- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
I see a project of the United States reasserting dominance over what it has historically considered its sphere of influence. MAGA’s Project 2025 considered “re-hemisphering” as a necessity to guarantee US supply chains and economic dominance. The recently released National Security Strategy also considered a rebranding of the Monroe Doctrine to guarantee US control over the region’s strategic resources.
Under this scenario, it seems Washington will attempt to crush independent projects not aligned with its purposes. We have seen interventionism in elections such as the ones in Argentina or Honduras. We have seen threats and coercion even against nonradical, progressive projects such as in Colombia, Brazil, or Mexico. More revolutionary projects like Venezuela and Cuba are direct targets of aggression.
The recently released National Security Strategy also considered a rebranding of the Monroe Doctrine to guarantee US control over the region’s strategic resources.
This is what the American people want, apparently.
Rebranding.
These people think only in capitalist dialects. It’s not a brand. It’s a fucking political assurance made to other countries in our hemisphere and shouldnot be fluid. It should not considered anything but intact or defunct.
Deviation from the edict is breaking it’s terms.
Deviation from the edict is breaking it’s terms.
Yeah and I don’t think the American people want to deviate from the edict. I think a majority of us support the edict, either tacitly or explicitly. I think they want our country to have ultimate control over the resources of the Western hemisphere. And maybe the world, at least eventually.
Going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume there are some misplaced words here. The first two sentences don’t gel with your last two sentences.
Is the edict not the Monroe doctrine? Or some modern iteration of it?
Your sentence about control over the Western hemisphere implies that the majority of Americans are pro-imperialist. The start and end of your post feel at odds.
Monroe Doctrine, (December 2, 1823), cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy enunciated by Pres. James Monroe in his annual message to Congress. Declaring that the Old World and New World had different systems and must remain distinct spheres, Monroe made four basic points: (1) the United States would not interfere in the internal affairs of or the wars between European powers; (2) the United States recognized and would not interfere with existing colonies and dependencies in the Western Hemisphere; (3) the Western Hemisphere was closed to future colonization; and (4) any attempt by a European power to oppress or control any nation in the Western Hemisphere would be viewed as a hostile act against the United States.
Your sentence about control over the Western hemisphere implies that the majority of Americans are pro-imperialist.
Aren’t they?
The Monroe doctrine has evolved since 1823. It has been invoked or used as inspiration or justification for US involvement, solicited or unsolicited, in the political and economic affairs of several countries in Central and South America, especially those with socialist governments.
I guess the way I understood the original intent was that we were attempting to set up a bulwark against further expansion from European colonialism. That’s how it was taught to me.
I don’t think the average American citizen wants hemispheric domination.
That’s some egg on trumps face



