Abstract Leftism Leaves Bolivia And The Global South In Imperialist Crosshairs

| Strategize!

Above Photo: From Blackagendareport.com

The phony US Left specializes in finding excuses to betray victims of US imperialism.

“It apparently does not matter to liberals that the forced takeover in Bolivia is unconstitutional and US support for it is a flagrant violation of international law.”

“Progressive leftists” in the U.S., also known as liberals who claim to oppose U.S. Empire but tolerate all of its crimes, cannot be described as anything less than nauseating. Anything short of outright U.S. military invasion or bombing of a country is not worthy of their public condemnation, much less their activism.

As explained  by the Black Alliance for Peace, “The silence, lack of visible opposition, and outright support for the coup [in Bolivia] from across the Western world is yet another example of the cross-class white supremacist commitment to the imperialist project.”

There are many examples of this but the most recent is the U.S. backed coup in Bolivia. The contradictions in liberal justifications for not vehemently opposing what is nothing short of a US backed coup against a popular government can be examined with Bolivia as a case study.

“Anything short of outright U.S. military invasion or bombing of a country is not worthy of their public condemnation.”

The primary obligation of anti-imperialists who are not Bolivian and reside in the belly of the beast should be to expose and oppose US imperialism in Bolivia, and it’s pervasive and extra-impactful U.S. covert and overt foreign policies. This must include the role of corporate news media that works as the fourth branch of the US government.

All of which is interestingly and conspicuously missing from liberal discourse about Bolivia and from the analysis of Pablo Solón , a Bolivian who served in the Evo Morales government until parting of ways in 2011 and whose analysis is used by non-Bolivian progressives to validate their abstinence from an unequivocal stand against the coup.

One would think as a progressive Bolivian Solón should be very concerned about US led regime change in Bolivia, no matter what he thinks of Evo Morales or that administration. One Truthout article  by Marjorie Cohn details several critical issues ignored by Pablo Solón. Since those who have taken over the government represent the racist, ultra-right, Solón’s positions ring as even more bizarre.

“Corporate news media works as the fourth branch of the US government.”

He in fact legitimizes baseless accusations about the election process and the results, which have been clearly refuted in a revealing report by The Center for Economic and Policy Research: “What Happened in Bolivia’s 2019 Vote ,Count? The Role of the OAS Electoral Observation Mission .”

Solón ignores the corrupt role of the OAS (OEA) in publishing false propaganda against not just Bolivia but against all of Latin American and the Caribbean.

Haiti is a prime example, although not the only one where the OAS has proven itself as an institution for rubber stamping imperialist interests. Regarding Bolivia, Solón actually legitimizes the role of the OAS, repeating its claims that “The rapid count [in the October election] was stopped inexplicably the day of the election.” While no explanation was given for why it was stopped, the fact that the election’s rapid count was not the official counting process [and regardless was eventually completed and released], it is reasonable to have stopped it because the privately-operated count was being used to falsely imply voting fraud in the middle of the process.

“The OAS has proven itself as an institution for rubber stamping imperialist interests.”

In the end the results of both the unofficial quick count and the official count proved to bear no significant difference. It apparently does not matter to liberals that the forced takeover in Bolivia is unconstitutional and US support for it is a flagrant violation of international law.

US liberals also typically like to buttress arguments that reduce political dynamics to an individual, in this case Evo Morales. This not only over simplifies situations but conveniently sets up principled anti-imperialist to be mischaracterized as romanticizing and hero worshiping a leader.

It also avoids having to more accurately assess various internal and external factors and elements in the struggle for power.

An example is Solón saying the “reactionary right have celebrated the protests” even though this reactionary right have always been far more involved in illegally deposing Morales than such a spectator role suggests.

His passing reference to the ultra-rightist, Eurocentric multimillionaire Luis Fernando Camacho was only to mention his affiliation in order to demonstrate the diversity in the opposition to Morales. Yet Camacho’s leading role in the coup is even recognized by Western media and the media watchdog FAIR has demonstrated how such media has sanitized the image of Camacho and the other major coup players.

“Camacho’s leading role in the coup is even recognized by Western media.”

The US liberal left and Pablo Solón align with imperialist propaganda that basically blames Evo Morales for the right wing coup against himself. Sometimes they cast doubt on whether the forced resignation of Morales by the military was even a coup at all.

The principled obligation of explaining the machinations of imperialism in Bolivia are dismissed as conspiracy theories when the real conspiracy theory is the one that fraud somehow changed election results in favor of Morales.

No one has explained how hundreds of tally sheets could have been uploaded to the electoral authority, using hundreds of cell phones, from all over the country, in the presence of electoral observers (including from opposition parties). And apparently they would have needed to do this twice: once during the quick count, and once during the official count, since both counts were so similar.

“Sometimes they cast doubt on whether the forced resignation of Morales by the military was even a coup at all.

Anti-imperialists’ prioritize concerns about the pervasive machinations of US imperialism in Bolivia and the world that seem to go unchallenged by too many US liberals who consider themselves against US Empire.

When there is any internal discrepancy within a leftist government fighting neocolonialism — and there are always discrepancies since nothing is perfect — liberals always use those as an excuse for a bizarre blame-the-victim position. And the victim is not just Evo Morales but all Black and Brown working class people who right now are on the receiving end in the global battle against intersecting white supremacy, capitalism, and patriarchy.

If the people in a country don’t have all their internal items in order, they can expect no support against imperialism from US liberals. Only a spotlight of criticism on the country’s internal contradictions that cannot exist in a vacuum.

Liberals always take a bizarre blame-the-victim position.”

It is of no importance that “[d]uring Morales ’s nearly 14 years in office, his Movement Towards Socialism (MAS) party reduced poverty by 42 percent and extreme poverty by 60 percent. It cut unemployment by 50 percent and nearly tripled the per-capita G.D.P. “It’s indisputable that Bolivians are healthier, wealthier, better educated, living longer and more equal than at any time in this South American nation’s history,” Anthony Faiola wrote in The Washington Post.”

One has to wonder about the naivete of the US liberal left. Do they really think after centuries of US and Western European domination that the global ruling elite would leave things over to the “agency” of the people? As if they would just stop their own agenda of covert sabotage operations. And what sort of inferiority and superiority complexes are entailed in suggesting that once left in power formerly colonized just do themselves in?

“MAS reduced poverty by 42 percent and extreme poverty by 60 percent.”

Evidence of US complicity in the coup in Bolivia has been laid out for liberals but classic cognitive dissonance, as explained by Frantz Fanon, creates a blindspot.

The right wing governments in Latin America are maneuvering to consolidate a united front against the leftist governments and leftist aspirations inside the rightist countries. The US government has promised assistance to Bolivia, Colombia, Chile, and Ecuador to keep down the mass protests in those countries. And these same countries, along with Brazil, have also conspired in travel bans with extradition agreements within their borders against Venezuelan officials that include President Nicholas Maduro.

This combination of travel ban with extradition agreements recalls the 2013 force down of Bolivian President Evo Morales’s plane due to denial of airspace by France, Spain and Portugal, then followed by Morales’ 14-hour confinement while in Austria with authorities there demanding to “inspect” his aircraft for the “fugitive” Edward Snowden.

Another incident of gangsterism that was met with silence by liberals.

In the Black Alliance for Peace we are clear that “political subversion, killer sanctions, drone death from the skies, mass incarceration, genocide, slavery, white supremacist ideology, ecocide, social degradation, and dehumanization characterize the policies and character of the hegemonic Pan-European colonial/capitalist white supremacist patriarchy and the reasons why for the sake of our collective humanity it must be defeated.”

  • subcomandante Felix

    This straw man argument says more about the authentic U.S. big “L” Left than the
    muddled analysis of the Bolivian coup presented here. Who is this “phony US Left” and by what stretch of a fevered imagination is Pablo Salon representative of it? By the way, who is Pablo Salon and why is he representative anyone, left, center, right or progressive? To conflate U.S. “progressive leftists” with “liberals” illustrates just how confused this analysis is. Unfortunately, it also illustrates the penchant of the U.S. small “l” left to throw verbal hand grenades just to hear the bang (in lieu of rigorous analysis and accuracy). Of greater concern, to both the small “l” and big “L” U.S. left should be the tendency to present the coup against Evo Morales and his MAS party as black and white, good versus evil. This has been sadly reflected in a kind of left-media Stalinism, where most analysis is the same and any criticism of Evo and the MAS is equated with support of the coup. This kind of faux analysis of the Bolivian coup and the actions of the MAS government that led up to it has its costs and it is the indigenous peoples – particularly women – that have paid most dearly.

  • Jon

    Very well stated! The “liberal” facade is breaking as the political earthquake tremors of the dialectical process begin.

  • Jon

    The lessons of history abound: 1871 Paris Commune, post WW2 Korea, 1953 Iran, 1954 Guatemala, 1965 Indonesia, 1973 Chile to mention just a few. Beyond ruthless repression.

  • Ken Meyercord

    “US liberals also typically like to buttress arguments that reduce political dynamics to an individual, in this case Evo Morales. This not only over simplifies situations but conveniently sets up principled anti-imperialist to be mischaracterized as romanticizing and hero worshiping a leader.” – Who do you have in mind? I can think of several people with whom you collaborate quite closely who fit the bill; i.e., while deploring US interventions, they invariably identify the leader of whatever country is the unfortunate victim du jour as reprehensible, e.g., Assad, Qaddafi, Morales, et al. Only Castro got a pass and, with some, even with him their approval was qualified. Most Americans, only obtusely aware of or interested in foreign affairs, hearing the criticism of the “dictator”, “strongman”, “authoritarian leader” tune out to the more salient part of the discourse. Hence, such folk’s “anti-imperialist” stance is counter-productive, as you astutely point out.