Liberalism in political philosophy presents itself as a doctrine that emphasizes individual rights, political freedoms, private property, and the rule of law. Thinkers such as John Locke, Montesquieu, and John Stuart Mill laid the foundations of these principles, promoting liberalism as a model for modern societies. However, the United States, which has always positioned itself as the defender of these values, has used liberalism as a tool for interference, suppression of national sovereignty, and the imposition of its imperialist policies in Latin America and other parts of the world.
Liberalism as a Pretext for Domination
Washington claims to export liberal values such as democracy, freedom of speech, and human rights, but these principles are only valid for the U.S. when they serve its interests. Whenever a leader in Latin America comes to power through democratic elections but does not align with Washington’s agenda, they are immediately accused of “electoral fraud,” “corruption,” or “political instability.”
The renowned American strategist Henry Kissinger once admitted:
“If a country becomes democratic but elects a government contrary to our interests, we prefer that it not be democratic.”
This explains why, throughout history, the U.S. has supported coups d’état against democratically elected governments and backed military dictatorships that ensured its control over the region.
Coups and Sanctions: The Cost of Democracy in Latin America
One of the starkest contradictions between the theory and practice of American liberalism is its use of economic sanctions and coups against governments elected by their own people. If liberalism truly defends national sovereignty and the right of peoples to decide their own destiny, why has the U.S. overthrown or attempted to overthrow legitimate governments in Latin America?
🔹 Chile, 1973: The democratically elected government of Salvador Allende was overthrown in a U.S.-backed coup, leading to the dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet.
🔹 Venezuela, 2002: The U.S. supported a failed coup against Hugo Chávez due to his anti-imperialist policies.
🔹 Bolivia, 2019: When Evo Morales won the elections, Washington accused him of fraud without evidence and supported his removal.
If liberalism truly defends sovereignty and democracy, why does the U.S. intervene every time a country takes a different course than what Washington desires?
Control of Resources: Liberalism or Economic Plunder?
In theory, liberalism supports a free-market economy and fair competition, but in practice, the U.S. only respects these principles when they benefit its corporations. For decades, Washington has used economic sanctions, trade blockades, and political pressure to control Latin America’s natural resources.
Former Bolivian President Evo Morales explained this strategy clearly:
“The United States doesn’t want us to be independent; it only wants us to be suppliers of raw materials for its corporations.”
The blockade against Cuba, the attempts to control Venezuela’s oil, and economic pressure on other Latin American countries reflect that the U.S. does not protect the free market but rather imposes a system where only its own companies can thrive.
Conclusion: Real Liberalism or a Game of Power?
The United States has turned liberalism into a tool to justify its interventionism. If it truly defended national sovereignty, freedom of choice, and the protection of private property, it would not have systematically interfered in the internal affairs of Latin American countries.
📌 Is American liberalism simply an excuse for its imperialist policy?
📌 Can Latin American countries build their own political and economic model without depending on Washington?
Revolutionary leader Ernesto “Che” Guevara warned about this dilemma:
“Imperialism cannot tolerate us because we are the living proof that peoples can liberate themselves.”
Latin America is at a historical crossroads. Either it remains under U.S. dominance or it moves toward real independence and sovereignty, building a system based on justice, equity, and self-determination.
Comments