Legend of the Ronny

[JayB]

This absurd victim-narrative would be more compelling if a region in which the same dynamics were in play - long history of domination by colonial powers, extreme underdevelopment relative to Western industrial powers, even greater poverty, far fewer natural resources, etc - hadn't lifted a few hundred million people out of poverty and captured a significant fraction of the global manufacturing economy in far less time than it took the conglomeration of retards running South America to devastate their own economies.

 

It's still more amusing to contemplate how the authors would account for the rise of the US as the world's foremost economic power between the time of the first settlements and the late 19th century.

 

The fact of the matter is that South Americans either scared away foreign capital with asset seizures/nationalization, used protectionism to lock out the capital that they couldn't scare off, and bankrupted themselves with staggeringly idiotic policies like "Import Substitution Industrialization." The latter of which made about as much sense as Saudi Arabia refusing to exchange oil for rice and trying to grow it in the desert instead. In addition to negating any comparative advantage that they may have had, their new economic policies provided opportunities for politically inspired patronage and rent-seeking. This took them from also-rans in the realm of corruption to world-beaters in this category.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[ashw_justin]

Oh Ronny, those were the days, eh?

WUEnvRz7JW0

 

 

"Freedom from the threat of the bomb"? Whose bomb would that be again? And such a gracious actor, even spelling out the lefties' surrendermonkey agenda for them. :swoon: :swoon:

 

Sorry, trying to get the thread back on track here

[Fairweather]

True then. True today. Good find, Justin.

[olyclimber]

comparing reagan's orating skillz to the current prez makes me weep

[Fairweather]

No denyin' that.

[olyclimber]

there was a clip on the radio today where they played sound clips of all the current major presidential candidates so you could guess which voice went to which person....and I heard one and was surprised by the tenor of a african american voice! yes, there is a black man running for president! i forgot it was so.

[Fairweather]

Gotta admit I like listening to Obama speak. Too bad it all falls apart when I actually hear what he's saying.

[underworld]

he's not black enough, remember...

[ashw_justin]

This absurd victim-narrative would be more compelling if a region in which the same dynamics were in play - long history of domination by colonial powers, extreme underdevelopment relative to Western industrial powers, even greater poverty, far fewer natural resources, etc - hadn't lifted a few hundred million people out of poverty and captured a significant fraction of the global manufacturing economy in far less time than it took the conglomeration of retards running South America to devastate their own economies.

Actually the most (perhaps the only) surprising thing about Galeano's diatribe was that this contrast was directly addressed, with clear envy for the United States' ability to assert its right to economic independence from the colonial empire. As one would expect he says nothing of the revolutionary spirit, and instead chalks it up to a relative lack of external economic pressure in North America, due to the relative dearth of immediately exploitable natural resources coupled to a lack of a native civilization large enough to enslave for the extraction of said resources had they been found. But one could consider how things could have happened differently in North America if the colonies had been sitting on a literal gold mine.

 

In any case it is truly sad that the South American people did and continue to roll over into submission when confronted with foreign money or violence (whichever happens to be speaking louder at any given time).

 

The fact of the matter is that South Americans either scared away foreign capital with asset seizures/nationalization, used protectionism to lock out the capital that they couldn't scare off, and bankrupted themselves with staggeringly idiotic policies like "Import Substitution Industrialization." The latter of which made about as much sense as Saudi Arabia refusing to exchange oil for rice and trying to grow it in the desert instead. In addition to negating any comparative advantage that they may have had, their new economic policies provided opportunities for politically inspired patronage and rent-seeking. This took them from also-rans in the realm of corruption to world-beaters in this category.

They haven't and will never have a chance as long as they never produce anything. While the only nationals that see even a penny of return for opening up their countries to foreign "investment" are the exceedingly few aristocratic politicians who are willing to sell out their countries' futures in exchange for their own immediate personal gain, I fail to see how a country in such a position stands to lose anything by attempting to foster a competitive domestic economy.

 

ps. here we observe a depiction of the American Colonists protesting economic protectionism, by putting tea back onto the boat of a British tradeship that has come to grace them with cheap foreign goods.

 

[Fairweather]

Of the three main Democrat nominees, he has the most honor. The only folks I've hear spewing the "ain't black enough" line are the Sharpton/Jackson/Wrangel types.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

comparing reagan's orating skillz to the current prez makes me weep

 

listen to some tapes of Teddie Roosevelt, or FDR, or Truman, JFK, etc. yes, we've dropped to the lowest common denominator.

 

[JosephH]

The history of Latin and South America was written long before Columbus sailed. That history began and remains one largely based on resource extraction. Period. Various interests over 500 years have seeked ot control the export of those resources, but get real, that's the name of the game. That local interests attempt to take control of the machinery after 500 years should be no surprise. That they then have to focus primarily on assuming and consolidating power to stave off long-entrenched interests as opposed to focusing on the well-being and productive potential of their countries should also be no surprise at all.

 

Swapping the captain and officers out for locals, while possibly comforting or discomforting, depending on your economic interests, in reality changes little about a country's prospects for meaningful change. It's a big leap for a Peru or a Venezuela to become a Brasil - hell, Brazil barely managed to became Brazil and still has to fight relentlessly to keep the momentum going towards a growing industrial base and self-sufficiency.

 

The idea that the glowing after-effects and legacy of hundreds of years of colonial rule is simply a matter of victimal self-persecution is about on par with claiming racial discrimmination no longer exists in the US. It's a joke. The fact that countries like Australia struggle (poorly) to escape an economic future largely dependent on continuing resource extraction well-illustrates the challenges facing Latin and South American (or African) nations.

 

A little tale. I used to know the head of DECs office in Perth. When I was working in Asia one winter and thinking about heading down that way for a spell near Margaret River I gave him a call and said, "Andrew, how goes it down there? What do you guys have going on?" Andrew responded, "well mate, we buy shovels and trucks from the Japanese, dig up Western Australia, and put it on boats for Japan where they make shovels and trucks out of it. I keep suggesting we drive it to the coast and make something out of it ourselves, but they all think I'm crazy."

 

Again, Swapping the captain and officers out for locals is fun, but changing a Titanic's course is a different deal altogether - power would have to shift from those in supporting resource extraction on a more or less permanent basis so that the role of acquired power is no longer solely preoccupied with merely sustaining itself and can focus on more productive proclivities. Seldom does an alternative regime sustain power in post colonial states long enough to even consolidate power let alone leverage it in any meaningful way. Destabilization isn't just a hobby, it's an indelible strategic planning line item and has been all along - resource extraction demands it.

 

You would think stable societies and economies would be more efficiently exploited, but given the choice of creating more Saudi Royal families versus dealing with endless chaos in Nigeria - the choice has increasingly been one of making a science of resource extraction from chaotic environments. The French and the Chinese who model the French are particularly good at this sort of thing.

[tvashtarkatena]

Gotta admit I like listening to Obama speak. Too bad it all falls apart when I actually hear what he's saying.

 

What, specifically, is wrong with what he's saying?

[olyclimber]

comparing reagan's orating skillz to the current prez makes me weep

 

listen to some tapes of Teddie Roosevelt, or FDR, or Truman, JFK, etc. yes, we've dropped to the lowest common denominator.

 

the royal we has perhaps. i didn't vote for bush, did you?

[ashw_justin]

Actually Bush may be the greatest actor of all. The more idiotic they make his public persona, the more likely he is to be forgiven for delivering the dynasty's unconscionable and contradictory lies... er, intelligence mistakes.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

comparing reagan's orating skillz to the current prez makes me weep

 

listen to some tapes of Teddie Roosevelt, or FDR, or Truman, JFK, etc. yes, we've dropped to the lowest common denominator.

 

the royal we has perhaps. i didn't vote for bush, did you?

 

Gore and Kerrey talk like morons as well. Sorry, no difference.

 

Reagan purposely used simple language, but at least was articulate, humorous and thought on his toes, improvised.

 

Bubba also chose to dumb-down his rhetoric, using Reagan as a model. But again, at least it was a choice.

 

 

 

 

[olyclimber]

If one were to select the all time worst Presidential orator, the choice would be clear.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

If one were to select the all time worst Presidential orator, the choice would be clear.

 

Dude, Gore was a total moron - at every debate and every appearance and speech. But hey, if you want to sniff two pieces of shit and claim one smells better, all the power to you.

[tvashtarkatena]

If you want amazing, listen to a little MLK. His speech on Vietnam was both historically well researched and beautifully delivered.

[olyclimber]

If one were to select the all time worst Presidential orator, the choice would be clear.

 

Dude, Gore was a total moron - at every debate and every appearance and speech. But hey, if you want to sniff two pieces of shit and claim one smells better, all the power to you.

 

Sounds like you've done that yourself. Gore actually has a command of the English language.

[tvashtarkatena]

If one were to select the all time worst Presidential orator, the choice would be clear.

 

Dude, Gore was a total moron - at every debate and every appearance and speech. But hey, if you want to sniff two pieces of shit and claim one smells better, all the power to you.

 

Sounds like you've done that yourself. Gore actually has a command of the English language.

 

I heard Gore speak in person. He was articulate, intelligent, and had a decent, self depricating sense of humor.

Edited January 4, 2008 by tvashtarkatena

[sirwoofalot]

If one were to select the all time worst Presidential orator, the choice would be clear.

 

Dude, Gore was a total moron - at every debate and every appearance and speech. But hey, if you want to sniff two pieces of shit and claim one smells better, all the power to you.

 

 

What do you mean by saying Gore was a total moron? did he not declear he was the inventor of the internet or some such nonsence? That should make him a god considering how he most have been what 2 years old or there about? Now a 2 year old inventing the internet is no moron.

[tvashtarkatena]

If one were to select the all time worst Presidential orator, the choice would be clear.

 

Dude, Gore was a total moron - at every debate and every appearance and speech. But hey, if you want to sniff two pieces of shit and claim one smells better, all the power to you.

 

 

What do you mean by saying Gore was a total moron? did he not declear he was the inventor of the internet or some such nonsence? That should make him a god considering how he most have been what 2 years old or there about? Now a 2 year old inventing the internet is no moron.

 

That claim is an out of context urban myth and you very well know it.

 

What's up with your boy scout climbing class? You asked, I answered, then nothing.

 

 

Edited January 4, 2008 by tvashtarkatena

[KaskadskyjKozak]

If one were to select the all time worst Presidential orator, the choice would be clear.

 

Dude, Gore was a total moron - at every debate and every appearance and speech. But hey, if you want to sniff two pieces of shit and claim one smells better, all the power to you.

 

 

What do you mean by saying Gore was a total moron? did he not declear he was the inventor of the internet or some such nonsence? That should make him a god considering how he most have been what 2 years old or there about? Now a 2 year old inventing the internet is no moron.

 

Two words: lock box

 

Repeat endlessly.

 

I think the Saturday Night Live skits with Gore best illustrate what I am referring to.

 

 

[No. 13 Baby]

Is it any wonder that folks who still believe Gore said he invented the internet are the same ones who think Dumbya's command of the English language is on a par with Gore or "Kerrey" [sic].