Bitter Fruit
The introduction of the Banana seems such a minor thing that would cause such a stir in the world. This story seems to follow a familiar path. Those with power find something that they want and figure out a way to get what they want. They hide behind (while there may be some truth to what they say) the thought that they are doing good for the country who is being "be-sieged" in the long run. A thought comes to mind regarding something that John Maynard Keynes said, "In the long run, we're all dead".
Regardless, the notion that anyone thought that taking advantage of a people would continue unchallenged for a long time seems ridiculous. As such when Jacobo Arbenz became president, it didn't surprise to hear what happened next. He wanted more and those who had "Given so much already" became offended and suddenly became very interested in the letter of the law. Convenient.
What else I thought was almost funny in a way was the language that was used in chapter 11, the final countdown. I remember in high school history course my teacher talking about ww2 and the american entrance into the war and the quote from the president at the time.. " I want in, but I need an excuse". This seemed to be echoed by the sentiment of the Secretary of State in the first paragraph.
Also, the US' complete disregard for international law regarding the shipments to Guatemala or around the waters seemed almost funny in a way.
The entire story seemed almost ridiculous to believe. That a western government, the supposed leaders of the free world and proponents of democracy, would plan/back/be involved in a coup in order to protect some bananas.. interesting..
I acknowledge that this is all written by an American journalist and another gentleman involved in the UN and as such may not be entirely accurate.
tag: target="_blank">last301

1 Comments:
I found the whole story a little absurb and melodramatic at times as well. But lets not forget the reverberations of McCarthyism and the growing anti-Communist sentiment at that time. Bananas merely ignited the putsch, after that the US continually advanced, tightening their grip on the country to prevent a Communist takeover. During Armas' last days his rhetoric became so mechanical as a blatantly contrived justification for any violent repression. Page 235: workers protest the new anti-union laws and he declares a state of siege. I wonder to what extent the people doubted the Communist argument since there was probably very little official, or radical Communist organization/plottiing happening at the time. Armas' statement that "Communist agitators have prepared a conspiracy and it has become indispensable to adopt severe and drastic means of repressing it", seems so obviously fabricated given the authors account of the social climate of that time. The whole story really made me wonder to what extent we're being lied to today. I can't wait to look back on this time in 30 years and see which conspiracies were right on the mark!
Post a Comment
<< Home