Re:Invade Haiti, Wall Street Urged. The U.S. Obliged
by jcranmer on Sunday May 22, 2022 @02:21PM
(#31471166)
> Heck, you don’t even know if Panama would be a country in the alternate timeline where the canal isn’t built.
I mean, the US more or less sponsored Panamanian independence from Colombia solely because they didn't like Colombia's terms on offer for acquiring the land for the Panama Canal.
Re:Invade Haiti, Wall Street Urged. The U.S. Obliged
by selimthegrim on Sunday May 22, 2022 @02:06PM
(#31471028)
You probably want to explain to them that rabiblanco is slang for white Panamanian elite (ie not Noriega and co)
Re:Invade Haiti, Wall Street Urged. The U.S. Obliged
by Der_Einzige on Sunday May 22, 2022 @03:53PM
(#31472053)
But Costa Rica is so rich because it's a western tourist state. It's entirely white settler colonialism behind Costa Rica AND panamas relative success...
As one rabiblanco put it to me the last time I was there, “When America left we had to grow up.” Therein lies the pernicious nature of benign colonialism.
You have no idea what Panama would look like had the canal not been built. Maybe it would be more like Costa Rica than Nicaragua. The difference between Costa Rica and Nicaragua is that Nicaragua had the temerity to get a government we didn’t like. Heck, you don’t even know if Panama would be a country in the alternate timeline where the canal isn’t built.
How do you know the extent of my knowledge of Panama’s history based on my original response? Must I be ignorant simply because I believe the U.S. ended up being bad for Panama by the time of the Treaty? Who propped up Noriega and encouraged the expansion of the PDF? Who wanted Battalon 2000 to be in Amador and was fine with the PDF being the de facto rulers of Panama? (Until Herrara Diaz made his accusations and the people rose up.)