[Marxism] Weak bourgeoisie and Balkanization [Re: Second and final on the quiz]

[S. Artesian]

You showed nothing of the influence of the US.  Yes, the British did land 
troops twice, but the US was so undeveloped, so weak, so occupied with other 
issues that it provided no intervention into the struggles in Venezuela, 
Colombia, Peru, Bolivia, Ecuador.

British influence in "Gran Colombia" was also minimal.  As for its 
intervention in Brazil, the history of Brazil gives no evidence of any 
nascent popular revolt against empire, monarchy scotched by the British.  On 
the contrary,  Brazil became the actual seat of the empire.

As for the defeat of Spanish and Portuguese navigation-- sorry that also 
doesn't wash, certainly not in the case of Portugal.

I don't know what history you've been reading but it has little contact with 
the actual struggle as it developed in Latin America.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Nestor Gorojovsky" <nmgoro at gmail.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 3:18 PM
Subject: [Marxism] Weak bourgeoisie and Balkanization [Re: Second and final 
on the quiz]


S. Artesian escribió:
> Nestor,
>
> I think your take on this misses the rivalries, divisions, conflicts
> internal to the amalgam of forces participating in the independence
> struggles. [etc.]