The common mindset among most Americans is that the United States could never become a totalitarian-like country — that is, one in which freedom of speech is sharply curtailed, protests and demonstrations are violently suppressed, people are kidnapped on the streets and quickly incarcerated in secret prisons without trial or due process, prisoners are tortured, no one dares to criticize what is occurring, deep fear exists within the citizenry, the powers of the president and the national-security establishment are omnipotent, elections are temporarily suspended, and people have convinced themselves that all this totalitarian tyranny is necessary because some national-security emergency requires it.
Yet, there is one big problem with that mindset: U.S. officials have demonstrated that they favor that way of life, at least in foreign countries.
Consider, for example, the 1953 CIA coup in Iran. It ousted the democratically elected prime minister of Iran, Mohammad Mossadegh, from power in order to install the Shah of Iran in his stead. The unelected Shah then wielded and exercised omnipotent powers over the Iranian people — the types of powers listed above — with the full support of the U.S. government. In fact, the CIA even helped to bring into existence and train the much-feared national police force of the Shah — the SAVAK, whose powers were essentially a combination of the omnipotent powers wielded by the CIA, FBI, ICE, and Pentagon today.
Yes, I know — that was Iran. But my point is that U.S. officials knowingly and intentionally brought that type of system into existence. That’s because they believed in it. They favored it. They thought it was a good thing.
The same thing happened the following year — 1954 — in Guatemala. The CIA ousted the democratically elected president of the country, Jacobo Arbenz, and knowingly and intentionally replaced him with an army colonel, one whose goons wielded the same omnipotent powers over the Guatemalan people that are wielded in totalitarian regimes — the types for powers I listed above. That’s because the U.S. national-security establishment favored that type of military-run totalitarian regime.
In 1973, the U.S. national-security establishment knowingly and intentionally helped oust the democratically elected president of Chile, Salvador Allende, from power to install a military general, Gen. Augusto Pinochet, in his stead. Pinochet and his national-security establishment immediately began exercising the omnipotent powers listed above, including kidnapping some 50,000 people who were suspected of being communist supporters of Allende and then torturing, raping, sexually abusing, or murdering them — all without due process of law or trial.
Yes, once again, I fully realize that Guatemala and Chile are foreign countries, but my point is that U.S. officials not only played instrumental roles in bringing those totalitarian-like regimes into power but that they actually favored those types of systems and the omnipotent power that came with them.
Olden days, you say?
Just recently, the Trump administration forcibly deported dozens of Venezuelan immigrants to El Salvador, where the government wields and exercises the omnipotent power to take people into custody without formal charges, incarcerate them indefinitely without due process or trial, and torture them. U.S. officials deported those refugees, who had not been convicted of any crimes, to El Salvador knowing and intending that they would be thrown into that system. U.S. officials firmly believed that that was a good thing.
Don’t forget also the Pentagon’s and the CIA’s torture and prison camp that was established in Cuba after the 9/11 attacks and that is still operational. That camp is for anyone that the Pentagon or the CIA accuse of being a “terrorist,” a label that is now employed by every totalitarian regime on the planet to justify the exercise of the totalitarian-like powers listed above. Gitmo is now widely known for its torture, indefinite detention without trial, denial of due process of law, denial of trial by jury, and denial of effective assistance of counsel. Why Cuba instead of the United States? The Pentagon and the CIA wanted no judicial interference with its totalitarian-like system in Cuba.
Today, the Trump administration, with the full support of the U.S national-security establishment, is partnering with a brutal socialist regime in Venezuela, one that has destroyed freedom of speech. It harshly punishes or even kills people who engage in protests and demonstrations. It kidnaps and incarcerates people indefinitely, tortures dissidents, and executes opponents — all without due process or trial. Moreover, everyone knows that it’s an illegitimate regime in that it lost the last presidential election but nonetheless chose to remain in power owing to the omnipotent powers of the national-security branch of the Venezuelan government.
The reason for this unusual U.S. partnership with this brutal totalitarian-like regime in Venezuela? “Stability”— as compared to the “instability” that can come with democracy, elections, protests, demonstrations, freedom of speech, and dissent.
Could never happen here? Don’t make me laugh.
