cross-posted from: https://lemmit.online/post/5938935
This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot.
The original was posted on /r/todayilearned by /u/sleekpaprika69 on 2025-05-29 01:09:43+00:00.
cross-posted from: https://lemmit.online/post/5938935
This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot.
The original was posted on /r/todayilearned by /u/sleekpaprika69 on 2025-05-29 01:09:43+00:00.
It sounds like a bit of a shitshow even without US involvement
Foreign loans means they were being fucked by Empire. This is colonialism.
Nobody was arguing that colonialism didn’t play a part, even though the article does mention that the loans had pretty favourable terms.
Loans are exploitive by definition.
What these countries need is reparations, a transfer of wealth from all that was stolen from them.
I mean aren’t those countries made up by the former colonialists, they should probably be paying the og natives
Someone didn’t read US history before trying to recreate things.
Yes, and I also think everybody should read more history. There are a lot of lessons in Latin American history for US citizens as well.
Which lesson from US history should the have read?
The US had a very similar struggle with a weak Federal government, an inability to tax, and high debts when it was first formed. The early government went through very drastic changes to become what we have today.
Of course it wasn’t that far back in history at the time this central American government was going through the same exact problems. Those changes came to the US in the late 1780s. I wonder if they would have had access to the Federalist papers, might have changed things.
And then there were more gradual changes over time made by the Supreme Court interpretations of the Constitution, but those started more after the Civil War with the Marshall court.