Why does Venezuela look so much like Nicaragua (1950s), Iran (1953), and Cuba (1960s)? Because, according to Stephen Kinzer (The Brothers) "Allen Dulles, head of the CIA was "indeed a thing apart." With the approval of Eisenhower, John Foster Dulles, gave 'Kim' Roosevelt an assignment never before given to an American intelligence officer: carte blanche to "overthrow a government"--beginning with Iran 1953.  President "Mossadegh was a trusting soul, unwise to the ways of the covert world, and never imagined that a CIA officer was in Iran directing" his overthrow.  "He presumed that the shah had been behind it, and with the shah gone the danger was past.  He relaxed security restrictions and released prisoners"--and the rest is (American denied) history.

'Newsweek' Journalist Was At Venezuelan Military Base During Raid


Rachel Martin talks to Carlos Flores, contributing writer at Newsweek En Espanol, who gives an eyewitness account of a recent raid of a military base in Venezuela.


Is Venezuela Inching Toward The End Of Democracy?


August 1, 20174:29 PM ET

In Venezuela, the arrest of opposition politicians overnight mark a shift towards dictatorship.

NPR's Audie Cornish talks with William Dobson, NPR's chief international editor, about how Venezuela reached this tipping point. And she speaks with a Venezuelan man in Caracas about what daily life looks like amid the protests and what his concerns are now.

Lothrop Stoddard (The Rising Tide of Color) gives an answer to why the CIA destroys democratically elected governments worldwide, especially in Latin America. "The menace of Bolshevism (Communism) is simply incalculable.  Bolshevism is a peril in some ways unprecedented in the world's history.  It is not merely a war against a social system, not merely a war against our civilization; it is a war of the hand against the brain. ...Bolshevism's cardinal tenets--the dictatorship of the proletariat, and the destruction of the 'classes' by social war--are of truly hideous import.  The 'classes,' as conceived by Bolshevism, are very numerous. ...

Bolshevism has vowed the proletarianization of the world, beginning with the white peoples.  To this end it not only foments social revolution within the white world itself, but it also seeks to enlist the colored races in its grand assault on civilization.  The rulers of Soviet Russia are well aware of the profound ferment now going on in colored lands. ...

Accordingly, in every quarter of the globe, in Asia, Africa, Latin America, and the United states, Bolshevik agitators whisper in the ears of discontented colored men their gospel of hatred and revenge.  Every nationalist aspiration, every political grievance, every social discrimination, is fuel for Bolshevism's hellish incitement to racial as well as to class war.

And this Bolshevik propaganda has not been in vain.  Its results already show in the most diverse quarters, and they are ominous for the future.  China, Japan, Afghanistan, India, Java, Persia, Turkey, Egypt, Brazil, Chile, Peru, Mexico, and the 'black belts' of our own United States: here is a partial list of the lands where the Bolshevik leaven in color is clearly at work.

Bolshevism thus reveals itself as the arch-enemy of civilization and the race.  Bolshevism is the renegade, the traitor within the gates, who would betray the citadel, degrade the very fiber of our being, and ultimately hurl a re-barbarized, racially impoverished world into the most debased and hopeless of mongrelizations.

Therefore, Bolshevism must be crushed out with iron heels, no matter what the cost.  If this means more war, let it mean more war.  We know only too well war's dreadful toll particularly on racial values.  But what war-losses could compare with the losses inflicted by the living death of Bolshevism? There are some things worse than war, and Bolshevism stands foremost among those dread alternatives.

Weakened and impoverished by [WWI]; handicapped by an unconstructive peace, and facing internal Bolshevist disaffection which must at all costs be mastered, the white world is ill-prepared to confront--the rising tide of color."

Kinzer posits, "Eisenhower wrote in his diary that Mossadegh's fall had been a 'serious defeat' for the Soviets--"Genuinely [believing] that Russia was poised to enter Iran in 1953, and that only the CIA had prevented a Communist victory."

Guatemala's downfall was similar to Iran (1953) President Truman--defending the interest of United Fruit, "authorized initial planning for a CIA coup.  Thomas McCann recalled, "Guatemala's government was the region's weakest, most corrupt, and most pliable, then something went wrong: a man named Jacobo Arbenz became president."

On March 15, 1951, Arbenz stood before a cheering crowd and in his inaugural address committed himself to "three fundamental objectives: to convert our country from a dependent nation with a semi-colonial economy to an economically independent country.  To convert Guatemala from a backward country with a predominantly feudal economy into a modern capitalist state; and to make this transformation in a way that will raise the standard of living of the great mass of our people. . . .Foreign capital will always be welcome as long as it adjusts to local conditions, remains always subordinate to Guatemalan laws, cooperates with economic development of the country, and strictly abstains from intervening in the nation's social and political life."

"Short of proclaiming himself a Bolshevik, Arbenz could have said little that would so effectively provoke the wrath of Americans committed to defending transnational capitalism."

Once Eisenhower was elected and "chose Foster and Allen Dulles to design and carry out his foreign policy, the die was cast.  Arbenz became the second monster [after Mossadegh] they went abroad to destroy."

Castro's Cuba was up next, but the CIA "had enough experience to recognize the considerable differences between Guatemala in 1954 and Cuba in 1960."

However, "one of Castro's closest comrades, the Argentine-born guerrilla Che Guevara, had been in Guatemala in 1954 and witnessed the coup against Arbenz.  Later he told Castro why it succeeded.  He said Arbenz had foolishly tolerated an open society, which the CIA penetrated and subverted, and also preserved the existing army, which the CIA turned into its instrument.  Castro agreed that a revolutionary regime in Cuba must avoid those mistakes.  Upon taking power, he cracked down on dissent and purged the army.  Many Cubans supported his regime and were ready to defend it.  All of this made the prospect of deposing him daunting [and impossible]."

Both Chavez and Maduro made Arbenz's sociopolitical mistakes as is now evident in Venezuela's fall to CIA machinations.


Americans see themselves as benevolent overlords, concerned with "human rights & the rule of law."  In reality the United States is an imperial--neocolonialist nation, which Solomon (War Made Easy) attests: the US is "careful to downplay or bypass the "horrendous deeds of allies" violation of human rights and the rule of law, "such as Turkey."  Jack Woddis (An Introduction to Neo-Colonialism) explains that for the United States, the method of controlling a country without exercising direct political rule [neocolonialism] has been a long-standing one.  For decades American imperialism pulled the strings in Liberia, determined its policies and ran its economy.  The entire constitutional system was modeled on that of the United States, and the Liberian currency was based on the dollar.

It was above all in Latin America, however, that the United States fashioned and practiced this tactic.  Outwardly Mexicans ruled Mexico, Venezuelans ruled Venezuela" and so on.  And it was the same in all twenty Latin American republics.  Outwardly they were independent--and constitutionally speaking they were independent in fact.  But real power was not in the hands of the people of these countries.  It resided firmly in Wall Street and Washington, acting through a most fearsome and corrupt brood of dictators, cum presidents."

United States ambassadors have acted as all-powerful monarchs, [viceroys],  Imposing their 'advice' on nominally independent governments.  This economic and political power has been backed up by military power, U.S. military services and instructors often playing a key role in the military services of the Latin American countries, which are tied to military aid programs, agreements and alliances.

Before 1945 disguised forms of colonial domination were only practiced in a minority of territories, mainly in Latin America, and only partially in the Middle East, Asia and Africa.  Today however, so headlong has been the retreat of direct colonial rule that it can be said that neo-colonialism has now become the dominant form and is no longer the exception.

The term, in fact, though it describes a strategy of imperialism and not a new stage, can only be understood as a strategy which has become predominant in a particular new phase of imperialism.

Venezuelan Election Looms Amid Fears of Dictatorship


Views: 47

Comment by mary gravitt on August 12, 2017 at 10:49am

The problem with Venezuela is that Chevez did not close off his socialist country from the US, thus the CIA.  Why are Americans so worried about dictatorship in Latin America when we have a dictator in Washington D.C.  If not a dictator, an insane man who is against everything Obama and who requires 50 pages of printed adoration from his fans.  This is the insanity that the Nazis required in order to stay in power.  Even the men that could take Trump's place are worst than him.  This is why the CIA has not booted Trump out of office.  Now his rhetoric threatens to bring on the 4th World War--one the US as well as Asia may not survive.  This should be reason to worry about our own country and not worry about how the Venezuelan people select their government.

Comment by mary gravitt on August 12, 2017 at 10:59am

The CIA had better come back home from overthrowing Venezuelan government  and rescue US government from the 4-front war that Donald Trump under the influence of Steve Bannon is cooking up. 

Comment by mary gravitt on August 17, 2017 at 11:13am

The Afghan War will be privatized on Friday.  This is why Pence has to rush back to Camp David, a spot way below Trump's standards, to plot out the details with Erik Prince.  Was Pence's name Jerry Mahoney in his past life?


You need to be a member of Our Salon to add comments!

Join Our Salon


A Body of Work

Posted by Rosigami on July 18, 2018 at 3:47pm 3 Comments


Posted by The Songbird on July 17, 2018 at 11:00pm 4 Comments

Can You See What I See?

Posted by Ron Powell on July 16, 2018 at 11:30am 1 Comment

© 2018   Created by lorianne.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service