Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueVenezuela, Guatemala, Cuba, Chile, Salvador, Bolivia: people's struggle for democracy versus US imperialism in Latin America since the 1950s, backing coups and supporting dictatorships.Venezuela, Guatemala, Cuba, Chile, Salvador, Bolivia: people's struggle for democracy versus US imperialism in Latin America since the 1950s, backing coups and supporting dictatorships.Venezuela, Guatemala, Cuba, Chile, Salvador, Bolivia: people's struggle for democracy versus US imperialism in Latin America since the 1950s, backing coups and supporting dictatorships.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
Photos
- Self
- (archives sonores)
- Self
- (images d'archives)
- Self
- (images d'archives)
- Self
- (images d'archives)
- Self
- (images d'archives)
- Self
- (images d'archives)
- Self
- (images d'archives)
- Self
- (images d'archives)
- Self
- (images d'archives)
- Self
- (images d'archives)
- Self
- (images d'archives)
- Self - President of Guatemala
- (images d'archives)
- (as Jacobo Arbenz)
Avis à la une
We had the unpleasant experience of having our popularly elected government led by Gough Whitlam destabilised by the CIA while at the same time they were backing Indonesia's illegal invasion of East Timor in which six Australian journalists were murdered. It turns out that the coup by which that Indonesian leader, Suharto, came to power was also orchestrated by the CIA, and thousands of Indonesians, especially ethnic Chinese, were slaughtered in the name of anti-Communism.
It is by now well known that the casus belli for the war on the Vietnamese, the so-called Gulf of Tonkin incident, was a total fabrication, used to justify President Johnson's decision to reverse President Kennedy's plan to withdraw all troops from South Vietnam.
There is plenty material here for The War on Democracy II if John wants to do a sequel.
I am addressing these remarks in the first place to law-abiding people, as most sharply distinguished from war criminals. The definition of a crisis = a period in which, in order to abide by that law which serves justice only, one must be prepared to enforce it. This extraordinary duty occurs because the official agencies with their names in the upper case --DoJ, DoD & CIA, for example-- have been captured by a bloody tyranny which utterly perverts such basic political concepts as those of justice, defense and intelligence. (Spook HQ is now officially named the George Bush Center for Intelligence, which is located two doors down from the Wilt Chamberlain Home for Short People.) These general reflections very much pertain to the subject of Mr.Pilger's masterpiece.
I speak Spanish and briefly represented the U.S. State Department in Chile in 1964 & '65. In its hour & a half, WOD covers Latin America from El Salvador to Chile with a focus on Venezuela led by Hugo Chavez and a stop in Bolivia. For those new to this continent, WOD's an absolutely essential introduction. For those who already know it (among the group whom I'm addressing, please remember), they will be overjoyed to see an intelligent and artistically coherent story of their homelands on the Big Screen. We're talking about a place more than twice the area of the USA with more than half a billion people, hundreds of millions of whom are dirt poor and many of whom have had relatives murdered by thugs trained by the US Army at the "School of the Americas", which has recently changed its name out of embarrassment.
When Pilger says that the CIA puppet regime in Guatemala slew "thousands", he is grossly understating the case, since the best estimate's ~250,000. Naturally he spent more time in countries where it's safer to film. Once we understand that we should all bring everybody we know to see this movie, then we can acknowledge that it's an opening of the door to a vast realm. Many more such features need to be made even to begin to do justice to the material.
A criticism: In discussion with a Chilean physician who was a torture victim, Pilger uses a phrase about being "ensnared in fascism". IMHO he should simply forget the F word. As a matter of historical fact, Benito Mussolini, who created the concept of Fascism and led that Party in national power for a quarter of a century, had a lot more going for him than did the traitor Generals Rios Montt of Guatemala or Augusto Pinochet of Chile, to name only two of the dozens of US puppets in the region. The CIA's Guatemalan Genociderals in particular in their atrocities by far exceeded any acts of repression which Il Duce ever carried out in Italy. In other words, from Ronald Reagan until now the U.S. Government gives Fascism a bad name.
Anyone who wants to have a head's up 'tude toward such a big part of our human race will definitely want to check out John Pilger's well-informed portrait of the irresistibly rising forces of the Western Hemisphere. Alert supporters of Barack Obama, Ralph Nader and Cynthia McKinney will want to give thought to tying in WOD to their candidates' campaigns.
OTOH white supremacists & jingoes who think that slaughtering the families of foreigners is still cool, especially if they themselves can get a piece of the financial action, well, such "Chicago boys" as SonnaBush calls them in WOD, they will pan Pilger's product as skillfully as they can manage.
Let me clarify, the British government is atrocious and highly corrupt but the leaders over the pond have taken it to the next level ever since their creation.
This fantastic piece by British journalist John Pilger is about Americas direct influence into Latin American countries such as Chile and Venezuala and the atrocities they have caused to better their own interests.
Heartbreaking, powerful and eye opening if you aren't aware of the steps the US go to further their economy this is essential viewing.
The USA for anyone with any awareness is the proverbial boy who cried wolf. They manipulate their people using the media to such an extent with their lies that every time a new story comes out you do have to question it.
They've been lying about the middle east for decades and still are. At time of writing how much of what we are told about North Korea is true? And how much is to sway public opinion to their own personal agendas?
The Good:
Professionaly made
Great interview segments
Essential viewing
The Bad:
Doesn't make for the easiest watch
Things I Learnt From This Movie:
The US has attempted to overthrow 50 governments, more than I had originally believed
This new documentary is his first major film for the cinema.
When I personally have travelled in South America, I marvelled at how basic facts about Western foreign policy's role in destabilising 'unfriendly' governments is normal knowledge. From shop workers to academics. Far more than in Britain. Here, most people are now probably aware that the CIA toppled the democratically elected President Allende of Chile. That they were responsible for the succession of the tyrant Pinochet. Those with slightly longer memories probably recall the scandal over Nicaragua when the USA backed the wrong side. Again, against a democratically elected government. To live with ourselves (and our governments) we tend to think these were just mistakes of the past. The reality is that the truth, in those cases, couldn't be suppressed easily. The reality is that similar events are continuing. As policy.
Suppressing truth is always a sensitive issue. Many years ago, when I came out of the Singapore War Museum, there were Japanese visitors with tears in their eyes. It was the first time they had been confronted with the horrors that their government had committed during WWII. Other countries frequently feel angry that Japan does not retell more of its war crimes in standard school books. It is simply easier, in most cases, not to. Pilger's film is about crimes against democracy that it is 'easier' to ignore. The culprit being a country that almost invented the word. The United States of America.
Interviews are conducted with renegade CIA agents like Philip Agee, but also with Duane Clarridge, former head of CIA operations in South America. Clarridge openly defends America's right to do what they want anywhere in the world and to anyone, regardless of their innocence - as long as it's in America's national interest. 'Like it or lump it,' he says. A harrowing interview features an American nun, Dianna Ortiz. Ortiz reveals how she was tortured and gang raped in the late 80s by a group led by a fellow American clearly in league with a US-backed regime. Ortiz asks whether the American people are aware of the role their country plays in subverting innocent nations under the guise of a 'war on terror'. CIA man and Watergate conspirator Howard Hunt describes how he and others overthrew a previously democratically elected government. Hunt even mentions how he organised "a little harmless bombing".
More controversially, Pilger features extensive footage with Venezuelan President, Hugo Chavez. This is a man demonised by President Bush, but one about whom the facts are harder to determine. That he has used much of his country's vast oil wealth to benefit the poor is largely accepted, give or take some details. But that he has taken steps to concentrate power in himself arouses sterner debate. War on Democracy, uniquely, shows us the country from the inside. Many of the conditions are reminiscent of Allende's Chile. The power of the media seems unabated and is fiercely anti-government. But we see how it is owned by the rich half of the class divide. When the military try to unseat Chavez, thousands of people come out of the slums to protest until he is returned to power. These are people who had no voice before Chavez and they are devoted to him as passionately. Just as the wealthy classes are opposed to him. Given the forces he is up against, the assumption of power (and from a democratically elected base) seems more understandable. We recall how Allende, even with popular support, was brought down. Chavez looks like a tougher nut.
Pilger's attitude towards Chavez is friendly, although he does ask him about the poverty that remains, in spite of the vast oil wealth. Could his interview have been more balanced without playing into the hands of those fabricating the lies he is trying to expose? Pilger also travels to America and uses undercover filming. The 'School of Americas' in Georgia is where Pinochet's torture squads were trained, together with death squads in other Latin American countries. The wide-ranging testimony is unsettling.
Pilger's extensive travels in Latin America, in depth interviews, documentation and film archives obtained under US freedom of information, evidence corroborated by people in opposing camps, his own calm sincerity - they all paint a cohesive portrait of USA attacks on democracy.
The main fault I found with the War on Democracy was not any lack of balance. Pilger argues his case quite methodically and convincingly and gives critics ample right of reply. He is not a soundbite merchant, parading flashy quotes in Michael Moore fashion. But the difficulty - and one Moore did overcome - is that Pilger's years of experience on the small screen has not translated effectively to cinema. The timing is probably right - what with the re-examinations of 9/11 and criticisms of US policy now being acceptable topics of discussion. Horrors of Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib quickly come to mind. But it still feels like a television programme, even if it is many notches above Panorama or Dispatches.
Overall, The War on Democracy is an excellent primer on US destabilisation and anti-democracy measures in Latin America. To civil rights enthusiasts and Amnesty International supporters, much of it will be nothing new. But it is told with piercing insight and no sense of personal axes-to-grind. Previous films by John Pilger have done much good. $40 million was raised unsolicited by his film on Cambodia (Cambodia Year Zero) which to help the thousands of orphaned children there. The aim of this film is simply to increase awareness.
A wise cinematographic decision by Pilger is to interview and show the people of these nations. They appear decent and it is important for Westerners to realize that they have a lot in common with the so-called impoverished. Beneath our different exteriors, we share many characteristics. Also, the footage of the countries, and often just the day-to-day lives are lovely and the mountainous backdrops of Bolivia, Peru, and Chile, are beautiful. Pilger makes a strong case for government conducted on behalf of the people and interviews Chavez, allowing him to make his case for such a rule-of-law. Pilger interviews a couple of CIA sources, including the head of the CIA in South America during the mid-1980s. He asks him whether the ouster of Allende had been justified and the man states that the ends had to justify the means. He also said that US interests were protected via the installation of Pinochet, failing to recognize the contrast between US claims of respect for democratically elected governments and US intervention when the US, oh.....felt like it. Pilger's decision to refuse to interrupt while the man put his foot in his mouth and re-affirmed the importance of protecting US interests over even sovereign governments, seems wise. The man only seems all the more out-of-touch and arrogant for his unapologetic defense of autocracy. This is a powerful indictment of greed and of the possible benefits available to ALL if the US will allow sovereign governments to work autonomously. Notably, the film is available via Google Video for those interested.
Le saviez-vous
- Citations
Hugo Chávez: [speaks Spanish; subtitles read:] I had a beautiful grandmother, she was Indian, she filled me with love. She taught me a lot, and I learnt from her about solidarity with other people. About sharing bread, even if there's little to eat.
- ConnexionsFeatured in The Arrivals (2008)
Meilleurs choix
Détails
Box-office
- Budget
- 2 500 000 $US (estimé)
- Montant brut mondial
- 320 935 $US
- Durée
- 1h 36min(96 min)
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1