ProleWiki - User contributions [en]

Deng Xiaoping

2021-02-25T18:47:47Z

Iskender: /* Political Career */

{{Infobox politician
| name = Deng Xiaoping
| native_name = 邓小平
| image = File:Deng Portrait.jpg
| image_size = 200px
| image_upright =
| image_alt =
| caption = Portrait of comrade Deng Xiaoping
| nationality = [[China|Chinese]]
| birth_name =
| birth_date = {{Birth date|1904|08|22}}
| birth_place = Guang'an, Qing China
| death_date = {{Death date and age|1997|2|19|1904|08|22}}
| death_place = Beijing, [[People's Republic of China]]
| political_line = [[Marxism-Leninism]]Mao Zedong ThoughtSocialism with Chinese Characteristics
}}

'''Deng Xiaoping''' (Chinese: 邓小平) (22 August 1904 – 19 February 1997) was a Chinese politician, most notably the Paramount Leader of the [[China|People's Republic of China]] from 1978 to his resignation in 1989. During his leadership, he initiated a policy of adopting elements of market economics while maintaining the governing role of the [[Communist Party of China]], it's commitment to [[Marxism-leninism|Marxism-Leninism]] and to the task of building [[Socialism]] according to the [[Four Cardinal Principles]]. He is, by such, largely associated with the idea [[Socialism with Chinese Characteristics]], of which [[Deng Xiaoping Thought]] is a part, and is considered by many to be the "Architect of modern China". He is a controversial figure among [[Marxism|marxists]], some of them considering him to be a [[Revisionism|revisionist]], mostly criticising his [[Opening Up and Reform|''Opening Up and Reform'']] policy.

==Political Career==
Deng Xiaoping was born in an educated land-owning family in Sichuan Province. He studied in France, where he became a [[Marxism-leninism|Marxist-Leninist]], joined the [[Communist Party of China]] in 1923 and took part in the Chinese Revolution. During his later political career, he would recall the more formative years of the Communist Party of China and its War of Resistance in the following way: <blockquote>"Now I should like to talk about our Party’s experience during the War of Resistance Against Japan. Tactics serve strategies. The years prior to the anti-Japanese war are called the period of the Agrarian Revolution. At that time we pursued a policy of confiscating land from the landlord class. After Japan stepped up its aggression against China, the national problem became the principal concern, and Japanese imperialism became our main target of attack. Under these circumstances, we had to ally ourselves with all our indirect allies in the world, which included contacts with the United States, for example. The comprador-capitalist class, previously our main target of attack, became one whom we both unite with and struggle against. Its representative was Chiang Kai-shek, with whom we co-operated to resist Japan, adopting a policy of both unity and struggle in the course of co-operation."<ref>[https://dengxiaopingworks.wordpress.com/2013/02/22/build-a-mature-and-combat-effective-party/ Deng Xiaoping; Selected Works of Deng Xiaoping, Vol. 1, Build a Mature and Combat-Effective Party]</ref></blockquote>After the founding of the [[China|People's Republic of China]], he became the Party's Secretary General, but was purged twice during the [[Cultural Revolution]]. After Mao's death, he managed to return to political power to become the leader of the country by 1978. That same year, he initiated the [[Opening Up and Reform|''Opening Up and Reform'']] policy, emphasising the goal of the [[Four Modernisations]], and proposed the following year to revise the Chinese constitution. Deng Xiaoping resigned from his positions in 1989, and died on 19 February 1997 of a combination of a lung infection and Parkinson's disease.

==The ''Opening Up and Reform'' policy==
The ''[[Opening Up and Reform]]'' policy was proposed in order to deal with the main problems the country faced at the time: namely a very poor population, the lack of an industrial base, and the lack of a large urban population (80% of the population lived in rural areas at the time). Deng Xiaoping realised that the country was still too underdeveloped to build [[Socialism]], so he proposed the idea of implementing market policies in order to build the productive forces in order to eventually be able to build Socialism. In this regard, the [[Opening Up and Reform|''Opening Up and Reform'']] policy can be compared to the soviet ''[[New Economic Policy]]'' implemented by Lenin. Deng Xiaoping explained his policies in the following manner:<blockquote>"It is wrong to maintain that a market economy exists only in capitalist society and that there is only “capitalist” market economy. Why can’t we develop a market economy under socialism? Developing a market economy does not mean practising capitalism. While maintaining a planned economy as the mainstay of our economic system, we are also introducing a market economy. But it is a socialist market economy. Although a socialist market economy is similar to a capitalist one in method, there are also differences between them. The socialist market economy mainly regulates interrelations between state-owned enterprises, between collectively owned enterprises and even between foreign capitalist enterprises. But in the final analysis, this is all done under socialism in a socialist society. We cannot say that market economy exists only under capitalism. Market economy was in its embryonic stages as early as feudalist society. We can surely develop it under socialism. Similarly, taking advantage of the useful aspects of capitalist countries, including their methods of operation and management, does not mean that we will adopt capitalism. Instead, we use those methods in order to develop the productive forces under socialism. As long as learning from capitalism is regarded as no more than a means to an end, it will not change the structure of socialism or bring China back to capitalism."<ref>{{Cite web |title=Deng Xiaoping; Selected Works, Vol. 2, "We Can Develop A Market Economy Under Socialism" |url=https://dengxiaopingworks.wordpress.com/2013/02/25/we-can-develop-a-market-economy-under-socialism/}}</ref></blockquote>This policy lead to a period of great economic growth for the country, with a median growth of 9.2% between 1980 and 2020<ref>{{Cite web |title=MGM research; China GDP Charts and Graphs 1980-2020 |url=https://mgmresearch.com/china-gdp-data-and-charts-1980-2020/}}</ref>. Deng's policies were however criticised by some [[Marxism|marxists]], many of which [[Marxism-Leninism-Maoism|maoists]], who believed that Deng went too far in his liberalisation of the economy.

==Selected Works==
Deng Xiaoping's ''Selected Works'' are composed of three volumes, each dedicated to works written during a specific timeframe. They are available for free online at https://dengxiaopingworks.wordpress.com.

== References ==
<references />

Deng Xiaoping

2021-02-25T18:46:45Z

Iskender: /* Political Career */

{{Infobox politician
| name = Deng Xiaoping
| native_name = 邓小平
| image = File:Deng Portrait.jpg
| image_size = 200px
| image_upright =
| image_alt =
| caption = Portrait of comrade Deng Xiaoping
| nationality = [[China|Chinese]]
| birth_name =
| birth_date = {{Birth date|1904|08|22}}
| birth_place = Guang'an, Qing China
| death_date = {{Death date and age|1997|2|19|1904|08|22}}
| death_place = Beijing, [[People's Republic of China]]
| political_line = [[Marxism-Leninism]]Mao Zedong ThoughtSocialism with Chinese Characteristics
}}

'''Deng Xiaoping''' (Chinese: 邓小平) (22 August 1904 – 19 February 1997) was a Chinese politician, most notably the Paramount Leader of the [[China|People's Republic of China]] from 1978 to his resignation in 1989. During his leadership, he initiated a policy of adopting elements of market economics while maintaining the governing role of the [[Communist Party of China]], it's commitment to [[Marxism-leninism|Marxism-Leninism]] and to the task of building [[Socialism]] according to the [[Four Cardinal Principles]]. He is, by such, largely associated with the idea [[Socialism with Chinese Characteristics]], of which [[Deng Xiaoping Thought]] is a part, and is considered by many to be the "Architect of modern China". He is a controversial figure among [[Marxism|marxists]], some of them considering him to be a [[Revisionism|revisionist]], mostly criticising his [[Opening Up and Reform|''Opening Up and Reform'']] policy.

==Political Career==
Deng Xiaoping was born in an educated land-owning family in Sichuan Province. He studied in France, where he became a [[Marxism-leninism|Marxist-Leninist]], joined the [[Communist Party of China]] in 1923 and took part in the Chinese Revolution. After the founding of the [[China|People's Republic of China]], he became the Party's Secretary General, but was purged twice during the [[Cultural Revolution]].

During his political career, he would recall the more formative years of the Communist Party of China in the following way:<blockquote>"Now I should like to talk about our Party’s experience during the War of Resistance Against Japan. Tactics serve strategies. The years prior to the anti-Japanese war are called the period of the Agrarian Revolution. At that time we pursued a policy of confiscating land from the landlord class. After Japan stepped up its aggression against China, the national problem became the principal concern, and Japanese imperialism became our main target of attack. Under these circumstances, we had to ally ourselves with all our indirect allies in the world, which included contacts with the United States, for example. The comprador-capitalist class, previously our main target of attack, became one whom we both unite with and struggle against. Its representative was Chiang Kai-shek, with whom we co-operated to resist Japan, adopting a policy of both unity and struggle in the course of co-operation."<ref>[https://dengxiaopingworks.wordpress.com/2013/02/22/build-a-mature-and-combat-effective-party/ Deng Xiaoping; Selected Works of Deng Xiaoping, Vol. 1, Build a Mature and Combat-Effective Party]</ref></blockquote>After Mao's death, he managed to return to political power to become the leader of the country by 1978. That same year, he initiated the [[Opening Up and Reform|''Opening Up and Reform'']] policy, emphasising the goal of the [[Four Modernisations]], and proposed the following year to revise the Chinese constitution. Deng Xiaoping resigned from his positions in 1989, and died on 19 February 1997 of a combination of a lung infection and Parkinson's disease.

==The ''Opening Up and Reform'' policy==
The ''[[Opening Up and Reform]]'' policy was proposed in order to deal with the main problems the country faced at the time: namely a very poor population, the lack of an industrial base, and the lack of a large urban population (80% of the population lived in rural areas at the time). Deng Xiaoping realised that the country was still too underdeveloped to build [[Socialism]], so he proposed the idea of implementing market policies in order to build the productive forces in order to eventually be able to build Socialism. In this regard, the [[Opening Up and Reform|''Opening Up and Reform'']] policy can be compared to the soviet ''[[New Economic Policy]]'' implemented by Lenin. Deng Xiaoping explained his policies in the following manner:<blockquote>"It is wrong to maintain that a market economy exists only in capitalist society and that there is only “capitalist” market economy. Why can’t we develop a market economy under socialism? Developing a market economy does not mean practising capitalism. While maintaining a planned economy as the mainstay of our economic system, we are also introducing a market economy. But it is a socialist market economy. Although a socialist market economy is similar to a capitalist one in method, there are also differences between them. The socialist market economy mainly regulates interrelations between state-owned enterprises, between collectively owned enterprises and even between foreign capitalist enterprises. But in the final analysis, this is all done under socialism in a socialist society. We cannot say that market economy exists only under capitalism. Market economy was in its embryonic stages as early as feudalist society. We can surely develop it under socialism. Similarly, taking advantage of the useful aspects of capitalist countries, including their methods of operation and management, does not mean that we will adopt capitalism. Instead, we use those methods in order to develop the productive forces under socialism. As long as learning from capitalism is regarded as no more than a means to an end, it will not change the structure of socialism or bring China back to capitalism."<ref>{{Cite web |title=Deng Xiaoping; Selected Works, Vol. 2, "We Can Develop A Market Economy Under Socialism" |url=https://dengxiaopingworks.wordpress.com/2013/02/25/we-can-develop-a-market-economy-under-socialism/}}</ref></blockquote>This policy lead to a period of great economic growth for the country, with a median growth of 9.2% between 1980 and 2020<ref>{{Cite web |title=MGM research; China GDP Charts and Graphs 1980-2020 |url=https://mgmresearch.com/china-gdp-data-and-charts-1980-2020/}}</ref>. Deng's policies were however criticised by some [[Marxism|marxists]], many of which [[Marxism-Leninism-Maoism|maoists]], who believed that Deng went too far in his liberalisation of the economy.

==Selected Works==
Deng Xiaoping's ''Selected Works'' are composed of three volumes, each dedicated to works written during a specific timeframe. They are available for free online at https://dengxiaopingworks.wordpress.com.

== References ==
<references />

ProleWiki:Principles/Signed

2021-01-27T19:57:34Z

Iskender: /* Sign below */

__NOTOC__<includeonly><blockquote>''To leave a signature, click [[ProleWiki:Principles/Signed|here]].''</blockquote>
</includeonly><noinclude>

== Signing ==
=== Visual editor ===
In visual editor, make a new line after the last signature, then click on "Insert" in the upper menu bar, then expand the list by clicking "More" and you'll see the option to leave your signature.

=== Source editor ===
Make a new line after the last signature, then simply type out <code><nowiki>~~~~</nowiki></code> and preview your edit to confirm you are leaving a signature.

== Sign below ==
</noinclude>
— ''Comrade [[User:FelipeForte|Felipe Forte]]'' ([[User talk:FelipeForte|talk]]) 21:01, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[User:Andassol|Andassol]]'' ([[User talk:Andassol|talk]]) 21:35, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[User:Fisicomunista|Fisicomunista]]'' ([[User talk:Fisicomunista|talk]]) 00:45, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[User:Yurigagarin|Yurigagarin]]'' ([[User talk:Yurigagarin|talk]]) 01:33, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[User:MathematicalDialect|MathematicalDialect]]'' ([[User talk:MathematicalDialect|talk]]) 07:07, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[User:AmadeuMl|AmadeuMl]]'' ([[User talk:AmadeuMl|talk]]) 09:32, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[User:Jucheguevara|Jucheguevara]]'' ([[User talk:Jucheguevara|talk]]) 17:27, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[User:CriticalResist|CriticalResist]]'' ([[User talk:CriticalResist|talk]]) 17:31, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[User:Aryan13AKS|Aryan13AKS]]'' ([[User talk: Aryan13AKS|talk]]) 19:25, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[Comrade:Sera|Sera]]'' ([[Comrade talk:Sera|talk]]) 17:05, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[Comrade:Che Guava|Che Guava]]'' ([[Comrade talk:Che Guava|talk]]) 19:17, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[Comrade:Sakaearisu|Sakaearisu]]'' ([[Comrade talk:Sakaearisu|talk]]) 20:04, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[Comrade:Extriia|Extriia]]'' ([[Comrade talk:Extriia|talk]]) 20:57, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[Comrade:GenSun|GenSun]]'' ([[Comrade talk:GenSun|talk]]) 14:17, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[Comrade:Hypercite|Hypercite]]'' ([[Comradeship:Hypercite|talk]]) 06:17, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[Comrade:Field Marshal|Field Marshal]]'' ([[Comradeship:Field Marshal|talk]]) 04:57, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[Comrade:BloodySteel|BloodySteel]]'' ([[Comradeship:BloodySteel|talk]]) 11:37, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[Comrade:TeeOS|TeeOS]]'' ([[Comradeship:TeeOS|talk]]) 14:47, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[Comrade:Komradsuvo|Komradsuvo]]'' ([[Comradeship:Komradsuvo|talk]]) 19:31, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[Comrade:Iskender|Iskender]]'' ([[Comradeship:Iskender|talk]]) 19:57, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

ProleWiki:Principles/Signed

2021-01-27T19:56:04Z

Iskender: /* Sign below */

__NOTOC__<includeonly><blockquote>''To leave a signature, click [[ProleWiki:Principles/Signed|here]].''</blockquote>
</includeonly><noinclude>

== Signing ==
=== Visual editor ===
In visual editor, make a new line after the last signature, then click on "Insert" in the upper menu bar, then expand the list by clicking "More" and you'll see the option to leave your signature.

=== Source editor ===
Make a new line after the last signature, then simply type out <code><nowiki>~~~~</nowiki></code> and preview your edit to confirm you are leaving a signature.

== Sign below ==
</noinclude>
— ''Comrade [[User:FelipeForte|Felipe Forte]]'' ([[User talk:FelipeForte|talk]]) 21:01, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[User:Andassol|Andassol]]'' ([[User talk:Andassol|talk]]) 21:35, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[User:Fisicomunista|Fisicomunista]]'' ([[User talk:Fisicomunista|talk]]) 00:45, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[User:Yurigagarin|Yurigagarin]]'' ([[User talk:Yurigagarin|talk]]) 01:33, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[User:MathematicalDialect|MathematicalDialect]]'' ([[User talk:MathematicalDialect|talk]]) 07:07, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[User:AmadeuMl|AmadeuMl]]'' ([[User talk:AmadeuMl|talk]]) 09:32, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[User:Jucheguevara|Jucheguevara]]'' ([[User talk:Jucheguevara|talk]]) 17:27, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[User:CriticalResist|CriticalResist]]'' ([[User talk:CriticalResist|talk]]) 17:31, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[User:Aryan13AKS|Aryan13AKS]]'' ([[User talk: Aryan13AKS|talk]]) 19:25, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[Comrade:Sera|Sera]]'' ([[Comrade talk:Sera|talk]]) 17:05, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[Comrade:Che Guava|Che Guava]]'' ([[Comrade talk:Che Guava|talk]]) 19:17, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[Comrade:Sakaearisu|Sakaearisu]]'' ([[Comrade talk:Sakaearisu|talk]]) 20:04, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[Comrade:Extriia|Extriia]]'' ([[Comrade talk:Extriia|talk]]) 20:57, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[Comrade:GenSun|GenSun]]'' ([[Comrade talk:GenSun|talk]]) 14:17, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[Comrade:Hypercite|Hypercite]]'' ([[Comradeship:Hypercite|talk]]) 06:17, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[Comrade:Field Marshal|Field Marshal]]'' ([[Comradeship:Field Marshal|talk]]) 04:57, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[Comrade:BloodySteel|BloodySteel]]'' ([[Comradeship:BloodySteel|talk]]) 11:37, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[Comrade:TeeOS|TeeOS]]'' ([[Comradeship:TeeOS|talk]]) 14:47, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

— ''Comrade [[Comrade:Komradsuvo|Komradsuvo]]'' ([[Comradeship:Komradsuvo|talk]]) 19:31, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

19:56, 27 January 2021 (UTC)''Comrade [[Comrade:Iskender|Iskender]]'' ([[Comradeship:Iskender|talk]])

United States of America

2021-01-02T20:38:37Z

Iskender: /* Print Sources */

The '''United States of America''' ('''USA'''), commonly known as the '''United States''' ('''U.S.''' or '''US'''), is a country located almost entirely in North America. It is made up of 50 states and a federal district: Washington D.C., the capital of the country. With about 332 million inhabitants, it is the third most populous country in the world, although it is quite far from the first two, China and India. It is also the fourth largest country in the world.

Recognized as the [[American imperialism|empire of this era]], it is the most powerful nation of all time. Born as an independent nation in 1776, it has achieved remarkable economic, scientific and military development. It has historically been characterized by forcibly stripping other nations and countries of territories and natural resources to put them at the service of their companies and monopolies. With only 4% of the world's population, it consumes 25% of the energy produced on the planet, and despite its wealth more than a third of its population is not assured of medical care.

Since the collapse of the [[Union of Soviet Socialist Republics|Soviet Union]], the United States has been considered the last remaining [[superpower]] due to its influential culture, economic prowess, military strength and capability to influence the affairs of any country in the world. It played a key role in the [[Cold War]], funding anti-communist dictators, engaging in myriad [[List of US atrocities|war crimes]] as well as [[McCarthyism|persecuting and suppressing socialists]] in its own territory.

== History ==
With the advent of the war of 1776 against the British empire and afterwards, the fledgling United States expanded westward with President Thomas Jefferson (the third in a long line of Presidents) referring to the nation as an "empire of liberty." As Nancy Isenberg elucidates in her book ''White Trash: The 400-Year Untold History of Class in America'': "The Louisiana Territory, as he envisioned it, would encourage agriculture and forestall the growth of manufacturing and urban poverty—that was his formula for liberty. It was not Franklin’s “happy mediocrity” (a compression of classes across an endless stretch of unsettled land), but a nation of farmers large and small. This difference is not nominal: Franklin and Paine used Pennsylvania as their model, while Jefferson saw America’s future—and the contours of its class system—through the prism of Virginia." <ref>Isenberg 2016, p. 92</ref>

Around 1800, as the lands further to the west were opened up to the fledgling United States, the young state saw the land as a way to appease its population and strengthen its power in the world. As Nancy Isenberg further explains: "By 1800, one-fifth of the American population had resettled on its 'frontier,' the territory between the Appalachian Mountains and the Mississippi. Effective regulation of this mass migration was well beyond the limited powers of the federal government. Even so, officials understood that the country’s future depended on controlling this vast territory. Financial matters were involved too. Government sale of these lands was needed to reduce the nation’s war debts. Besides, the lands were hardly empty, and the potential for violent conflicts with Native Americans was ever present, as white migrants settled on lands they did not own. National greatness depended as much as anything upon the class of settlers that was advancing into the new territories. Would the West be a dumping ground for a refuse population? Or would the United States profit from its natural bounty and grow as a continental empire more equitably? There was much uncertainty." <ref>Isenberg 2016, p. 110</ref>

By the end of the 19th century, the United States would find itself as a predominant imperialist power in the world, invading countries such as the Philippines in a brutal war for control. In J. Sakai's book ''Settlers'', it's recounted that: "U.S. Brig. Gen. James Bell, upon returning to the U.S. in 1901, said that his men had killed one out of every six Filipinos on the main island of Luzon (that would be some one million deaths just there). It is certain that at least 200,000 Filipinos died in the genocidal conquest. In Samar province, where the patriotic resistance to the U.S. invaders was extremely persistent, U.S. Gen. Jacob Smith ordered his troops to shoot every Filipino man, woman or child they could find 'over ten' (years of age)."<ref>Sakai 2014, p. 111</ref>

The United States would expand beyond its continental borders with the colonialist acquisition of lands such as Hawaii, the Philippines, Guam, etc. With the attack on several of these territories by the Japanese empire, most notably at Pearl Harbor, President Roosevelt would downplay the colonialist additions to the American empire, such as the Philippines, and give more emphasis to the U.S. territory of Hawaii (which was not yet a state during this time). From Daniel Immerwahr's ''How To Hide An Empire: A History of the Greater United States'': <blockquote>"Why did Roosevelt demote the Philippines? We don't know, but it's not hard to guess. Roosevelt was trying to tell a clear story: Japan had attacked the United States. But he faced a problem. ''Were'' Japan's targets considered 'the United States'? Legally, yes, they were indisputably U.S. territory. But would the public see them that way? What if Roosevelt's audience didn't care that Japan had attacked the Philippines or Guam? Polls taken slightly before the attack show that few in the continental United States supported a military defense of those remote territories.

Consider how similar events played out more recently. On August 7, 1998, al-Qaeda launched simultaneous attacks on U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Hundreds died (mostly Africans), and thousands were wounded. But though those embassies were outposts of the United States, there was little public sense that the country ''itself'' had been harmed. It would take another set of simultaneous attacks three years later, on New York City and Washington, D.C., to provoke an all-out war."<ref>Immerwahr 2019, p. 6</ref></blockquote>While an embassy is different from a territory, as the book concedes, a similar logic was at play. And as Immerwahr says, Hawaii had more Americans and was closer to statehood. However, as Immerwahr explains, even Roosevelt felt the need to say that the "American island of Oahu" was attacked and that "very many American lives" had been lost. As Immerwahr says in explaining the nationalism implicit in Roosevelt's speech after Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor: "An ''American'' island, where ''American'' lives were lost - that was the point he was trying to make. If the Philippines was being rounded down to foreign, Hawai'i was being rounded up to 'American.'"<ref>Immerwahr 2019, p. 7</ref>

== The Crimes of US Foreign Policy: A Very Brief Introduction ==
The United States has long seen itself as a very special nation, playing a uniquely noble role on the world stage. While other nations are said to be guided by vulgar self-interest, the United States is supposedly different; the primary goal of American foreign policy is, according to the State Department’s website, to “promote and demonstrate democratic values and advance a free, peaceful, and prosperous world.” But how well does the United States live up to those so-called “democratic values”? Does it in fact promote the cause of a “free, peaceful, and prosperous world”? Let’s look at the facts.

=== US Foreign Aid and Human Rights ===
To begin with, the US has a horrific foreign aid record. It seems that American aid is quite a good predictor of human rights abuses, and that this trend goes back decades; according to a 1981 study in the journal ''Comparative Politics,'' US aid is “clearly distributed disproportionately to countries with repressive governments… this distribution represented a pattern and not merely one or a few isolated cases.” Indeed, it is quite easy to find examples of the United States supporting vicious repressive regimes (such as Pinochet's Chile, the Shah of Iran, and the military junta of El Salvador).

Similarly, a 1984 study in the ''Journal of Peace Research'' looked at human rights and US aid under Nixon, Ford, and Carter. The authors found that “under Presidents Nixon and Ford foreign assistance was directly related to levels of human rights violations, i.e. more aid flowed to regimes with higher levels of violation, while under President Carter no clear statistical pattern emerged.” They therefore conclude that “the Carter administration did not implement a policy of human rights which actually guided the disposition of military and economic assistance.” In other words, the US attitude towards human rights seems to vary from outright hostility (under more conservative administrations) to mere indifference (under more liberal ones).

More recent studies have painted a similarly bleak picture. A 2008 book by Rhonda Callaway and Elizabeth Matthews found that “both United States economic and military aid have detrimental effects on security rights of the citizens in recipient states.” They note that these results “provide support for those critical of the US foreign assistance program.” The most recent research has continued to back up these conclusions. A 2016 study in the ''Quarterly Journal of Political Science'' sampled 150 countries from 1972 to 2008, finding that “US aid harms political rights, fosters other forms of state repression (measured along multiple dimensions), and strengthens authoritarian governance. [...] These findings counter the publicly stated objectives of the US government to foster political liberalization abroad via bilateral economic assistance.”

All-in-all, it seems that aid from the United States has a deleterious impact on the human rights situation in recipient nations. It provides military and economic aid to repressive regimes, arming and propping up some of the most vicious dictators on the planet, all in service of its own interests.

=== The Human Cost of the "War on Terror" ===
Lest we think that the harm of US foreign policy stops at providing aid to dictators, the United States has also carried out a great deal of violence all on its own. To demonstrate the enormous death toll of US military intervention and invasion, let's take a look at the post-9/11 "War on Terror," including the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan (among others).

According to a 2019 report from Brown University's Costs of War project, "between 770,000 and 801,000 people have died" in what the report refers to as "America's post-9/11 wars." This tally does not include so-called "indirect deaths," such as those resulting from displacement and the destruction of crucial infrastructure (e.g. water and sanitation systems). In a 2019 article for the ''Hill,'' David Vine (Professor of Anthropology at American University) writes that "total deaths during the post-2001 U.S. wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Pakistan and Yemen [are] likely to reach 3.1 million or more — around 200 times the number of U.S. dead." Others have come to similar conclusions. According to a 2018 report from the ''Intercept:''<blockquote>In addition to those killed by direct acts [of] violence, the number of indirect deaths — those resulting from disease, displacement, and the loss of critical infrastructure — is believed to be several times higher, running into the millions.</blockquote>These death tolls are backed up by earlier research. A 2009 article from the MIT Center for International Studies, which looked ''only'' at Iraq, found that "we have, at present, between 800,000 and 1.3 million 'excess deaths' in this war as we approach its six-year anniversary." Keep in mind that this is only one of the invaded countries, and that this article was authored in 2009 (more than a decade ago). The current death tolls, when factoring in all nations (as well as the decade of subsequent warfare), are likely many times higher.

The United States government has engaged in a concerted effort to hide the civilian cost of its Middle Eastern wars. According to a 2017 report from the ''New York Times'', the actual rate of civilian causalities inflicted by coalition forces in the Middle East is "more than 31 times that acknowledged by the coalition. It is at such a distance from official claims that, in terms of civilian deaths, this may be the least transparent war in recent American history."

In point of fact, US forces often kill more people than the terrorists they are supposedly there to fight; a 2019 article in the ''New York Times'' reports that "more civilians are being killed by Afghan government and American forces than by the Taliban and other insurgents, according to a [United Nations] report on Wednesday." This is not even mentioning the US drone program, which was detailed in a 2013 report from the ''Intercept.'' To make matters worse, civilian casualties from US wars have been increasing dramatically since Donald Trump took office, according to a 2018 article from the ''Washington Post.''

While it must be noted that the United States did not personally kill all of the millions of people mentioned above, it still bears a heavy burden for these deaths, having initiated the invasions, and started the entire conflict. In the same way that we hold Hitler responsible for the deaths of WWII (since he was the one who started it), so too should we hold the United States responsible for the deaths listed above. For more information on the civilian cost of US intervention, I recommend ''The Deaths of Others: The Fate of Civilians in America's Wars'', a study authored by John Tirman, director of the MIT Center for International Studies.

=== Coups and Regime Change: The Case of Chile ===
The United States has a long history of overthrowing governments it doesn't like, typically then replacing them with brutal dictatorships. There are many, ''many'' examples of this, ranging from Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala, to Mohammad Mosaddegh in Iran (a coup for which the CIA actually admitted responsibility in 2013). In order to understand the horrific effects that these coups often have, it will be helpful to take a particular example: that of Chile, where in 1973 the United States helped to overthrow the elected socialist government of Salvador Allende, replacing it with the right-wing dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet. A 2017 article in the ''New York Times'' details many of the documents proving US intervention. As one man put it:<blockquote>“To see on a piece of paper, for example, the president of the United States ordering the C.I.A. to preemptively overthrow a democratically elected president in Chile is stunning,” Mr. Kornbluh said. “The importance of having these documents in the museum is for the new generations of Chileans to actually see them.”</blockquote>As if this were not enough, in a 2014 interview with the ''Atlantic,'' Jack Devine (a former CIA agent who was in Chile at the time of the coup) confirmed that the Nixon administration was directly instructing the CIA to support the coup. According to declassified documents, Nixon had previously ordered Henry Kissinger to "make the economy scream," in an effort to rally support for the right-wing forces. The United States also attempted to prevent Allende from being inaugurated after his election, and provided support for state-terrorist campaigns after the coup. Now that the US role has been established, let's look at what Pinochet did once in power.

To begin with, Pinochet killed, tortured, and "disappeared" tens of thousands of people. According to a 2011 article from the BBC, the "total of recognized victims" numbers over 40,000, including more than 3,000 who were killed or forcibly disappeared. The rest were kidnapped, tortured, exiled, or some combination of the above. Pinochet was one of the most vicious dictators in the history of Latin America, and the United States played a direct role in propping up his regime.

In addition, Pinochet introduced hard-line neoliberal reforms, which did immense damage to Chile's economy. A good study on this was published in 1990 in the journal ''Critical Sociology''. The authors note that growth rates under Pinochet were remarkably unimpressive:<blockquote>The Pinochet model produced growth rates well below the Chilean average established over the 1950-72 period. The average yearly GDP rate of growth in the latter period was 3.9 percent, while the Pinochet regime averaged 1.4 percent over the 1974-83 period... overall growth throughout the 1980s has been far from miraculous: GDP per capita grew at a 1.2 percent average rate between 1980 and 1989, below the 1.7 percent average yearly rate for 1950-72.</blockquote>In addition, the authors charge Pinochet with "creating a great deal of poverty," noting that unemployment "rose dramatically after the coup," while real wages fell. At the same time, social expenditures were reduced, and "infectious diseases readily associated with poverty, overcrowding poor hygiene, and inadequate sanitation underwent explosive growth." This assessment is echoed by a study in the ''International Development Planning Review'', which found that "the radical neoliberal policies and structural adjustment of the 1970s and 1980s during the Pinochet regime had severe negative effects on the poor and middle class." The poverty rate itself increased dramatically; according to a report from the North American Congress on Latin America:<blockquote>The number of poor Chileans doubled during the Pinochet regime. By 1989, 44% of Chileans lived in poverty.</blockquote>In addition, it seems that Pinochet's privatizations also helped to create enormous corruption. According to a study in the ''Journal of Economic History,'' "firms were sold underpriced to politically connected buyers." This had predictable consequences:<blockquote>These newly private firms benefited financially from the Pinochet regime. Once democracy arrived, they formed connections with the new government, financed political campaigns, and were more likely to appear in the Panama Papers. These findings reveal how dictatorships can influence young democracies using privatization reforms.</blockquote>All of this goes to show the horrifying impact that US intervention in regime change had on Chile. One can only imagine the combined suffering of the people in all of the nations that the United States has "intervened" in over the last several decades.

=== Conclusion ===
This has been only a very brief summary of the crimes committed abroad by the United States government. Some of the very worst offenses (most notably the Vietnam War, as well as US support for the Pol Pot regime) have been omitted, if only because they are so egregious as to require their own post. Hopefully this has given a general introduction to the topic, which will spark the reader to make their own investigation into the issue. Useful reading includes ''Killing Hope'' by William Blum, as well as ''Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower,'' by the same author.

=== Sources ===

* U.S. Department of State | About Page
* Comparative Politics | U. S. Foreign Policy and Human Rights Violations in Latin America: A Comparative Analysis of Foreign Aid Distributions
* Journal of Peace Research | Human Rights and U.S. Foreign Assistance from Nixon to Carter
* Routledge | Strategic US Foreign Assistance: The Battle Between Human Rights and National Security
* Quarterly Journal of Political Science | Does Foreign Aid Harm Political Rights? Evidence from U.S. Aid
* Brown University | The Cost of the Global War on Terror: $6.4 Trillion and 801,000 Lives
* The Hill | Reckoning With the Costs of War: It's Time to Take Responsibility
* The Intercept | It's Time for America to Reckon With the Staggering Death Toll of the Post-9/11 Wars
* MIT Center for International Studies | Bush's War Dead: One Million
* The New York Times | The Uncounted
* The New York Times | U.S. and Afghan Forces Killed More Civilians Than Taliban Did, Report Finds
* The Intercept | The Assassination Complex: The Drone Papers
* The Washington Post | Middle East Civilian Deaths Have Soared Under Trump. And the Media Mostly Shrug.
* MIT Center for International Studies | The Deaths of Others: The Fate of Civilians in America's Wars
* CNN | In Declassified Document, CIA Acknowledges Role in '53 Iran Coup
* The New York Times | Documenting U.S. Role in Democracy’s Fall and Dictator’s Rise in Chile
* The Atlantic | The Other 9/11: A CIA Agent Remembers Chile's Coup
* National Security Archive | Chile and the United States: Declassified Documents Relating to the Military Coup, September 11, 1973
* BBC | Chile Recognizes 9,800 More Victims of Pinochet's Rule
* Critical Sociology | The Chilean "Economic Miracle": An Empirical Critique
* International Development Planning Review | Land of Miracles? A Critical Analysis of Poverty Reduction Strategies in Chile, 1975-2005
* NACLA | In Pursuit of "Growth With Equity": The Limits of Chile's Free-Market Social Reforms
* Journal of Economic History | The Privatization Origins of Political Corporations: Evidence from the Pinochet Regime
* The New Statesman | How Thatcher Gave Pol Pot a Hand

== Poverty in the United States ==
We are constantly told about how the American economy is "the best it's ever been"; however, this narrative does not hold up to even the slightest scrutiny. For example, we are constantly told about the low unemployment rate; what we ''aren't'' told about is how pitiful many of these new jobs really are. According to a study from the Brookings Institute:<blockquote>53 million Americans between the ages of 18 to 64—accounting for 44% of all workers—qualify as “low-wage.” Their median hourly wages are $10.22, and median annual earnings are about $18,000.</blockquote>Almost ''half'' of the American workforce is officially "low-wage," and that's only if we use an ''extremely'' low standard (below minimum wage, in some states). This is especially horrifying when we remember how many deaths can be directly linked to poverty and deprivation in the United States. According to a study from Columbia University:<blockquote>Overall, 4.5% of U.S. deaths were found to be attributable to poverty... the number of deaths the researchers calculated as attributable to low education (245,000) is comparable to the number caused by heart attacks (192,898), which was the leading cause of U.S. deaths in 2000. The number of deaths attributable to racial segregation (176,000) is comparable to the number from cerebrovascular disease (167,661), the third leading cause of death in 2000, and the number attributable to low social support (162,000) compares to deaths from lung cancer (155,521).</blockquote>The United States also ranks at the very bottom of the developed world in terms of preventable deaths. According to an article in ''Reuters'':<blockquote>If the U.S. health care system performed as well as those of [comparable nations], there would be 101,000 fewer deaths in the United States per year, according to researchers writing in the journal Health Affairs.</blockquote>Hundreds of thousands of people are dying every year because of poverty, deprivation, and lack of access to social services. Capitalism is a fundamentally broken system, which must be abolished.

=== Sources ===

* Brookings Institute | Low-Wage Work is More Prevalent Than You Think, and There Aren't Enough Good Jobs to Go Around
* Columbia University | How Many US Deaths Are Caused by Poverty, Lack of Education, and Other Social Factors?
* Reuters | US Worst in Preventable Death Ranking of Industrialized Countries

== The Nightmare of American Healthcare ==
The American healthcare system is among the most dysfunctional institutions imaginable, with the highest costs in the world, and some of the worst outcomes of any advanced country. That being said, there are still those who deny the necessity of completely overhauling the system, and as such, it is useful to take some time and go over the essential facts of the matter. As always, all sources will be listed at the end.

=== America's Poor Health Outcomes ===
The USA ranks near the bottom of the developed world in most essential health outcomes. A 2020 paper from the American College of Physicians (published in the ''Annals of Internal Medicine)'' reports that "despite higher spending, the United States generally has less favorable outcomes than other countries." Let's take infant mortality, for example. According to a 2016 study from the American Economic Association:<blockquote>The United States has higher infant mortality than peer countries... The US disadvantage persists after adjusting for potential differential reporting of births near the threshold of viability.</blockquote>The ACP paper confirms that America's poor infant mortality ranking persists "even after adjustment for reporting differences." According to the AEA, this subpar performance "is driven by poor birth outcomes among lower socioeconomic status individuals." As if this wasn't bad enough, maternal mortality is also shockingly high in the USA. According to an article from NPR (reporting on data from the CDC):<blockquote>More American women are dying of pregnancy-related complications than any other developed country. Only in the U.S. has the rate of women who die been rising.</blockquote>To make matters worse, there is evidence that the official statistics actually leave out a great number of deaths, meaning that the actual rate is probably much higher. According to an article from ProPublica, "the new rate, while capturing just how poorly the U.S. ranks among other countries, is actually a significant underestimate of the problem." This only makes the issue even more horrifying.

In addition, healthcare-amenable mortality is generally higher in the United States than in peer countries. According to the American College of Physicians:<blockquote>The United States has a higher mortality rate for medical conditions for which there are recognized health care interventions than Germany, the Netherlands, Japan, France, and Australia.</blockquote>A 2017 study in the ''Lancet'' looked at global amendable mortality, finding that the United States ranked 35th in the world in overall performance. In a press release following the publication of the paper, Dr. Christopher Murray (the study's lead author) said the following:<blockquote>What we have found about health care access and quality is disturbing. Having a strong economy does not guarantee good health care. Having great medical technology doesn’t either. We know this because people are not getting the care that should be expected for diseases with established treatment. [...] America’s ranking is an embarrassment, especially considering the US spends more than $9,000 per person on health care annually, more than any other country. Anyone with a stake in the current health care debate, including elected officials at the federal, state, and local levels, should take a look at where the US is falling short.</blockquote>While many people acclaim the US health system for its advanced technology, it is clear that this does no good if people cannot actually access the care they need. All-in-all, it clear that outcomes in the American healthcare system are extremely subpar, especially when one takes into account the ludicrously high cost. On that note, let's discuss cost and expenditures.

=== Cost and Expenditures in the American Healthcare System ===
The United States spends more per-capita on healthcare than any other country on Earth. According to the aforementioned study from the American College of Physicians:<blockquote>The United States spends far more per capita on health care than other wealthy countries, and spending is increasing at an unsustainable rate. [...] The pricing of health care goods and services is substantially higher in the United States than in other developed nations. A 2003 analysis of OECD data showed that health care utilization in the United States did not exceed that of other countries, and price was the key driver of spending differences.</blockquote>Much of this excessive cost is due to the enormous inefficiency and bureaucracy of the American system. There is a massive amount of administrative spending in the US, which is due primarily to the fragmented multi-payer nature of the healthcare system. According to the ACP:<blockquote>In large part owing to its pluralistic financing system, the United States spends more on administration of health care than peer countries. One study estimated that in 2012, the United States spent $471 billion on billing and insurance-related costs—$375 billion (80%) more than in a “simplified financing system,” such as Canada's single-payer model. Another study concluded that administrative costs were 31% of total U.S. health care expenditures, nearly double those of Canada.</blockquote>These findings are validated by a study in the ''Journal of the American Medical Association'', which said the following:<blockquote>The fragmented financing system is one of the principal explanations for the high cost of medical care in the United States. A careful consolidation of financing into some form of single-payer system is probably the only feasible solution.</blockquote>Another study from the same journal says the following:<blockquote>The United States spent approximately twice as much as other high-income countries on medical care, yet utilization rates in the United States were largely similar to those in other nations. Prices of labor and goods, including pharmaceuticals, and administrative costs appeared to be the major drivers of the difference in overall cost between the United States and other high-income countries.</blockquote>Consider the subpar outcomes of the American healthcare system, these high expenditures are entirely unwarranted, and should be a source of national shame for the USA.

=== Access to Care and Lack of Insurance ===
To make matters worse, a large chunk of the American population is uninsured, and many are forced to go without the care that they need. According to the ACP:<blockquote>The United States is the only wealthy industrialized nation without universal health coverage, a crucial component to ensuring quality health care for all without financial burden that causes delay or avoidance of necessary medical care... nearly 30 million remain uninsured, millions more are underinsured, and the number of uninsured persons is expected to grow.</blockquote>The high rate of uninsured people is extremely troubling, especially seeing as a lack of insurance is associated with increased risk of mortality. A 2009 study in the ''American Journal of Public Health'' said the following on the matter:<blockquote>Uninsurance is associated with mortality. [...] Lack of health insurance is associated with as many as 44 789 deaths per year in the United States, more than those caused by kidney disease.</blockquote>A 2017 study in the ''Annals of Internal Medicine'' validated these findings, saying:<blockquote>The evidence strengthens confidence in the Institute of Medicine's conclusion that health insurance saves lives: The odds of dying among the insured relative to the uninsured is 0.71 to 0.97.</blockquote>The high costs of US medical care cause a great deal of financial strain for patients. According to a 2019 study in the ''Journal of General Internal Medicine'' (carried out by the American Cancer Society), "medical financial hardship is common among adults in the USA, with nearly 140 million adults reporting hardship in the past year. Among those aged 18–64 years, more than half report problems with medical bills or medical debt; stress or worry; or forgoing or delaying health care due to cost." A 2019 Gallup poll found that 25% of Americans say that they or a family member have put off treatment for a "serious illness" in the past year because of cost, with a further 8% saying they or a family member has put off treatment for a "less serious illness" in the past year.

Overall, there is strong evidence that the United States' lack of universal healthcare causes tens of thousands of deaths every year, and financial ruin for many more.

=== Single-Payer as the Solution to America's Healthcare Problem ===
Of all the potential solutions put forward by politicians and activists, only one has any chance of actually solving the problem: the establishment of a universal, single-payer system. According to a 2020 study in the ''Lancet'' (conducted at Yale Medical School), a single-payer system would save an enormous amount of money and (more importantly) lives:<blockquote>Taking into account both the costs of coverage expansion and the savings that would be achieved through the Medicare for All Act, we calculate that a single-payer, universal health-care system is likely to lead to a 13% savings in national health-care expenditure, equivalent to more than US $450 billion annually (based on the value of the US$ in 2017). [...] Furthermore, we estimate that ensuring health-care access for all Americans would save more than 68 000 lives and 1.73 million life-years every year compared with the status quo.</blockquote>Claims that a single-payer system would be unaffordable are entirely baseless, and contradicted by the overwhelming mass of evidence. A 2020 meta-analysis in ''PLOS Medicine'' found "a high degree of analytic consensus for the fiscal feasibility of a single-payer approach in the US." As they put it:<blockquote>There is near-consensus in these analyses that single-payer would reduce health expenditures while providing high-quality insurance to all US residents. To achieve net savings, single-payer plans rely on simplified billing and negotiated drug price reductions, as well as global budgets to control spending growth over time. Replacing private insurers with a public system is expected to achieve lower net healthcare costs.</blockquote>With these findings in mind, it is clear that a single-payer system is the only way to solve the problems of the American healthcare system. In healthcare (as in so many other things), capitalism and market-forces can do nothing but harm.

=== Conclusion ===
All-in-all, it is clear that the American medical system is broken to the point where mild reforms cannot hope to fix the problems. The system as a whole must be scrapped; market-forces and private insurance must be removed entirely, and an entirely public, universal system must be established, based on a single-payer financing system. Only then can we hope to provide healthcare to all people free at the point of use, as is their right as human beings.

=== Sources ===

* Annals of Internal Medicine | Envisioning a Better U.S. Health Care System for All
* American Economic Association | Why is Infant Mortality Higher in the United States Than in Europe?
* NPR | U.S. Has the Worst Rate of Maternal Deaths in the Developed World
* ProPublica | The New U.S. Maternal Mortality Rate Fails to Capture Many Deaths
* The Lancet | Healthcare Access and Quality Index Based on Mortality from Causes Amenable to Personal Health Care
* Physicians for a National Health Program | America's Ranking on Amenable Mortality is an Embarrassment
* Journal of the American Medical Association | Is Single Payer the Answer for the US Health Care System?
* Journal of the American Medical Association | Health Care Spending in the United States and Other High-Income Countries
* American Journal of Public Health | Health Insurance and Mortality in US Adults
* Annals of Internal Medicine | The Relationship of Health Insurance and Mortality: Is Lack of Insurance Deadly?
* Journal of General Internal Medicine | Prevalence and Correlates of Medical Financial Hardship in the USA
* Gallup Poll | More Americans Delaying Medical Treatment Due to Cost
* The Lancet | Improving the Prognosis of Health Care in the USA
* PLOS Medicine | Projected Costs of Single-Payer Healthcare Financing in the United States: A Systematic Review of Economic Analyses

== External links ==
{{External links|Wikipedia=United States|EcuRed=Estados Unidos}}

== References ==

=== Citations ===
<references />

=== Bibliography ===

====== Print Sources ======

* Isenberg, Nancy (2016). [https://www.powells.com/book/white-trash-9780143129677 White Trash: The 400-Year Untold History of Class in America]. Viking. ISBN 9780670785971.
* Sakai, J. (2014). [https://www.pmpress.org/index.php?l=product_detail&p=679 Settlers: The Mythology of the White Proletariat from Mayflower to Modern]. Kersplebedeb and PM Press. ISBN 9781629630373.
* Immerwahr, Daniel (2019). [https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374172145 How To Hide An Empire: A History of the Greater United States]. Farrar, Straus and Giroux. ISBN 9780374172145.

United States of America

2021-01-02T20:33:29Z

Iskender: /* History */

United States of America

2021-01-02T18:46:00Z

Iskender: /* History */

The '''United States of America''' ('''USA'''), commonly known as the '''United States''' ('''U.S.''' or '''US'''), is a country located almost entirely in North America. It is made up of 50 states and a federal district: Washington D.C., the capital of the country. With about 332 million inhabitants, it is the third most populous country in the world, although it is quite far from the first two, China and India. It is also the fourth largest country in the world.

Recognized as the [[American imperialism|empire of this era]], it is the most powerful nation of all time. Born as an independent nation in 1776, it has achieved remarkable economic, scientific and military development. It has historically been characterized by forcibly stripping other nations and countries of territories and natural resources to put them at the service of their companies and monopolies. With only 4% of the world's population, it consumes 25% of the energy produced on the planet, and despite its wealth more than a third of its population is not assured of medical care.

Since the collapse of the [[Union of Soviet Socialist Republics|Soviet Union]], the United States has been considered the last remaining [[superpower]] due to its influential culture, economic prowess, military strength and capability to influence the affairs of any country in the world. It played a key role in the [[Cold War]], funding anti-communist dictators, engaging in myriad [[List of US atrocities|war crimes]] as well as [[McCarthyism|persecuting and suppressing socialists]] in its own territory.

== History ==
With the advent of the war of 1776 against the British empire and afterwards, the fledgling United States expanded westward with President Thomas Jefferson (the third in a long line of Presidents) referring to the nation as an "empire of liberty." As Nancy Isenberg elucidates in her book ''White Trash: The 400-Year Untold History of Class in America'': "The Louisiana Territory, as he envisioned it, would encourage agriculture and forestall the growth of manufacturing and urban poverty—that was his formula for liberty. It was not Franklin’s “happy mediocrity” (a compression of classes across an endless stretch of unsettled land), but a nation of farmers large and small. This difference is not nominal: Franklin and Paine used Pennsylvania as their model, while Jefferson saw America’s future—and the contours of its class system—through the prism of Virginia." <ref>Isenberg 2016, pg. 92</ref>

Around 1800, as the lands further to the west were opened up to the fledgling United States, the young state saw the land as a way to appease its population and strengthen its power in the world. As Nancy Isenberg further explains: "By 1800, one-fifth of the American population had resettled on its 'frontier,' the territory between the Appalachian Mountains and the Mississippi. Effective regulation of this mass migration was well beyond the limited powers of the federal government. Even so, officials understood that the country’s future depended on controlling this vast territory. Financial matters were involved too. Government sale of these lands was needed to reduce the nation’s war debts. Besides, the lands were hardly empty, and the potential for violent conflicts with Native Americans was ever present, as white migrants settled on lands they did not own. National greatness depended as much as anything upon the class of settlers that was advancing into the new territories. Would the West be a dumping ground for a refuse population? Or would the United States profit from its natural bounty and grow as a continental empire more equitably? There was much uncertainty." <ref>Isenberg 2016, pg. 110</ref>

By the end of the 19th century, the United States would find itself as a predominant imperialist power in the world, invading countries such as the Philippines in a brutal war for control. In J. Sakai's book ''Settlers'', it's recounted that: "U.S. Brig. Gen. James Bell, upon returning to the U.S. in 1901, said that his men had killed one out of every six Filipinos on the main island of Luzon (that would be some one million deaths just there). It is certain that at least 200,000 Filipinos died in the genocidal conquest. In Samar province, where the patriotic resistance to the U.S. invaders was extremely persistent, U.S. Gen. Jacob Smith ordered his troops to shoot every Filipino man, woman or child they could find 'over ten' (years of age)."<ref>Sakai 2014, p. 111</ref>

== The Crimes of US Foreign Policy: A Very Brief Introduction ==
The United States has long seen itself as a very special nation, playing a uniquely noble role on the world stage. While other nations are said to be guided by vulgar self-interest, the United States is supposedly different; the primary goal of American foreign policy is, according to the State Department’s website, to “promote and demonstrate democratic values and advance a free, peaceful, and prosperous world.” But how well does the United States live up to those so-called “democratic values”? Does it in fact promote the cause of a “free, peaceful, and prosperous world”? Let’s look at the facts.

=== US Foreign Aid and Human Rights ===
To begin with, the US has a horrific foreign aid record. It seems that American aid is quite a good predictor of human rights abuses, and that this trend goes back decades; according to a 1981 study in the journal ''Comparative Politics,'' US aid is “clearly distributed disproportionately to countries with repressive governments… this distribution represented a pattern and not merely one or a few isolated cases.” Indeed, it is quite easy to find examples of the United States supporting vicious repressive regimes (such as Pinochet's Chile, the Shah of Iran, and the military junta of El Salvador).

Similarly, a 1984 study in the ''Journal of Peace Research'' looked at human rights and US aid under Nixon, Ford, and Carter. The authors found that “under Presidents Nixon and Ford foreign assistance was directly related to levels of human rights violations, i.e. more aid flowed to regimes with higher levels of violation, while under President Carter no clear statistical pattern emerged.” They therefore conclude that “the Carter administration did not implement a policy of human rights which actually guided the disposition of military and economic assistance.” In other words, the US attitude towards human rights seems to vary from outright hostility (under more conservative administrations) to mere indifference (under more liberal ones).

More recent studies have painted a similarly bleak picture. A 2008 book by Rhonda Callaway and Elizabeth Matthews found that “both United States economic and military aid have detrimental effects on security rights of the citizens in recipient states.” They note that these results “provide support for those critical of the US foreign assistance program.” The most recent research has continued to back up these conclusions. A 2016 study in the ''Quarterly Journal of Political Science'' sampled 150 countries from 1972 to 2008, finding that “US aid harms political rights, fosters other forms of state repression (measured along multiple dimensions), and strengthens authoritarian governance. [...] These findings counter the publicly stated objectives of the US government to foster political liberalization abroad via bilateral economic assistance.”

All-in-all, it seems that aid from the United States has a deleterious impact on the human rights situation in recipient nations. It provides military and economic aid to repressive regimes, arming and propping up some of the most vicious dictators on the planet, all in service of its own interests.

=== The Human Cost of the "War on Terror" ===
Lest we think that the harm of US foreign policy stops at providing aid to dictators, the United States has also carried out a great deal of violence all on its own. To demonstrate the enormous death toll of US military intervention and invasion, let's take a look at the post-9/11 "War on Terror," including the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan (among others).

According to a 2019 report from Brown University's Costs of War project, "between 770,000 and 801,000 people have died" in what the report refers to as "America's post-9/11 wars." This tally does not include so-called "indirect deaths," such as those resulting from displacement and the destruction of crucial infrastructure (e.g. water and sanitation systems). In a 2019 article for the ''Hill,'' David Vine (Professor of Anthropology at American University) writes that "total deaths during the post-2001 U.S. wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Pakistan and Yemen [are] likely to reach 3.1 million or more — around 200 times the number of U.S. dead." Others have come to similar conclusions. According to a 2018 report from the ''Intercept:''<blockquote>In addition to those killed by direct acts [of] violence, the number of indirect deaths — those resulting from disease, displacement, and the loss of critical infrastructure — is believed to be several times higher, running into the millions.</blockquote>These death tolls are backed up by earlier research. A 2009 article from the MIT Center for International Studies, which looked ''only'' at Iraq, found that "we have, at present, between 800,000 and 1.3 million 'excess deaths' in this war as we approach its six-year anniversary." Keep in mind that this is only one of the invaded countries, and that this article was authored in 2009 (more than a decade ago). The current death tolls, when factoring in all nations (as well as the decade of subsequent warfare), are likely many times higher.

The United States government has engaged in a concerted effort to hide the civilian cost of its Middle Eastern wars. According to a 2017 report from the ''New York Times'', the actual rate of civilian causalities inflicted by coalition forces in the Middle East is "more than 31 times that acknowledged by the coalition. It is at such a distance from official claims that, in terms of civilian deaths, this may be the least transparent war in recent American history."

In point of fact, US forces often kill more people than the terrorists they are supposedly there to fight; a 2019 article in the ''New York Times'' reports that "more civilians are being killed by Afghan government and American forces than by the Taliban and other insurgents, according to a [United Nations] report on Wednesday." This is not even mentioning the US drone program, which was detailed in a 2013 report from the ''Intercept.'' To make matters worse, civilian casualties from US wars have been increasing dramatically since Donald Trump took office, according to a 2018 article from the ''Washington Post.''

While it must be noted that the United States did not personally kill all of the millions of people mentioned above, it still bears a heavy burden for these deaths, having initiated the invasions, and started the entire conflict. In the same way that we hold Hitler responsible for the deaths of WWII (since he was the one who started it), so too should we hold the United States responsible for the deaths listed above. For more information on the civilian cost of US intervention, I recommend ''The Deaths of Others: The Fate of Civilians in America's Wars'', a study authored by John Tirman, director of the MIT Center for International Studies.

=== Coups and Regime Change: The Case of Chile ===
The United States has a long history of overthrowing governments it doesn't like, typically then replacing them with brutal dictatorships. There are many, ''many'' examples of this, ranging from Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala, to Mohammad Mosaddegh in Iran (a coup for which the CIA actually admitted responsibility in 2013). In order to understand the horrific effects that these coups often have, it will be helpful to take a particular example: that of Chile, where in 1973 the United States helped to overthrow the elected socialist government of Salvador Allende, replacing it with the right-wing dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet. A 2017 article in the ''New York Times'' details many of the documents proving US intervention. As one man put it:<blockquote>“To see on a piece of paper, for example, the president of the United States ordering the C.I.A. to preemptively overthrow a democratically elected president in Chile is stunning,” Mr. Kornbluh said. “The importance of having these documents in the museum is for the new generations of Chileans to actually see them.”</blockquote>As if this were not enough, in a 2014 interview with the ''Atlantic,'' Jack Devine (a former CIA agent who was in Chile at the time of the coup) confirmed that the Nixon administration was directly instructing the CIA to support the coup. According to declassified documents, Nixon had previously ordered Henry Kissinger to "make the economy scream," in an effort to rally support for the right-wing forces. The United States also attempted to prevent Allende from being inaugurated after his election, and provided support for state-terrorist campaigns after the coup. Now that the US role has been established, let's look at what Pinochet did once in power.

To begin with, Pinochet killed, tortured, and "disappeared" tens of thousands of people. According to a 2011 article from the BBC, the "total of recognized victims" numbers over 40,000, including more than 3,000 who were killed or forcibly disappeared. The rest were kidnapped, tortured, exiled, or some combination of the above. Pinochet was one of the most vicious dictators in the history of Latin America, and the United States played a direct role in propping up his regime.

In addition, Pinochet introduced hard-line neoliberal reforms, which did immense damage to Chile's economy. A good study on this was published in 1990 in the journal ''Critical Sociology''. The authors note that growth rates under Pinochet were remarkably unimpressive:<blockquote>The Pinochet model produced growth rates well below the Chilean average established over the 1950-72 period. The average yearly GDP rate of growth in the latter period was 3.9 percent, while the Pinochet regime averaged 1.4 percent over the 1974-83 period... overall growth throughout the 1980s has been far from miraculous: GDP per capita grew at a 1.2 percent average rate between 1980 and 1989, below the 1.7 percent average yearly rate for 1950-72.</blockquote>In addition, the authors charge Pinochet with "creating a great deal of poverty," noting that unemployment "rose dramatically after the coup," while real wages fell. At the same time, social expenditures were reduced, and "infectious diseases readily associated with poverty, overcrowding poor hygiene, and inadequate sanitation underwent explosive growth." This assessment is echoed by a study in the ''International Development Planning Review'', which found that "the radical neoliberal policies and structural adjustment of the 1970s and 1980s during the Pinochet regime had severe negative effects on the poor and middle class." The poverty rate itself increased dramatically; according to a report from the North American Congress on Latin America:<blockquote>The number of poor Chileans doubled during the Pinochet regime. By 1989, 44% of Chileans lived in poverty.</blockquote>In addition, it seems that Pinochet's privatizations also helped to create enormous corruption. According to a study in the ''Journal of Economic History,'' "firms were sold underpriced to politically connected buyers." This had predictable consequences:<blockquote>These newly private firms benefited financially from the Pinochet regime. Once democracy arrived, they formed connections with the new government, financed political campaigns, and were more likely to appear in the Panama Papers. These findings reveal how dictatorships can influence young democracies using privatization reforms.</blockquote>All of this goes to show the horrifying impact that US intervention in regime change had on Chile. One can only imagine the combined suffering of the people in all of the nations that the United States has "intervened" in over the last several decades.

=== Conclusion ===
This has been only a very brief summary of the crimes committed abroad by the United States government. Some of the very worst offenses (most notably the Vietnam War, as well as US support for the Pol Pot regime) have been omitted, if only because they are so egregious as to require their own post. Hopefully this has given a general introduction to the topic, which will spark the reader to make their own investigation into the issue. Useful reading includes ''Killing Hope'' by William Blum, as well as ''Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower,'' by the same author.

=== Sources ===

* U.S. Department of State | About Page
* Comparative Politics | U. S. Foreign Policy and Human Rights Violations in Latin America: A Comparative Analysis of Foreign Aid Distributions
* Journal of Peace Research | Human Rights and U.S. Foreign Assistance from Nixon to Carter
* Routledge | Strategic US Foreign Assistance: The Battle Between Human Rights and National Security
* Quarterly Journal of Political Science | Does Foreign Aid Harm Political Rights? Evidence from U.S. Aid
* Brown University | The Cost of the Global War on Terror: $6.4 Trillion and 801,000 Lives
* The Hill | Reckoning With the Costs of War: It's Time to Take Responsibility
* The Intercept | It's Time for America to Reckon With the Staggering Death Toll of the Post-9/11 Wars
* MIT Center for International Studies | Bush's War Dead: One Million
* The New York Times | The Uncounted
* The New York Times | U.S. and Afghan Forces Killed More Civilians Than Taliban Did, Report Finds
* The Intercept | The Assassination Complex: The Drone Papers
* The Washington Post | Middle East Civilian Deaths Have Soared Under Trump. And the Media Mostly Shrug.
* MIT Center for International Studies | The Deaths of Others: The Fate of Civilians in America's Wars
* CNN | In Declassified Document, CIA Acknowledges Role in '53 Iran Coup
* The New York Times | Documenting U.S. Role in Democracy’s Fall and Dictator’s Rise in Chile
* The Atlantic | The Other 9/11: A CIA Agent Remembers Chile's Coup
* National Security Archive | Chile and the United States: Declassified Documents Relating to the Military Coup, September 11, 1973
* BBC | Chile Recognizes 9,800 More Victims of Pinochet's Rule
* Critical Sociology | The Chilean "Economic Miracle": An Empirical Critique
* International Development Planning Review | Land of Miracles? A Critical Analysis of Poverty Reduction Strategies in Chile, 1975-2005
* NACLA | In Pursuit of "Growth With Equity": The Limits of Chile's Free-Market Social Reforms
* Journal of Economic History | The Privatization Origins of Political Corporations: Evidence from the Pinochet Regime
* The New Statesman | How Thatcher Gave Pol Pot a Hand

== Poverty in the United States ==
We are constantly told about how the American economy is "the best it's ever been"; however, this narrative does not hold up to even the slightest scrutiny. For example, we are constantly told about the low unemployment rate; what we ''aren't'' told about is how pitiful many of these new jobs really are. According to a study from the Brookings Institute:<blockquote>53 million Americans between the ages of 18 to 64—accounting for 44% of all workers—qualify as “low-wage.” Their median hourly wages are $10.22, and median annual earnings are about $18,000.</blockquote>Almost ''half'' of the American workforce is officially "low-wage," and that's only if we use an ''extremely'' low standard (below minimum wage, in some states). This is especially horrifying when we remember how many deaths can be directly linked to poverty and deprivation in the United States. According to a study from Columbia University:<blockquote>Overall, 4.5% of U.S. deaths were found to be attributable to poverty... the number of deaths the researchers calculated as attributable to low education (245,000) is comparable to the number caused by heart attacks (192,898), which was the leading cause of U.S. deaths in 2000. The number of deaths attributable to racial segregation (176,000) is comparable to the number from cerebrovascular disease (167,661), the third leading cause of death in 2000, and the number attributable to low social support (162,000) compares to deaths from lung cancer (155,521).</blockquote>The United States also ranks at the very bottom of the developed world in terms of preventable deaths. According to an article in ''Reuters'':<blockquote>If the U.S. health care system performed as well as those of [comparable nations], there would be 101,000 fewer deaths in the United States per year, according to researchers writing in the journal Health Affairs.</blockquote>Hundreds of thousands of people are dying every year because of poverty, deprivation, and lack of access to social services. Capitalism is a fundamentally broken system, which must be abolished.

=== Sources ===

* Brookings Institute | Low-Wage Work is More Prevalent Than You Think, and There Aren't Enough Good Jobs to Go Around
* Columbia University | How Many US Deaths Are Caused by Poverty, Lack of Education, and Other Social Factors?
* Reuters | US Worst in Preventable Death Ranking of Industrialized Countries

== The Nightmare of American Healthcare ==
The American healthcare system is among the most dysfunctional institutions imaginable, with the highest costs in the world, and some of the worst outcomes of any advanced country. That being said, there are still those who deny the necessity of completely overhauling the system, and as such, it is useful to take some time and go over the essential facts of the matter. As always, all sources will be listed at the end.

=== America's Poor Health Outcomes ===
The USA ranks near the bottom of the developed world in most essential health outcomes. A 2020 paper from the American College of Physicians (published in the ''Annals of Internal Medicine)'' reports that "despite higher spending, the United States generally has less favorable outcomes than other countries." Let's take infant mortality, for example. According to a 2016 study from the American Economic Association:<blockquote>The United States has higher infant mortality than peer countries... The US disadvantage persists after adjusting for potential differential reporting of births near the threshold of viability.</blockquote>The ACP paper confirms that America's poor infant mortality ranking persists "even after adjustment for reporting differences." According to the AEA, this subpar performance "is driven by poor birth outcomes among lower socioeconomic status individuals." As if this wasn't bad enough, maternal mortality is also shockingly high in the USA. According to an article from NPR (reporting on data from the CDC):<blockquote>More American women are dying of pregnancy-related complications than any other developed country. Only in the U.S. has the rate of women who die been rising.</blockquote>To make matters worse, there is evidence that the official statistics actually leave out a great number of deaths, meaning that the actual rate is probably much higher. According to an article from ProPublica, "the new rate, while capturing just how poorly the U.S. ranks among other countries, is actually a significant underestimate of the problem." This only makes the issue even more horrifying.

In addition, healthcare-amenable mortality is generally higher in the United States than in peer countries. According to the American College of Physicians:<blockquote>The United States has a higher mortality rate for medical conditions for which there are recognized health care interventions than Germany, the Netherlands, Japan, France, and Australia.</blockquote>A 2017 study in the ''Lancet'' looked at global amendable mortality, finding that the United States ranked 35th in the world in overall performance. In a press release following the publication of the paper, Dr. Christopher Murray (the study's lead author) said the following:<blockquote>What we have found about health care access and quality is disturbing. Having a strong economy does not guarantee good health care. Having great medical technology doesn’t either. We know this because people are not getting the care that should be expected for diseases with established treatment. [...] America’s ranking is an embarrassment, especially considering the US spends more than $9,000 per person on health care annually, more than any other country. Anyone with a stake in the current health care debate, including elected officials at the federal, state, and local levels, should take a look at where the US is falling short.</blockquote>While many people acclaim the US health system for its advanced technology, it is clear that this does no good if people cannot actually access the care they need. All-in-all, it clear that outcomes in the American healthcare system are extremely subpar, especially when one takes into account the ludicrously high cost. On that note, let's discuss cost and expenditures.

=== Cost and Expenditures in the American Healthcare System ===
The United States spends more per-capita on healthcare than any other country on Earth. According to the aforementioned study from the American College of Physicians:<blockquote>The United States spends far more per capita on health care than other wealthy countries, and spending is increasing at an unsustainable rate. [...] The pricing of health care goods and services is substantially higher in the United States than in other developed nations. A 2003 analysis of OECD data showed that health care utilization in the United States did not exceed that of other countries, and price was the key driver of spending differences.</blockquote>Much of this excessive cost is due to the enormous inefficiency and bureaucracy of the American system. There is a massive amount of administrative spending in the US, which is due primarily to the fragmented multi-payer nature of the healthcare system. According to the ACP:<blockquote>In large part owing to its pluralistic financing system, the United States spends more on administration of health care than peer countries. One study estimated that in 2012, the United States spent $471 billion on billing and insurance-related costs—$375 billion (80%) more than in a “simplified financing system,” such as Canada's single-payer model. Another study concluded that administrative costs were 31% of total U.S. health care expenditures, nearly double those of Canada.</blockquote>These findings are validated by a study in the ''Journal of the American Medical Association'', which said the following:<blockquote>The fragmented financing system is one of the principal explanations for the high cost of medical care in the United States. A careful consolidation of financing into some form of single-payer system is probably the only feasible solution.</blockquote>Another study from the same journal says the following:<blockquote>The United States spent approximately twice as much as other high-income countries on medical care, yet utilization rates in the United States were largely similar to those in other nations. Prices of labor and goods, including pharmaceuticals, and administrative costs appeared to be the major drivers of the difference in overall cost between the United States and other high-income countries.</blockquote>Consider the subpar outcomes of the American healthcare system, these high expenditures are entirely unwarranted, and should be a source of national shame for the USA.

=== Access to Care and Lack of Insurance ===
To make matters worse, a large chunk of the American population is uninsured, and many are forced to go without the care that they need. According to the ACP:<blockquote>The United States is the only wealthy industrialized nation without universal health coverage, a crucial component to ensuring quality health care for all without financial burden that causes delay or avoidance of necessary medical care... nearly 30 million remain uninsured, millions more are underinsured, and the number of uninsured persons is expected to grow.</blockquote>The high rate of uninsured people is extremely troubling, especially seeing as a lack of insurance is associated with increased risk of mortality. A 2009 study in the ''American Journal of Public Health'' said the following on the matter:<blockquote>Uninsurance is associated with mortality. [...] Lack of health insurance is associated with as many as 44 789 deaths per year in the United States, more than those caused by kidney disease.</blockquote>A 2017 study in the ''Annals of Internal Medicine'' validated these findings, saying:<blockquote>The evidence strengthens confidence in the Institute of Medicine's conclusion that health insurance saves lives: The odds of dying among the insured relative to the uninsured is 0.71 to 0.97.</blockquote>The high costs of US medical care cause a great deal of financial strain for patients. According to a 2019 study in the ''Journal of General Internal Medicine'' (carried out by the American Cancer Society), "medical financial hardship is common among adults in the USA, with nearly 140 million adults reporting hardship in the past year. Among those aged 18–64 years, more than half report problems with medical bills or medical debt; stress or worry; or forgoing or delaying health care due to cost." A 2019 Gallup poll found that 25% of Americans say that they or a family member have put off treatment for a "serious illness" in the past year because of cost, with a further 8% saying they or a family member has put off treatment for a "less serious illness" in the past year.

Overall, there is strong evidence that the United States' lack of universal healthcare causes tens of thousands of deaths every year, and financial ruin for many more.

=== Single-Payer as the Solution to America's Healthcare Problem ===
Of all the potential solutions put forward by politicians and activists, only one has any chance of actually solving the problem: the establishment of a universal, single-payer system. According to a 2020 study in the ''Lancet'' (conducted at Yale Medical School), a single-payer system would save an enormous amount of money and (more importantly) lives:<blockquote>Taking into account both the costs of coverage expansion and the savings that would be achieved through the Medicare for All Act, we calculate that a single-payer, universal health-care system is likely to lead to a 13% savings in national health-care expenditure, equivalent to more than US $450 billion annually (based on the value of the US$ in 2017). [...] Furthermore, we estimate that ensuring health-care access for all Americans would save more than 68 000 lives and 1.73 million life-years every year compared with the status quo.</blockquote>Claims that a single-payer system would be unaffordable are entirely baseless, and contradicted by the overwhelming mass of evidence. A 2020 meta-analysis in ''PLOS Medicine'' found "a high degree of analytic consensus for the fiscal feasibility of a single-payer approach in the US." As they put it:<blockquote>There is near-consensus in these analyses that single-payer would reduce health expenditures while providing high-quality insurance to all US residents. To achieve net savings, single-payer plans rely on simplified billing and negotiated drug price reductions, as well as global budgets to control spending growth over time. Replacing private insurers with a public system is expected to achieve lower net healthcare costs.</blockquote>With these findings in mind, it is clear that a single-payer system is the only way to solve the problems of the American healthcare system. In healthcare (as in so many other things), capitalism and market-forces can do nothing but harm.

=== Conclusion ===
All-in-all, it is clear that the American medical system is broken to the point where mild reforms cannot hope to fix the problems. The system as a whole must be scrapped; market-forces and private insurance must be removed entirely, and an entirely public, universal system must be established, based on a single-payer financing system. Only then can we hope to provide healthcare to all people free at the point of use, as is their right as human beings.

=== Sources ===

* Annals of Internal Medicine | Envisioning a Better U.S. Health Care System for All
* American Economic Association | Why is Infant Mortality Higher in the United States Than in Europe?
* NPR | U.S. Has the Worst Rate of Maternal Deaths in the Developed World
* ProPublica | The New U.S. Maternal Mortality Rate Fails to Capture Many Deaths
* The Lancet | Healthcare Access and Quality Index Based on Mortality from Causes Amenable to Personal Health Care
* Physicians for a National Health Program | America's Ranking on Amenable Mortality is an Embarrassment
* Journal of the American Medical Association | Is Single Payer the Answer for the US Health Care System?
* Journal of the American Medical Association | Health Care Spending in the United States and Other High-Income Countries
* American Journal of Public Health | Health Insurance and Mortality in US Adults
* Annals of Internal Medicine | The Relationship of Health Insurance and Mortality: Is Lack of Insurance Deadly?
* Journal of General Internal Medicine | Prevalence and Correlates of Medical Financial Hardship in the USA
* Gallup Poll | More Americans Delaying Medical Treatment Due to Cost
* The Lancet | Improving the Prognosis of Health Care in the USA
* PLOS Medicine | Projected Costs of Single-Payer Healthcare Financing in the United States: A Systematic Review of Economic Analyses

== External links ==
{{External links|Wikipedia=United States|EcuRed=Estados Unidos}}

== References ==

=== Citations ===
<references />

=== Bibliography ===

====== Print Sources ======

* Isenberg, Nancy (2016). [https://www.powells.com/book/white-trash-9780143129677 White Trash: The 400-Year Untold History of Class in America]. Viking. ISBN 9780670785971.
* Sakai, J. (2014). [https://www.pmpress.org/index.php?l=product_detail&p=679 Settlers: The Mythology of the White Proletariat from Mayflower to Modern]. Kersplebedeb and PM Press. ISBN 9781629630373.

United States of America

2020-12-04T12:11:50Z

Iskender:

United States of America

2020-12-04T12:11:10Z

Iskender:

Capitalism

2020-12-02T11:26:38Z

Iskender:

'''Capitalism''' is a social system based on the private ownership of the means of production and private expropriation of socially produced wealth. The main feature of capitalism is the exploitation of the [[Proletariat|workers]] by the [[bourgeoisie]] through [[wage-slavery]].

== Definition ==
The definition of capitalism varies. The term "social system" is used here, because the capitalist mode of production also determines its political and cultural superstructure.

== Contradictions ==
The fundamental contradiction of Capitalism is that between the social character of production and the private capitalist form of appropriating the product of labor. <ref group="note">Workers in commodity-producing industries provide their labor as a collective force, and that is the social character of production. The bourgeoisie privately expropriate the product of collective labor.</ref> This contradiction expresses the profound antagonism between wage labor and capital, between the developing productive forces and the capitalist relations of production which shackle them. As the modern productive forces, based on large mechanized industry, develop, production becomes more and more concentrated, the social division of labor progresses, leading to a widening and intensification of the economic links between the various enterprises and branches of the economy.

During the production of each commodity, there is, directly or indirectly, participation of enterprises of different branches of production and hundreds of thousands to millions of workers, grouped in the capitalist enterprises. The process of production and work, through the development of [[productive forces]] is increasingly socialized. However, both production and its results do not belong to those who are really its creators — the workers — but to private persons, to the capitalists, who use the social wealth for profit, and not in the interest of society as a whole.

== History ==
With the advent of the 1980s, there was "a surge in economic and legal reforms in developed and emerging markets alike that prioritized markets over government in allocating economic resources, a process that was further galvanized by the disappearance of the iron curtain and the collapse of socialism."<ref>Pistor 2019, p. 1</ref>

== Governments Under Capitalism ==
Under capitalism, the law is placed firmly "in the service of capital."<ref>Pistor 2019, p. xi</ref> As Professor of Comparative Law at Columbia Law School Katharina Pistor further elucidates: "Through its courts, bailiffs, and police forces, states enforce not only their own commands, but also private property rights and the binding commitments private parties make to one another. This does not mean that state power is omnipresent. As long as the threat of coercive law enforcement is sufficiently credible, voluntary compliance can be achieved without mobilizing it in every case."<ref>Pistor 2019, pp. 17 - 18</ref>

== References ==

=== Notes ===
<references group="note"/>

=== Citations ===
<references />

=== Bibliography ===

====== Print sources ======

* Pistor, Katharina (2019). [https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691178974/the-code-of-capital The Code of Capital: How the Law Creates Wealth and Inequality]. Princeton University Press. ISBN 0691189439.

Capitalism

2020-12-02T10:17:36Z

Iskender: I put in a history section.

'''Capitalism''' is a social system based on the private ownership of the means of production and private expropriation of socially produced wealth. The main feature of capitalism is the exploitation of the [[Proletariat|workers]] by the [[bourgeoisie]] through [[wage-slavery]].

== Definition ==
The definition of capitalism varies. The term "social system" is used here, because the capitalist mode of production also determines its political and cultural superstructure.

== Contradictions ==
The fundamental contradiction of Capitalism is that between the social character of production and the private capitalist form of appropriating the product of labor. <ref group="note">Workers in commodity-producing industries provide their labor as a collective force, and that is the social character of production. The bourgeoisie privately expropriate the product of collective labor.</ref> This contradiction expresses the profound antagonism between wage labor and capital, between the developing productive forces and the capitalist relations of production which shackle them. As the modern productive forces, based on large mechanized industry, develop, production becomes more and more concentrated, the social division of labor progresses, leading to a widening and intensification of the economic links between the various enterprises and branches of the economy.

During the production of each commodity, there is, directly or indirectly, participation of enterprises of different branches of production and hundreds of thousands to millions of workers, grouped in the capitalist enterprises. The process of production and work, through the development of [[productive forces]] is increasingly socialized. However, both production and its results do not belong to those who are really its creators — the workers — but to private persons, to the capitalists, who use the social wealth for profit, and not in the interest of society as a whole.

== History ==
With the advent of the 1980s, there was "a surge in economic and legal reforms in developed and emerging markets alike that prioritized markets over government in allocating economic resources, a process that was further galvanized by the disappearance of the iron curtain and the collapse of socialism."<ref>Pistor 2019, p. 1</ref>

== Governments Under Capitalism ==
Under capitalism, the law is placed firmly "in the service of capital."<ref>Pistor 2019, p. xi</ref>

== References ==

=== Notes ===
<references group="note"/>

=== Citations ===
<references />

=== Bibliography ===

====== Print sources ======

* Pistor, Katharina (2019). [https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691178974/the-code-of-capital The Code of Capital: How the Law Creates Wealth and Inequality]. Princeton University Press. ISBN 0691189439.

Capitalism

2020-12-02T09:35:41Z

Iskender:

'''Capitalism''' is a social system based on the private ownership of the means of production and private expropriation of socially produced wealth. The main feature of capitalism is the exploitation of the [[Proletariat|workers]] by the [[bourgeoisie]] through [[wage-slavery]].

== Definition ==
The definition of capitalism varies. The term "social system" is used here, because the capitalist mode of production also determines its political and cultural superstructure.

== Contradictions ==
The fundamental contradiction of Capitalism is that between the social character of production and the private capitalist form of appropriating the product of labor. <ref group="note">Workers in commodity-producing industries provide their labor as a collective force, and that is the social character of production. The bourgeoisie privately expropriate the product of collective labor.</ref> This contradiction expresses the profound antagonism between wage labor and capital, between the developing productive forces and the capitalist relations of production which shackle them. As the modern productive forces, based on large mechanized industry, develop, production becomes more and more concentrated, the social division of labor progresses, leading to a widening and intensification of the economic links between the various enterprises and branches of the economy.

During the production of each commodity, there is, directly or indirectly, participation of enterprises of different branches of production and hundreds of thousands to millions of workers, grouped in the capitalist enterprises. The process of production and work, through the development of [[productive forces]] is increasingly socialized. However, both production and its results do not belong to those who are really its creators — the workers — but to private persons, to the capitalists, who use the social wealth for profit, and not in the interest of society as a whole.

== Governments Under Capitalism ==
Under capitalism, the law is placed firmly "in the service of capital."<ref>Pistor 2019, p. xi</ref>

== References ==

=== Notes ===
<references group="note"/>

=== Citations ===
<references />

=== Bibliography ===

====== Print sources ======

* Pistor, Katharina (2019). [https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691178974/the-code-of-capital The Code of Capital: How the Law Creates Wealth and Inequality]. Princeton University Press. ISBN 0691189439.

Capitalism

2020-12-02T09:30:08Z

Iskender:

Cold War

2020-12-01T11:51:47Z

Iskender:

The '''Cold War''' was a term coined by anti-communist essayist [[George Orwell]] and given to a period of tension between the [[capitalism|capitalist]] and [[socialism|socialist]] world following World War II, up until the illegal, violent [[dissolution of the USSR]]. The Cold War has been instrumentalised by the imperial core so as to pretend communism is a crumbling ideology that belongs to the 20th century, but it is safe to say that communism is still very much alive and keeps being targeted by imperial interests, making the Cold War an ongoing process.

Today, some marxist-leninists are talking about a second Cold War aimed at [[China]].

== Origins ==
The US and more generally the Allied block were content to let the Soviets fight the brunt of the war against Germany and then swoop in to deliver the finishing blow after the two had exhausted each other. Notably, Stalin offered to commit 1 million Red Army soldiers to an invasion of Germany if France and the British Empire followed with their own troops, opening two fronts at once before Hitler had a chance to ramp up the war effort.<ref>https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/3223834/Stalin-planned-to-send-a-million-troops-to-stop-Hitler-if-Britain-and-France-agreed-pact.html</ref> The Allied powers refused his request, as they had hoped that both would fight each other first. Despite the close alliance in the anti-fascist war, this remained an area of contention which the allied powers failed to recognise.

After WW2, tensions picked back up between capitalists and socialists, the latter holding a dominant place in Eastern Europe and socialist-led anti-colonialist movements rising to the fore. The USSR, whom especially had industrialized rapidly since Hitler's election and was now a world power of its own regard, could no longer allow herself to be treated as a pariah in international politics. As the Red Army were the first into Berlin, which rushed the surrender of Germany and the victory of anti-fascist pro-democratic forces, they scared the reactionaries of the Allied powers into uniting against the Soviet republics (so as to defeat socialism for the time being and reinforce their bourgeois class privileges in the world).

While bourgeois historians will downplay the criminal acts committed by the Allies (excluding the USSR after 1945), or try to make some false equivalences between the two powers abusing their authority (allegedly during the so-called Berlin Blockade of 1948), we know since the opening of the Soviet archives and the declassification of US documents that the [[Cold War]] was a front for imperialism and anticommunism, and most if not all international criminal acts were committed by the Allied powers -- such as the [[Years of Lead]] in Italy ([[NATO]]-funded neo-nazi groups under [[Operation Gladio]] committed several terrorist acts) or the separation of Germany itself (The Eastern side was provoked into taking a limited set of restrictions to ward off pernicious Western influence, which was left less in ruination by the war and old reactionaries were being reinstated).

== Three worlds theory ==
It is also from the Cold War that the terms first-, second-, and third-world started appearing in bourgeois republics.

The ''first-world'', also called the "free world" by the bourgeoisie, represented the countries aligned with the United States.

The ''second-world'' were therefore the countries aligned towards the USSR, and the ''third-world'' were the non-aligned countries.

Such distinctions were mostly made in the [[imperial core]]. Countries such as [[Cuba]] considered themselves non-aligned, but were forced to trade heavily with the USSR as first-world aligned countries embargoed them -- which more easily allowed these same countries to later justify military intervention, citing communist ties as a reason for intervention. Several other 'third world' countries were forced to turn to the socialist bloc after being turned down and facing hostility from imperialist powers.

== Conflicts caused by the first world ==

=== America ===

==== North America ====

==== South America ====
During the 60's and the 70's, the United States has helped install right-wing dictatorships in Latin America, such as Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Paraguay and Uruguay, Colombia, Peru and Venezuela. One of the most pervasive operations against Latin America was Operation Condor, which was a United States-backed campaign of political repression and state terror involving intelligence operations and assassination of left-wing opponents. Some estimates are that at least 60,000 deaths can be attributed to Condor, roughly 30,000 of these in Argentina, and the Archives of Terror discovered in Chile list 50,000 killed, 30,000 disappeared and 400,000 imprisoned.

=== Europe ===

==== Western Europe ====
In Italy, where Italian fascists were never systematically reeducated and moved away from positions of authority, NATO started recruiting them to commit assassinations and terrorist acts against communists. This was broadly known as Operation Gladio, which was more of a collection of smaller operations. For a long time, most people (including in Italy) fought the biggest terrorist acts were committed by communist organisations, due in part to a disinformation campaign waged by various Italian governmental agencies. In truth, most if not all assassinations and acts of terrorism were committed by neo-nazi organisations.

==== Eastern Europe ====

=== Middle East ===

=== Africa ===

==== North Africa ====

==== West Africa ====

==== East Africa ====

==== South Africa ====
Southern Africa would prove to be a major struggle for many in the hopes of liberation during the Cold War. After the Sharpeville massacre in South Africa, there was public outcry against apartheid both in the country and outside of it, particularly in regards to the United States' relationship with the RSA (Republic of South Africa). As historian Gerald Horne contends: "Washington was in the same bind in which it had been ensnared for years: eager to take advantage of he vast mineral wealth and cheap labor of Southern Africa but reluctant to be left holding the apartheid tar-baby. Then there was the vise in which U.S. imperialism found itself when it was compelled to back away from centuries of encrusted anti-Negro racism. It was in 1960 that presidential aspirant Richard M. Nixon declared ingloriously that "some of the peoples of Africa have been out of the trees for only about fifty years." These remarks were followed by another official who spoke acerbically of JFK's comrades G. Mennen Williams and Chester Bowles: "when they saw a handful of black baboons beating tom-toms they saw George Washington." A 1962 State Department policy paper cast Africans as barbarians in a sea of whiteness. Yet it was Williams - JFK's point man on Africa - who acknowledged that unless Washington moved more forcefully against apartheid it might lose military bases in Libya and Ethiopia, scientific bases in Nigeria and Zanzibar, and communications facilities in Liberia and Nigeria."<ref>Horne 2019, p. 313</ref> Around the same time, Angola would see the start of an anti-colonial war spearheaded by the MPLA (Movement for the Liberation of Angola) from February 1961 until liberation in 1975, though it would face subsequent problems with an internal revolt led by Jonas Savimbi and "sponsored by Washington and Pretoria."<ref>Horne 2019, p. 315</ref>

=== Asia ===

==== East Asia ====
In Indonesia, the USA funded General Suharto's effort in committing genocide against the native populations. This was all committed under the guise of fighting communist influence, and led to more than a million death of local communists and other civilians (such as people deemed "ethnic Chinese" or atheists, but also Gerwani members or Javanese Abangan).

==== South Asia ====
The Afghanistan War of 1979, which is part of a broader imperialist conflict lasting to this day, was caused after the Afghan government asked the Soviets for help fighting against the Mujahideen, who were soon funded and protected by NATO. Notably, Osama bin Laden was directly trained and funded by the USA during this war.

==== South-east Asia ====
The [[Vietnam War]], which led to the creation of the ''Socialist Republic of Vietnam'', was first caused by French colonial interests in what they then called ''Indochina''. After their devastating defeat, the USA swooped in to pick the fight back up and prevent a socialist Vietnam from being formed.

== References ==

=== Citations ===
<references />

=== Bibliography ===

====== Print Sources ======

* Horne, Gerald (2019). [https://www.google.com/books/edition/White_Supremacy_Confronted/sgkLwwEACAAJ?hl=en White Supremacy Confronted: U.S. Imperialism and Anti-Communism vs. the Liberation of Southern Africa, from Rhodes to Mandela]. International Publishers. ISBN 0717807630.

Cold War

2020-12-01T11:42:57Z

Iskender:

The '''Cold War''' was a term coined by anti-communist essayist [[George Orwell]] and given to a period of tension between the [[capitalism|capitalist]] and [[socialism|socialist]] world following World War II, up until the illegal, violent [[dissolution of the USSR]]. The Cold War has been instrumentalised by the imperial core so as to pretend communism is a crumbling ideology that belongs to the 20th century, but it is safe to say that communism is still very much alive and keeps being targeted by imperial interests, making the Cold War an ongoing process.

Today, some marxist-leninists are talking about a second Cold War aimed at [[China]].

== Origins ==
The US and more generally the Allied block were content to let the Soviets fight the brunt of the war against Germany and then swoop in to deliver the finishing blow after the two had exhausted each other. Notably, Stalin offered to commit 1 million Red Army soldiers to an invasion of Germany if France and the British Empire followed with their own troops, opening two fronts at once before Hitler had a chance to ramp up the war effort.<ref>https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/3223834/Stalin-planned-to-send-a-million-troops-to-stop-Hitler-if-Britain-and-France-agreed-pact.html</ref> The Allied powers refused his request, as they had hoped that both would fight each other first. Despite the close alliance in the anti-fascist war, this remained an area of contention which the allied powers failed to recognise.

After WW2, tensions picked back up between capitalists and socialists, the latter holding a dominant place in Eastern Europe and socialist-led anti-colonialist movements rising to the fore. The USSR, whom especially had industrialized rapidly since Hitler's election and was now a world power of its own regard, could no longer allow herself to be treated as a pariah in international politics. As the Red Army were the first into Berlin, which rushed the surrender of Germany and the victory of anti-fascist pro-democratic forces, they scared the reactionaries of the Allied powers into uniting against the Soviet republics (so as to defeat socialism for the time being and reinforce their bourgeois class privileges in the world).

While bourgeois historians will downplay the criminal acts committed by the Allies (excluding the USSR after 1945), or try to make some false equivalences between the two powers abusing their authority (allegedly during the so-called Berlin Blockade of 1948), we know since the opening of the Soviet archives and the declassification of US documents that the [[Cold War]] was a front for imperialism and anticommunism, and most if not all international criminal acts were committed by the Allied powers -- such as the [[Years of Lead]] in Italy ([[NATO]]-funded neo-nazi groups under [[Operation Gladio]] committed several terrorist acts) or the separation of Germany itself (The Eastern side was provoked into taking a limited set of restrictions to ward off pernicious Western influence, which was left less in ruination by the war and old reactionaries were being reinstated).

== Three worlds theory ==
It is also from the Cold War that the terms first-, second-, and third-world started appearing in bourgeois republics.

The ''first-world'', also called the "free world" by the bourgeoisie, represented the countries aligned with the United States.

The ''second-world'' were therefore the countries aligned towards the USSR, and the ''third-world'' were the non-aligned countries.

Such distinctions were mostly made in the [[imperial core]]. Countries such as [[Cuba]] considered themselves non-aligned, but were forced to trade heavily with the USSR as first-world aligned countries embargoed them -- which more easily allowed these same countries to later justify military intervention, citing communist ties as a reason for intervention. Several other 'third world' countries were forced to turn to the socialist bloc after being turned down and facing hostility from imperialist powers.

== Conflicts caused by the first world ==

=== America ===

==== North America ====

==== South America ====
During the 60's and the 70's, the United States has helped install right-wing dictatorships in Latin America, such as Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Paraguay and Uruguay, Colombia, Peru and Venezuela. One of the most pervasive operations against Latin America was Operation Condor, which was a United States-backed campaign of political repression and state terror involving intelligence operations and assassination of left-wing opponents. Some estimates are that at least 60,000 deaths can be attributed to Condor, roughly 30,000 of these in Argentina, and the Archives of Terror discovered in Chile list 50,000 killed, 30,000 disappeared and 400,000 imprisoned.

=== Europe ===

==== Western Europe ====
In Italy, where Italian fascists were never systematically reeducated and moved away from positions of authority, NATO started recruiting them to commit assassinations and terrorist acts against communists. This was broadly known as Operation Gladio, which was more of a collection of smaller operations. For a long time, most people (including in Italy) fought the biggest terrorist acts were committed by communist organisations, due in part to a disinformation campaign waged by various Italian governmental agencies. In truth, most if not all assassinations and acts of terrorism were committed by neo-nazi organisations.

==== Eastern Europe ====

=== Middle East ===

=== Africa ===

==== North Africa ====

==== West Africa ====

==== East Africa ====

==== South Africa ====
Southern Africa would prove to be a major struggle for many in the hopes of liberation during the Cold War. After the Sharpeville massacre in South Africa, there was public outcry against apartheid both in the country and outside of it, particularly in regards to the United States' relationship with the RSA (Republic of South Africa). As historian Gerald Horne contends: "Washington was in the same bind in which it had been ensnared for years: eager to take advantage of he vast mineral wealth and cheap labor of Southern Africa but reluctant to be left holding the apartheid tar-baby. Then there was the vise in which U.S. imperialism found itself when it was compelled to back away from centuries of encrusted anti-Negro racism. It was in 1960 that presidential aspirant Richard M. Nixon declared ingloriously that "some of the peoples of Africa have been out of the trees for only about fifty years." These remarks were followed by another official who spoke acerbically of JFK's comrades G. Mennen Williams and Chester Bowles: "when they saw a handful of black baboons beating tom-toms they saw George Washington." A 1962 State Department policy paper cast Africans as barbarians in a sea of whiteness. Yet it was Williams - JFK's point man on Africa - who acknowledged that unless Washington moved more forcefully against apartheid it might lose military bases in Libya and Ethiopia, scientific bases in Nigeria and Zanzibar, and communications facilities in Liberia and Nigeria."<ref>Horne 2019, p. 313</ref>

=== Asia ===

==== East Asia ====
In Indonesia, the USA funded General Suharto's effort in committing genocide against the native populations. This was all committed under the guise of fighting communist influence, and led to more than a million death of local communists and other civilians (such as people deemed "ethnic Chinese" or atheists, but also Gerwani members or Javanese Abangan).

==== South Asia ====
The Afghanistan War of 1979, which is part of a broader imperialist conflict lasting to this day, was caused after the Afghan government asked the Soviets for help fighting against the Mujahideen, who were soon funded and protected by NATO. Notably, Osama bin Laden was directly trained and funded by the USA during this war.

==== South-east Asia ====
The [[Vietnam War]], which led to the creation of the ''Socialist Republic of Vietnam'', was first caused by French colonial interests in what they then called ''Indochina''. After their devastating defeat, the USA swooped in to pick the fight back up and prevent a socialist Vietnam from being formed.

== References ==

=== Citations ===
<references />

=== Bibliography ===

====== Print Sources ======

* Horne, Gerald (2019). [https://www.google.com/books/edition/White_Supremacy_Confronted/sgkLwwEACAAJ?hl=en White Supremacy Confronted: U.S. Imperialism and Anti-Communism vs. the Liberation of Southern Africa, from Rhodes to Mandela]. International Publishers. ISBN 0717807630.

Cold War

2020-12-01T11:29:03Z

Iskender: /* South Africa */

The '''Cold War''' was a term coined by anti-communist essayist [[George Orwell]] and given to a period of tension between the [[capitalism|capitalist]] and [[socialism|socialist]] world following World War II, up until the illegal, violent [[dissolution of the USSR]]. The Cold War has been instrumentalised by the imperial core so as to pretend communism is a crumbling ideology that belongs to the 20th century, but it is safe to say that communism is still very much alive and keeps being targeted by imperial interests, making the Cold War an ongoing process.

Today, some marxist-leninists are talking about a second Cold War aimed at [[China]].

== Origins ==
The US and more generally the Allied block were content to let the Soviets fight the brunt of the war against Germany and then swoop in to deliver the finishing blow after the two had exhausted each other. Notably, Stalin offered to commit 1 million Red Army soldiers to an invasion of Germany if France and the British Empire followed with their own troops, opening two fronts at once before Hitler had a chance to ramp up the war effort.<ref>https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/3223834/Stalin-planned-to-send-a-million-troops-to-stop-Hitler-if-Britain-and-France-agreed-pact.html</ref> The Allied powers refused his request, as they had hoped that both would fight each other first. Despite the close alliance in the anti-fascist war, this remained an area of contention which the allied powers failed to recognise.

After WW2, tensions picked back up between capitalists and socialists, the latter holding a dominant place in Eastern Europe and socialist-led anti-colonialist movements rising to the fore. The USSR, whom especially had industrialized rapidly since Hitler's election and was now a world power of its own regard, could no longer allow herself to be treated as a pariah in international politics. As the Red Army were the first into Berlin, which rushed the surrender of Germany and the victory of anti-fascist pro-democratic forces, they scared the reactionaries of the Allied powers into uniting against the Soviet republics (so as to defeat socialism for the time being and reinforce their bourgeois class privileges in the world).

While bourgeois historians will downplay the criminal acts committed by the Allies (excluding the USSR after 1945), or try to make some false equivalences between the two powers abusing their authority (allegedly during the so-called Berlin Blockade of 1948), we know since the opening of the Soviet archives and the declassification of US documents that the [[Cold War]] was a front for imperialism and anticommunism, and most if not all international criminal acts were committed by the Allied powers -- such as the [[Years of Lead]] in Italy ([[NATO]]-funded neo-nazi groups under [[Operation Gladio]] committed several terrorist acts) or the separation of Germany itself (The Eastern side was provoked into taking a limited set of restrictions to ward off pernicious Western influence, which was left less in ruination by the war and old reactionaries were being reinstated).

== Three worlds theory ==
It is also from the Cold War that the terms first-, second-, and third-world started appearing in bourgeois republics.

The ''first-world'', also called the "free world" by the bourgeoisie, represented the countries aligned with the United States.

The ''second-world'' were therefore the countries aligned towards the USSR, and the ''third-world'' were the non-aligned countries.

Such distinctions were mostly made in the [[imperial core]]. Countries such as [[Cuba]] considered themselves non-aligned, but were forced to trade heavily with the USSR as first-world aligned countries embargoed them -- which more easily allowed these same countries to later justify military intervention, citing communist ties as a reason for intervention. Several other 'third world' countries were forced to turn to the socialist bloc after being turned down and facing hostility from imperialist powers.

== Conflicts caused by the first world ==

=== America ===

==== North America ====

==== South America ====
During the 60's and the 70's, the United States has helped install right-wing dictatorships in Latin America, such as Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Paraguay and Uruguay, Colombia, Peru and Venezuela. One of the most pervasive operations against Latin America was Operation Condor, which was a United States-backed campaign of political repression and state terror involving intelligence operations and assassination of left-wing opponents. Some estimates are that at least 60,000 deaths can be attributed to Condor, roughly 30,000 of these in Argentina, and the Archives of Terror discovered in Chile list 50,000 killed, 30,000 disappeared and 400,000 imprisoned.

=== Europe ===

==== Western Europe ====
In Italy, where Italian fascists were never systematically reeducated and moved away from positions of authority, NATO started recruiting them to commit assassinations and terrorist acts against communists. This was broadly known as Operation Gladio, which was more of a collection of smaller operations. For a long time, most people (including in Italy) fought the biggest terrorist acts were committed by communist organisations, due in part to a disinformation campaign waged by various Italian governmental agencies. In truth, most if not all assassinations and acts of terrorism were committed by neo-nazi organisations.

==== Eastern Europe ====

=== Middle East ===

=== Africa ===

==== North Africa ====

==== West Africa ====

==== East Africa ====

==== South Africa ====
Southern Africa would prove to be a major struggle for many in the hopes of liberation during the Cold War. After the Sharpeville massacre in South Africa, there was public outcry against apartheid both in the country and outside of it, particularly in regards to the United States' relationship with the RSA (Republic of South Africa). As historian Gerald Horne contends: "Washington was in the same bind in which it had been ensnared for years: eager to take advantage of he vast mineral wealth and cheap labor of Southern Africa but reluctant to be left holding the apartheid tar-baby. Then there was the vise in which U.S. imperialism found itself when it was compelled to back away from centuries of encrusted anti-Negro racism. It was in 1960 that presidential aspirant Richard M. Nixon declared ingloriously that "some of the peoples of Africa have been out of the trees for only about fifty years." These remarks were followed by another official who spoke acerbically of JFK's comrades G. Mennen Williams and Chester Bowles: "when they saw a handful of black baboons beating tom-toms they saw George Washington." A 1962 State Department policy paper cast Africans as barbarians in a sea of whiteness. Yet it was Williams - JFK's point man on Africa - who acknowledged that unless Washington moved more forcefully against apartheid it might lose military bases in Libya and Ethiopia, scientific bases in Nigeria and Zanzibar, and communications facilities in Liberia and Nigeria."<ref>Horne 2019, p. 313</ref>

=== Asia ===

==== East Asia ====
In Indonesia, the USA funded General Suharto's effort in committing genocide against the native populations. This was all committed under the guise of fighting communist influence, and led to more than a million death of local communists and other civilians (such as people deemed "ethnic Chinese" or atheists, but also Gerwani members or Javanese Abangan).

==== South Asia ====
The Afghanistan War of 1979, which is part of a broader imperialist conflict lasting to this day, was caused after the Afghan government asked the Soviets for help fighting against the Mujahideen, who were soon funded and protected by NATO. Notably, Osama bin Laden was directly trained and funded by the USA during this war.

==== South-east Asia ====
The [[Vietnam War]], which led to the creation of the ''Socialist Republic of Vietnam'', was first caused by French colonial interests in what they then called ''Indochina''. After their devastating defeat, the USA swooped in to pick the fight back up and prevent a socialist Vietnam from being formed.

== References ==

United States of America

2020-12-01T00:21:36Z

Iskender: /* History */

United States of America

2020-12-01T00:03:10Z

Iskender:

United States of America

2020-12-01T00:01:08Z

Iskender: Put some new information in.

United States of America

2020-11-30T23:46:15Z

Iskender:

Lao People's Democratic Republic

2020-11-26T14:46:45Z

Iskender: Some additions.

Laos is a modern-day socialist country in South-East Asia, after having achieved independence after its liberation movement led by Kaysone Phomvihane (a figure analogous to Vietnam's Ho Chi Minh).<ref>{{Cite web|last=Barahamin|first=Andre|date=November 5, 2017|title=The Hero of Laos: Kaysone Phomvihane|url=https://rallu.xyz/2017/11/05/the-hero-of-laos-kaysone-phomvihane/|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=|website=}}</ref>

== History ==
The Lao People's Revolutionary Party (LPRP), led by Kaysone Phomvihane, waged a war of liberation against the Kingdom of Laos and its allies. After liberation, Kaysone would dominate Laotian politics until his death in 1992.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Nette|first=Andrew|date=March 27, 1996|title=LAOS: Kaysone – Big in Life, Bigger in Death|url=http://www.ipsnews.net/1996/03/laos-kaysone-big-in-life-bigger-in-death/|url-status=live|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=|website=}}</ref>

== Politics ==
In recent years, the issue of malnutrition is still present in Laos, though the government has made inroads in combating this problem with the help of UNICEF.<ref>(October 19, 2018) https://laotiantimes.com/2018/10/19/nutrition-kids-unicef-xepon-laos/</ref> In addition, Laos has tackled such problems as inequality and poverty in its aim to shed its Least Developed Country Status by 2024. According to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), and as ''The Laotian Times'' reports, "Lao PDR’s Human Development Index (HDI) value which is calculated based on the life expectancy, level of education and income per capita of a country’s people, has increased by over 50 per cent since 1990."<ref>(October 30, 2018) [https://laotiantimes.com/2018/10/30/progress-inequality-push-education-laos/ Inequality, Disasters Risks to Development as Progress Pushed in Laos: UNDP]</ref> Laos is also the only ASEAN member to give up luxury state cars in a move by Lao Prime Minister Thongloun Sisoulith to reclaim all Lao leaders' luxury vehicles.<ref>Yap, Jasmina (February 23, 2017) [https://laotiantimes.com/2017/02/23/laos-only-asean-member-give-up-luxury-state-cars/?platform=hootsuite "Laos Only ASEAN Member To Give Up Luxury State Cars"]</ref>

== Notes ==
[[Category:History]]
<references />

Lao People's Democratic Republic

2020-11-26T14:18:08Z

Iskender:

Lao People's Democratic Republic

2020-11-20T09:19:51Z

Iskender: Added history section.

Lao People's Democratic Republic

2020-11-20T09:00:35Z

Iskender: Created page with "Laos is a modern-day socialist country in South-East Asia, after having achieved independence after its liberation movement led by Kaysone Phomvihane (a figure analogous to Vi..."

Laos is a modern-day socialist country in South-East Asia, after having achieved independence after its liberation movement led by Kaysone Phomvihane (a figure analogous to Vietnam's Ho Chi Minh).