Ronald E. Mcnair Scholar: A Passion For Social Justice

Click here to learn more and sign up for this exciting opportunity for your students!

First, I will give a brief history of the Dirty War, as I feel it is necessary to understand the landscape at this time and what influenced this collective conscious, followed by a discussion and outline of Dussel’s direct experience and observations surrounding Latin America during this incredibly tumultuous period of time. The essay concludes with a summary of how these principles were utilized in Argentina during and after the Dirty War and how education and open dialogue has influenced the character and the direction of those communities effected, today.

This Extended Essay will examine how American domestic politics during the Nixon Administration influenced the role of the U.S and more specifically the C.I.A in their role in the Chilean coup of 1973. Throughout this paper connections will be drawn between various corporations which had a significant stake in Chile’s industry and economy before the coup occurred and their subsequent relationships with different members of the Nixon Administration or those in places of power such as the director of the C.I.A. This paper will document just how much was at stake for various companies, and what they stood to gain or lose from a significant regime change. Furthermore, just how the C.I.A and these American corporations waged an economic war on Chile’s economy will be examined. In addition, this paper will provide an analysis on just who stood to gain the most from a regime change, the American people winning a war against communism, or the multinational corporations whose businesses in Chile could be potentially nationalized. This paper will also examine the interdepartamental differences and rifts inside the Nixon Administration itself, and help clarify whether or not these differences were based upon an ideological difference or because of their roles in rival corporations. Overall this paper will provide a broad look at just how much these large multinational corporations had an affect upon the Nixon Administration, and how much an ideological sense of responsibility was

6. The roles of the military in the governments in Brazil, Argentina, and Mexico had some similarities and differences. First starting out with Brazil, military dictators had played a major role in their governments fro about twenty years. Brazil was ruled by military dictators. This dictators, put importance on the economy growing, and they promoted some foreign investments. They showed this by beginning large projects that were located in the Amazon jungle. Because of these actions, the economy now did just as they hoped that it would. How every this economic advancements did have a couple negatives. Now, the governments stopped the wages, and they also held back on the social events. This then caused a downgrade in the standards of the normal

U.S Foreign Policy altered Latin America’s relationship to the U.S profoundly as the region became a battleground between capitalism and communism. Saul Landau, attempts to show that U.S policy since the late 18th century has seen revolution in other places as threats. According to U.S officials, the higher cause behind this was to stop communism. A word, that was confused with popular revolution in Third world countries.

In Poor Economics, Esther Duflo makes a cutting statement: “even the most well-thought-out policies may not have an impact of they are not implemented correctly”. She draws a distinct line between policies and politics and exposes how the latter can affect the implementation of policies. This post will exemplify such scenario with the implementation of the Washington Consensus (WC) in Latin America during the 1980’s. Latin America was immersed in a severe debt crisis. Governments were defaulting on payments owed to the IMF and the United States. Convinced there was a huge problem, policy-makers from Washington and the IMF decided to draft a 10-policy document that Latin American countries must follow if they wished to borrow more money in

One of Carter’s first attempts to implement his human rights initiatives was in Argentina. The authoritarian, rightist Juntas organized a violent repression against political dissidents. Trying to distance himself from the policies of Ford/Kissinger, Carter attempted to pressure the authoritarian regime to improve their human rights record via reductions in military aid and economic sanctions. These maneuvers led to some mild improvements initially, but ultimately came back to hurt the Carter administration after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Argentina’s decision to align itself with the Soviets rather than the US on the issue of grain embargoes is an example of the Carter administration 's poor foresight. Carter over-compartmentalized his foreign policy agenda and

“Kissinger, more than most, would agree…that disorder is worse than injustice” (Blumenfield 68-69). In the realist mind of Henry Kissinger the domestic issues of a country are not necessary to consider. Pinochet’s human rights violations are pointless to care about in the anarchic, Darwinist world in which Kissinger lives. “A general theme in analyses of Kissinger is [his] early experience[s] forged his basic philosophic belief that the world is a place where the forces of chaos constantly battle the forces of order” (Starr 477). Kissinger’s protection of Pinochet, who jailed thousands of citizens without just cause, was acceptable to Kissinger because Pinochet’s power helped to stabilizes political order in Latin America. Preventing human rights violations would be a concern to many

During this period, the economic policies of Latin American governments were relatively single-mindedly oriented to enhance the export sector, while doing little to promote any type of diversification of the economy or domestic industrial economic development. Swift discussed these government policies:

In the 1990’s two events officially define the current policy of the U.S-Cuban embargo, in 1996 the passage of the Helms-Burton Act, replacing, or Torricelli Act of 1992 better known as the Cuban Democracy Act, which previously embodied a tightening of the original embargo restrictions on U.S subsidiaries trade with Cuba. Also, the Torricelli Act “epitomized a change of policy aims for the embargo.” In 1991the fall of the Soviet Union call for a change of policy change in National Security. The containment of communism was harder to justify, however, given after the events in South America where new democratic governments had developed in Argentina, Brazil and Chile

1) With the advent of prohibition in the United States, organized crime came to play a significant role in Cuba. Infamous gangsters arrived on the island to drink, gamble, and smuggle alcohol back to the main land. Cuban dictator Fulgencio Batista profited from such a corrupt system, acting as an intermediary between Cuba and the mafia and making millions off of his cut. As a result, Cuba became an “El Dorado” for American gangsters, where they could make huge profits and launder their illegally made money without being hassled by the police. As Batista enriched himself, however, the income disparity between the Cuban rich and poor worsened. President Grau did little to stop the mafia when he was in power, and when Fulgencio Batista returned from Florida to run for the presidency (again), his involvement with mafia member Meyer Lansky and other elite American interests deepened as they helped fund his

Argentina’s Dirty War, had a devastating movement of kidnapping, torture, and murder planned to defeat a major leftist movement powered by the idealistic dreams of Argentina’s young people and liberal leaders. the corpses of the disappeared were secretly disposed of, the dictatorship that ruled Argentina until 1983 denied its role in the disappearances.

I have learn a lot during this lab. I have learned how osmosis works by using a real life example.

After the war, the main priority for Britain was the reconstruction where it turned out to be quicker than expected. As we saw the history of the dispute, US interests were in favor of Britain when both Presidents Andrew Jackson and Ronald Reagan declared Argentina’s actions as unlawful. However according to the public, it seems that the Obama Administration have changed

I'm a free-thinker I feel if everyone does not have the same rights as others it's an injustice, an insult. I'm part Native American with an immigrant past as many others do in America. Most people here in America share similar stories about our pasts and where we come from. It would be hypocritical for anyone in America not to feel we all should have the same social justice since America was founded by men for all men and women to be equal. Therefore, if we don't get social justice here then there is something wrong, we need to change it. I'm absolutely an advocate for any change that makes all people equal no matter what color your skin or where we come from. Nevertheless, we all share the same American story, recently in my second year I've