3 ms·

I'd say the extent and duration of the disruption between Latin America and the counties you mentioned are quite different. LATAM started from the get go being

by xandrius 10mo ago

I'd say the extent and duration of the disruption between Latin America and the counties you mentioned are quite different. LATAM started from the get go being awfully disrupted from the 1500s and in catastrophic ways. Also, we don't call any of those areas Latin X. It shows how much impact the conquerors had that it even defines how we can the region to this day.

stinkbeetle 10mo ago
> I'd say the extent and duration of the disruption between Latin America and the counties you mentioned are quite different. I don't think it is. Europe was full of wars, civil wars, conquest, occupation, and suppression and destabilization of competing nations for all that time, for example.
- igogq425 10mo ago
  If you tried to back up your assumption with figures or with specific historical facts, you would see that it is wrong. It's not just about the fact that there was instability somewhere at some point, but about how it is being perpetuated. The countries you list above are very diverse. But what they all have in common, and what distinguishes them from countries in Latin America, is that there is a lot of ocean between them and the US. Admittedly, this also applies to Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria. But if we examine the question of what distinguishes these countries from the ones you list, it brings us back to the connection that was already pointed out above. I live in Germany and have had access to toothpaste my whole life. People my age in Cuba can still remember very well what it was like to have to do without toothpaste. Now ask your favorite LLM who temporarily prevented toothpaste from being imported into Cuba.
  - boxed 10mo ago
    Blaming Cubas struggles on the US without acknowledging that Cuba, for example, has labor camps for children, is kinda silly imo. It's a brutal dictatorship very similar to Iran. Let's all keep that in mind.
    - igogq425 10mo ago
      I can find nothing to support the claim that Cuba allegedly has labor camps for children. As far as I can see, this is an unsubstantiated propaganda claim. It is well known that the US is currently having ICE round up people off the streets and imprison them throughout the country. There is evidence that five-year-old children are being detained separately from their parents. The ability of people to apply double standards is always astonishing. https://www.amnesty.de/sites/default/files/2025-03/030_2025_DE_USA_0.pdf https://www.amnesty.de/sites/default/files/2025-03/030_2025_... And it is simply irrational not to link Cuba's problems with the US embargo.
      - boxed 10mo ago
        Weird. You seem pretty bad at searching: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Units_to_Aid_Production https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Units_to_Aid_Producti... > The ages of the inmates ranged from 16 to over 60
        igogq425 10mo ago
        I will read the article and incorporate it into my view of things. I don't get the impression that you are prepared to evaluate information in a similarly open-minded way. You remain silent on all the points I have raised. This makes it clear to me that you are an ideologue.
        boxed 10mo ago
        I already knew about US immigration services abuse. It's absolutely a problem. It seems like a non sequitur in the discussion though. The actions of ICE in the US since Trump was elected don't seem like they have any relevance to the educational problems in Latin America in the 60s though? I mean, unless ICE now has time machines. If that's the case, I will absolutely start worrying. A lot.
        igogq425 10mo ago
  - stinkbeetle 10mo ago
    The topic is about Latin America in general. Cuba is a very small and extreme outlier for several reasons so not very representative, I would say. It's certainly true that communist regimes from Cambodia to North Korea to Cuba have often been horrible for their people, whatever the root causes might be. No, I'm talking about Latin America in general though. And yes it is certainly true there was colonialism, destabilization, economic coercion, and all that from large powers. I don't deny that. The examples I gave fit exactly the same description though. There was no "vast ocean" between the Ottoman Empire and Europe where it was throwing its weight around for centuries. Nor was there a vast (or any) ocean between China and colonial European powers, or later Japan. So if "vast oceans" are part of your thesis, you are going to have to explain and define that far better, with a lot more supporting evidence and reason for your claims. You can vaguely handwave and pontificate about differences between other examples and just assert without any real evidence or reasoning that must have been the cause of it. But like I said, that's just not scientific or even compelling in the slightest, really.
    - igogq425 10mo ago
      Of course it's not scientific. I don't wear a lab coat, and neither do you. You should take a look at yourself in that regard. You can't accuse me of lacking standards that you yourself don't live up to. Ecuador 2010, Honduras 2009, Venezuela 2002, Haiti 1994, Nicaragua, Guatemala, and El Salvador until 1990, Panama 1989, Grenada 1983, Bolivia 1980, Chile 1973, Dominican Republic 1965, Cuba 1961, Guatemala 1954, and so on until the territorial destruction of Mexico in 1848: all of them wars, coup attempts, occupations, protection of U.S. corporate interests, installation of military dictatorships, attempted assassinations of heads of government, etc. These are recent events that naturally have a massive impact on the political and economic development of the nations concerned. And you want to equate that with the fact that the Turks were in Vienna at some point or that a nation of 1.41 billion Chinese has now recovered somewhat from European colonialism. Sorry, but that's ridiculous. The US bears significant responsibility for the poor political and economic situation in many Latin American countries. You don't have to agree with this assessment. But to pretend that there aren't a multitude of valid arguments for it is either ignorant or disingenuous.
girvo 10mo ago
That really downplays the turmoil China has gone through. It’s at least equal.
- xandrius 10mo ago
  China's external turmoil can be boxed within the 1800s and I don't think it included: 80+% of casualties, forced religious conversion, forced language conversion, wholesale destruction of books and culture, etc.
  - suddenlybananas 10mo ago
    >China's external turmoil can be boxed within the 1800s Yeah except for that time that Japan tried to conquer them while they were in a civil war.
    - xandrius 10mo ago
      True but do you really think, all summed up, they had it worse than LATAM?
      - suddenlybananas 10mo ago
        Given that the worst of colonialism happened in 16th and 17th centuries and by the 1930s, China was in a worse position than much of Latin America (e.g. Argentina), I would say that they had a harder go of things more recently than Latin America.
  - girvo 10mo ago
    No it really _really_ cannot be. Go read a history book.
    - xandrius 10mo ago
      Graceful arguing right there. If you feel like enlightening us how China fared worse than LATAM or you can avoid being all snarky like that.

stinkbeetle 10mo ago

> I'd say the extent and duration of the disruption between Latin America and the counties you mentioned are quite different. I don't think it is. Europe was full of wars, civil wars, conquest, occupation, and suppression and destabilization of competing nations for all that time, for example.

igogq425 10mo ago
If you tried to back up your assumption with figures or with specific historical facts, you would see that it is wrong. It's not just about the fact that there was instability somewhere at some point, but about how it is being perpetuated. The countries you list above are very diverse. But what they all have in common, and what distinguishes them from countries in Latin America, is that there is a lot of ocean between them and the US. Admittedly, this also applies to Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria. But if we examine the question of what distinguishes these countries from the ones you list, it brings us back to the connection that was already pointed out above. I live in Germany and have had access to toothpaste my whole life. People my age in Cuba can still remember very well what it was like to have to do without toothpaste. Now ask your favorite LLM who temporarily prevented toothpaste from being imported into Cuba.
- boxed 10mo ago
  Blaming Cubas struggles on the US without acknowledging that Cuba, for example, has labor camps for children, is kinda silly imo. It's a brutal dictatorship very similar to Iran. Let's all keep that in mind.
  - igogq425 10mo ago
    I can find nothing to support the claim that Cuba allegedly has labor camps for children. As far as I can see, this is an unsubstantiated propaganda claim. It is well known that the US is currently having ICE round up people off the streets and imprison them throughout the country. There is evidence that five-year-old children are being detained separately from their parents. The ability of people to apply double standards is always astonishing. https://www.amnesty.de/sites/default/files/2025-03/030_2025_DE_USA_0.pdf https://www.amnesty.de/sites/default/files/2025-03/030_2025_... And it is simply irrational not to link Cuba's problems with the US embargo.
    - boxed 10mo ago
      Weird. You seem pretty bad at searching: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Units_to_Aid_Production https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Units_to_Aid_Producti... > The ages of the inmates ranged from 16 to over 60
      - igogq425 10mo ago
        I will read the article and incorporate it into my view of things. I don't get the impression that you are prepared to evaluate information in a similarly open-minded way. You remain silent on all the points I have raised. This makes it clear to me that you are an ideologue.
        boxed 10mo ago
        I already knew about US immigration services abuse. It's absolutely a problem. It seems like a non sequitur in the discussion though. The actions of ICE in the US since Trump was elected don't seem like they have any relevance to the educational problems in Latin America in the 60s though? I mean, unless ICE now has time machines. If that's the case, I will absolutely start worrying. A lot.
        igogq425 10mo ago
- stinkbeetle 10mo ago
  The topic is about Latin America in general. Cuba is a very small and extreme outlier for several reasons so not very representative, I would say. It's certainly true that communist regimes from Cambodia to North Korea to Cuba have often been horrible for their people, whatever the root causes might be. No, I'm talking about Latin America in general though. And yes it is certainly true there was colonialism, destabilization, economic coercion, and all that from large powers. I don't deny that. The examples I gave fit exactly the same description though. There was no "vast ocean" between the Ottoman Empire and Europe where it was throwing its weight around for centuries. Nor was there a vast (or any) ocean between China and colonial European powers, or later Japan. So if "vast oceans" are part of your thesis, you are going to have to explain and define that far better, with a lot more supporting evidence and reason for your claims. You can vaguely handwave and pontificate about differences between other examples and just assert without any real evidence or reasoning that must have been the cause of it. But like I said, that's just not scientific or even compelling in the slightest, really.
  - igogq425 10mo ago
    Of course it's not scientific. I don't wear a lab coat, and neither do you. You should take a look at yourself in that regard. You can't accuse me of lacking standards that you yourself don't live up to. Ecuador 2010, Honduras 2009, Venezuela 2002, Haiti 1994, Nicaragua, Guatemala, and El Salvador until 1990, Panama 1989, Grenada 1983, Bolivia 1980, Chile 1973, Dominican Republic 1965, Cuba 1961, Guatemala 1954, and so on until the territorial destruction of Mexico in 1848: all of them wars, coup attempts, occupations, protection of U.S. corporate interests, installation of military dictatorships, attempted assassinations of heads of government, etc. These are recent events that naturally have a massive impact on the political and economic development of the nations concerned. And you want to equate that with the fact that the Turks were in Vienna at some point or that a nation of 1.41 billion Chinese has now recovered somewhat from European colonialism. Sorry, but that's ridiculous. The US bears significant responsibility for the poor political and economic situation in many Latin American countries. You don't have to agree with this assessment. But to pretend that there aren't a multitude of valid arguments for it is either ignorant or disingenuous.

girvo 10mo ago

That really downplays the turmoil China has gone through. It’s at least equal.

xandrius 10mo ago
China's external turmoil can be boxed within the 1800s and I don't think it included: 80+% of casualties, forced religious conversion, forced language conversion, wholesale destruction of books and culture, etc.
- suddenlybananas 10mo ago
  >China's external turmoil can be boxed within the 1800s Yeah except for that time that Japan tried to conquer them while they were in a civil war.
  - xandrius 10mo ago
    True but do you really think, all summed up, they had it worse than LATAM?
    - suddenlybananas 10mo ago
      Given that the worst of colonialism happened in 16th and 17th centuries and by the 1930s, China was in a worse position than much of Latin America (e.g. Argentina), I would say that they had a harder go of things more recently than Latin America.
- girvo 10mo ago
  No it really _really_ cannot be. Go read a history book.
  - xandrius 10mo ago
    Graceful arguing right there. If you feel like enlightening us how China fared worse than LATAM or you can avoid being all snarky like that.