Someone in the news today made note of the fact that US interventions in Central and South America over the later half of the 20th century are largely to blame for the less-than-happy conditions in some of the countries that are fueling the surge of migrants presently.

Actually, that is in large part true. (Large part, but it’s not the whole story.)

The American International Corporation was created in 1915, a Wall Street entity led by the top financiers of the day, whose primary operations began with the funding of the Bolsheviks, taking over that responsibility from two prominent bankers, Jacob Schiff and Max Warburg, a campaign that, two years later, resulted in the Russian Revolution, the toppling of the Tzar and the execution of his family in Yekaterinburg. (What? Wall Street capitalists funded the communist revolution??? Crazy, huh?)

Once that task was finished, the AIC turned its focus on, basically, recreating the homogeny of the by-then-defunct British East India Company, which was commercial domination throughout the world. They succeeded in making the AIC a very powerful umbrella corporation under which no less than 200 corporations, involved in mining, railroads, ship-building, rubber plantations, banana and other fruit plantations, etc., operated around the globe. Due to the political influence the directors of the AIC enjoyed, the US State Department bowed to their influence, greasing the wheels of diplomacy where the profits of AIC-controlled companies like United Fruit (Guatemala, notably), or Anaconda Copper (active all over, but Chile was where things got contentious), were concerned. 

In 1947 the “elite” combined the US military departments into a new Department of Defense as part of a 1947 Nat. Security Act, which also created the CIA and NSA. The conventional wisdom is that the father of the CIA was "Wild Bill" Donovan, but really the men behind this were George Kennan, Allen Dulles (two of the so-called ‘wise men’ of the time that formulated our foreign policy, particularly regarding the USSR), and James Forrestal. Forrestal must have fallen from grace somehow (no one knows how or why), for he was committed to care at Bethesda Hospital for supposed mental issues and “fell” out of a 16th story window. 

But anyway, people think the CIA’s primary function is to gather intelligence. Well, kind of, but what it was really designed to do was to be the attack dog to protect the interests of AIC-controlled companies abroad. When the State Department failed in that task, the ‘Jackals,’ or one of the ‘Jackals,’ went in to warn the new democratically-elected leader of whatever country of the danger of bucking the system, of raising the rent on the land being rented to a fruit or mining company, or, God forbid, nationalizing an industry. If that didn’t work, the CIA went down and led a coup. I did the math once, and between its inception in 1947 and the beginning of Desert Storm, the CIA was involved in coups or interventions around the world at an average of one a year, from South America to Africa to Indonesia. It’s shameful — those were US taxpayer dollars at work making lives miserable around the world to enhance the profits of the truly rich.

There’s another layer of interpretation of all of this corrupt and abhorrent activity which Anton Chaitkin, author of ‘Treason in America,’ reveals. The ‘elite’ had, because they were heavily invested in stopping the American Experiment from spreading (despite the fact that American-style free market capitalism is what enabled them to become so rich in the first place), they initiated CIA interventions and backed military operations pursuant to the rest of the world viewing America in a bad light, or in Chaitkin’s words, a modern version of the British East India Company, still intent on colonizing and plundering the world’s resources. It worked, too. See any successful free-market capitalistic countries in Central or South America, led by popular democratically-elected leaders, presiding over a happy and prosperous population? I’ve heard Belize is a fairly nice country to live in; maybe I’m missing a couple of others, and I apologize for generalizing, but what I’m attempting to do provide the back story of a larger picture to explain the conditions in places like Honduras and Guatemala.

So, yeah, we, the US, we did all of this — well, kind of. Actually, it was the wealthy elite of Wall Street who did it, on purpose, very violently on occasion, for profit and in pursuit of stopping American-style free-market capitalism/republicanism from spreading, and now they are hell-bent on finishing the job (the destruction of this country as we know it) by sending all of these poor and desperate people across our southern border by the tens of thousands to overwhelm our systems, not to mention the free-for-all the Mexican cartels are enjoying trafficking in children and drugs. And make no mistake, this crisis is not spontaneous, it’s fueled, and George Soros has been fingered funding much of the migration. Is it heartless to protect one’s own borders and turn the migrants away? Many certainly feel that way, but when you factor in the real history of this crisis and the malevolent intentions of the people who are fomenting it, and the fact that, if, over the past century the “elite behind the curtain” hadn’t done everything in their power to stop the spread of our great American philosophy of government and economics to Central and South America and, instead, conspired to create such misery in these countries over many decades for their own purposes, we wouldn’t be here contemplating and arguing about all of this. 

It’s what they call the Hegelian dialectic, folks, and it’s at work right in front of our eyes.