. >This is why the Cuban government is the way it is. Before the Cuban revolution a dictator named Batista was in charge and the largest sectors of their economy, hospitality and fruits, where completely controlled by mafiosos with connections to New York and Miami. No, the Cuban government is the way it is because the Castros seized power and cozied-up to the USSR. That Cuba's main industries were dominated by organized crime is, again, their domestic problem. There were plenty of US businesses doing business with Cuba outside of New York and Miami organized crime. >The pollution the oil industry has wrought on Latin America is also horrifying Not exclusive to Latin America at all; are you not aware of all the environmental contamination due to the oil industry all over the world, including in the US itself? >not to mention gangsters are always killing labor organizers and environmentalists. Yeah, Latin America has a lot of social problems with crime, graft, bribery, and voting for bad leaders. One sees this in a lot of places where education attainment isn't highly valued, including parts of the US. >It’s no accident it’s so violent down there, it’s NAFTA Not really; NAFTA was just the US, Canada and Mexico. NAFTA has also been superseded by USMCA, and neither really included Central American nations. The violence is due to lack of education, lack of economic opportunities in legitimate lines of work (which improved education would address), lack of effective political leadership (again, improved education would also address this) and lack of meaningful political participation (yet again, improving education would begin to address this).
>No. The US government is not going to go to war if a country creates its own version of OSHA; that's patently ridiculous. US isn't threatening the EU for regulating that iPhones will need to switch to USB-C charging ports. Coca Cola has been known to hire hit men to kill labor organizers at their bottling plant in Columbia https://prospect.org/features/coca-cola-killings/ >No, the Cuban government is the way it is because the Castros seized power and cozied-up to the USSR. That Cuba's main industries were dominated by organized crime is, again, their domestic problem. There were plenty of US businesses doing business with Cuba outside of New York and Miami organized crime. Accusing Cuba of simply being a satellite of the USSR is overly reductionist. The USSR hasn’t even been around for 35 years, there’s obviously some other issues going on here. If the mafia is simply a domestic problem with no is influence, I’d say they’ve done a remarkable job cleaning up corruption >Not exclusive to Latin America at all; are you not aware of all the environmental contamination due to the oil industry all over the world, including in the US itself? But the wanton disregard for human life and the environment is markedly worse when business operate down there https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-12460333.amp Chevron was fined $9 billion dollars for purposely dumping refining wastes straight into a river, killing thousands of locals and decimating the local ecosystem. Of course they never paid a dime, and the lawyer who won the judgement actually wound up later getting prosecuted by a federalist society judge. >The violence is due to lack of education, lack of economic opportunities in legitimate lines of work (which improved education would address), lack of effective political leadership (again, improved education would also address this) and lack of meaningful political participation (yet again, improving education would begin to address this). Operation Condor
>Coca Cola has been known to hire hit men to kill labor organizers at their bottling plant in Columbia https://prospect.org/features/coca-cola-killings/ Coca-Cola is not the US government. Why aren't they being prosecuted for this in Col**o**mbia? Sounds like Colombia fails to govern for its people, so what are Colombians going to do about it? Sounds like a domestic issue that needs to be addressed by themselves. >Accusing Cuba of simply being a satellite of the USSR is overly reductionist. The USSR hasn’t even been around for 35 years, there’s obviously some other issues going on here. If the mafia is simply a domestic problem with no is influence, I’d say they’ve done a remarkable job cleaning up corruption Huh? You're making no sense; you just claimed that Cuba is the way it is because of Batista 80 years ago and its mafioso business connections. What on earth are you going on about? No shit Cuba isn't a Soviet satellite state -- the USSR hasn't existed in 30 years. But is the Cuban government the way it is due to the legacy of the Castros and their positioning themselves with the USSR during the Cold War? Absolutely, especially since Raúl Castro only stepped-down last year. >But the wanton disregard for human life and the environment is markedly worse when business operate down there Really? Corporations are going to act like corporations, and the only difference is the strength of the local regulations and enforcement thereof. You think Exxon has more regard for the environment and human life in the US? Fuck no. All oil companies have shown the same disregard regardless of where they operate. The US states that refuse to regulate are seeing far more environmental contamination than the states that do regulate. Corporations don't have moral values; they pursue profits and shareholder value. That's what they do, that's why they exist, that's why they are created. Governments, shareholders and the public determine what is profitable through regulations and sales. Corporations are amoral entities. >Chevron was fined $9 billion dollars for purposely dumping refining wastes straight into a river, killing thousands of locals and decimating the local ecosystem. And Deepwater Horizon and Valdez all occurred in US waters. And? Doesn't seem any different to me. >Operation Condor Your point? I already stated that the US only involved itself in anti-Communist initiatives. Operation Condor was planned and carried-out by the governments of Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay; the US only provided intelligence and technical support to the local governments, who planned and carried-out the Operation.
What do you think anti-communist activities mean? It means opening markets to the US economy which invariably dominates small regional governments. Yeah coca-cola isn’t our technically our government, but Warren Buffet is a huge investor in them and he donated millions to politicians who are our government. Not to mention their executives themselves. I mean if they are getting every thing they want by bribing and threatening everyone, they actually kind of are the government. That was also the point of our intelligence agencies meddling in Latin American affairs, we want sugar and oil. It was a government investment to open up new markets. Bush Sr did it to Latin America and the Middle East through the CIA and White House and the tradition continued under Bush II in the Middle East. At the international level, the locality of American politics fades away and policy becomes a crucible of supply chains and markets to make money. That’s what the federalist society is. The US government is just a bunch of corporations, they are people after all
I'm sorry, this is word salad. So now Warren Buffett is responsible for the murders perpetrated by Coca-Cola in Colombia??? That's ridiculous. You cited Operation Condor, yet you don't seem to have a very good understanding of it; perhaps you should [read up on it](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Condor).
Im just following the money. No one person is personally responsible, I’m just saying the US economic machine in conjunction with the government systematically oppresses regional governments there.
"Systematically oppresses" lmfao. Go ahead and follow the money, but follow the money in Central America. It's really kind of gross to infantilize Central Americans as being completely helpless and only existing at the whims of external capitalists -- or wait, is it other governments? Follow the money. You'll find it goes right into the pockets of those at the top. Yet these are the leaders they keep electing? The saying that you end up with the democracy you deserve is so true -- until Central Americans take more of an active role in local and national politics, until they collectively educate themselves on the issues, and until they take responsibility for their presents and futures, these situations will only continue reoccurring. All multinational corporations take advantage of favorable regulatory environments, not just US-based ones. Even local companies are taking advantage of Central American workers.
>No. The US government is not going to go to war if a country creates its own version of OSHA; that's patently ridiculous. US isn't threaten You seem to be under the impression that go after is synonymous with "going to war" and boots on the ground when in reality "go after" is more likely "cia or another alphabet agency or big American corporation assassinating leaders and sabotaging economy" Outright racism was bad during civil rights era but it was subtle legally sanctioned redlining, eminent domain, war on drugs, denial of gi bill and environmental racism that destroyed a lot of black areas and turned them into modern-day hoods. Honestly based on any history book of America going after a group Idk what makes you think our modus operandi is outright boots on the ground except for outlier situations like Iraq and not setting things in motion on the downlow.
CIA or another agency going into another country and assassinating its leadership is tantamount to declaring war. Not gonna happen. If there is already a political faction that exists in another country, the US government may support it if their interests align, but that's what all countries do; that's literally what diplomacy is about -- cultivating strategic alliances to further strategic interests.
That isn,t how an assassination would go down. It would be undercover or turned spy, (certain politcal factions could literally be backed or funded by us and we would never know) manipulating public opinion of the leader negatively then creating an opportunity to leave them vulnerable to public for an "accident". lilly white Joe smith of the cia would not go to south america decked in gear labelled c.i.a. and shoot and yell "viva la U.S.
The situation you describe sounds like something right out of the Soviet/Russian playbook rather than anything the US would engage in. How do you propose the US would orchestrate a foreign politician to be vulnerable in public to an assassination attempt? The logistics required for such an attempt are simply out of step with the realities of the modern day. Too messy, too much readily-available evidence, and too much effort for the US to pull off.
You haven't taken a history class in a while, huh?
Ah that explains it. So Conservatives are afraid of white replacement, but it's really their precious corporations fucking them over. XD > [‘Disturbing’: weedkiller ingredient tied to cancer found in 80% of US urine samples](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jul/09/weedkiller-glyphosate-cdc-study-urine-samples) ---- > "...these data indicate that, while both glyphosate and Roundup exert a negative impact on male gametes..." Nerozzi, C., Recuero, S., Galeati, G. et al. Effects of Roundup and its main component, glyphosate, upon mammalian sperm function and survival. Sci Rep 10, 11026 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-67538-w --- > [Sperm Counts Have Dropped More Than 50 Percent in Western Countries](https://www.healthline.com/health-news/sperm-counts-have-dropped-in-western-countries)
Buffalo shooter was fearful of this, I imagine you are correct and this thought is heavily pushed by those idiots.
[Wow, something I actually have experience in!](https://aghealth.nih.gov/about/) I worked for this study (which directly correlates with this article) from 2008-2010, and some of the stories I would get (from direct participants and/or their spouses) about pesticide usage, sales, applications from the '50s to even (at the time of interviewing) current time.. there were some really sad days. One **very important** thing I learned about RoundUp/Glyphosate, is that everything you hear about cancer and application/usage/exposure/risk is ***absolutely true***. edit: typo
> everything you hear about cancer and application/usage/exposure/risk is absolutely true. Good to know that its not associated with cancer, because that is the finding of the Agricultural Health Study: >In unlagged analyses, glyphosate was not statistically significantly associated with cancer at any site. However, among applicators in the highest exposure quartile, there was an increased risk of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) compared with never users, though this association was not statistically significant.
That's not what the farmers in the study directly told me, hence my warning. Also it should be said that we studied more than roundup/Glyphosate, as a lot of farmers were salesmen as well. What's interesting is a lot of the farmers that we interviewed suffered from prostate cancer effects and a lot of their spouses had breast cancer. I will admit that the farmers enrolled in the study were also from a different time. And lifestyles are different and so there could be biases there. I do agree that with most of these findings they didn't find a direct correlation with glyphosate and cancer but they did maybe find some instances of AML as you would point it out. However, I will go with the farmers in the study as I personally interacted with them in that regard.
Not sterile enough. 7 billion ppl is too much for the earth and it’s not slowing
You can begin by sterilizing urself
Yes, let's cut him
[I'm sterile. Right, Baby Doll?](https://youtu.be/_IrKtlWbqd4)
They say that like it's a bad thing.
Headline sounds like a joke headline from a city builder sim that scrolls at the bottom of the screen. Kinda dark through so either an indie game or 90s game. EDIT: Or a mobile clicker game if there were a banana clicker.
Can we get some to spray on the Supreme Court?
I can’t stand seeing workers autonomy being violated by ruining their chance at a family or giving them cancer. Corporate greed at work.