The War on Democracy

And it's probably not going to be thing that prevent this to reach 10 score IMHO, but the fact that this documentary carry a lot of burden to deliver the facts and truth, and in many ways it did. For those who thinks this is one sided approach and subjective they have their right of believing that, but for us who live near the facts it's the other side story that opens what we always feel and experience but never had the chance to reveal it to the world. There are many case in my country that possesses many similarities with things showed in this documentary, from the Reagen's era of communist fear until now, from the oppressive backed-up leader to now... minus that we don't have Chavez type of person here, which is very unfortunate. On the short notes yes this is very one sided documentary shows, whether you despise it or love depend's on your experience and point of view, but for some this one just complemented the other side of story which always been oppressed by the great force in shadows. probably only time will tells the real truth about this and many events around this movies.

Democracy is one of the old-fashioned goods the U.S. have exported to developing countries. To quote President Bush: "America will not impose our own style of government on the unwilling. Our goal instead is to help others to find their own voice, attain their own freedom, and make their own way." Can it be so? Absolutely not. The reality has usually been the other way round. Democracy made in the U.S. is like Pandora box for tiny countries.

The War On Democracy filmed by John Pilger shows well the falsity of the U.S. through the revelation of the hidden, suppressed history in Latin America.

Don't be embarrassed at the fact that The U.S has tried to turn over democratic governments under the guise of democracy. Especially, many countries in Latin America have been attacked with the loss of countless lives, and their leaders became the victims of an injustice; Jacobo Arbenz, a democratically elected Guatemalan president in 1950, was forced into exile being stripped naked and photographed; In 1973 Salvador Allende of Chile took his life against the bombing led by General Pinochet, an America's man.

By what right, has the U.S. played the leading role in destroying the democratic governments and the dreams of the people? Who gives the U.S. the right? Let's listen to the pretext of Duane Clarridge, head of the CIA's Latin American division in the early 1980s in Chile. "We'll intervene whenever we decide it's in our national security interests to intervene, and if you don't like it, lump it. Get used to it, world -we're not gonna put up with nonsense. If our interests are threatened, we're gonna do it." Philip Agee, C.I.A. agent 1967-68, also back up the Clarridge's excuse. "In the CIA, we didn't give a hoot about democracy. I mean, it was fine if a government was elected and would cooperate with us, but, if it didn't, then democracy didn't mean a thing to us, and I don't think it means a thing today." Like pilger's saying, it's evident no country has a right to go its own way, unless that way coincides with the interests of the United States.

However, the U.S. tasted the bitterness of defeat on April, 2002 in Venezuela. The joint work of Washington and the wealthy of Caracas to get rid of President Chavez ended up failing due to people power demanding the return of their president. In spite of the planned coup, Chavez was put in the bosom of the people in 48 hours after being abducted.

The people power was also brilliant in Bolivia. In 2000, to take backs the valuable resources like water, Bolivian people fought against a foreign consortium dominated by the American corporation Bechtel, and accomplished their hope. Furthermore, in 2005, the indigenous person, Evo Morales, was elected president for the first time ever.

Of course, there sure is another plot of empire still going in Latin America, Middle East, Afghanistan, and Africa. However, the rising up against empire will never stop as long as the people power exists. As Hugo Chavez says, the world should be governed by the rule of law, equality, justice and fraternity, not by empire's greed.

John Pilger has won high accolades for journalism (Journalist of the Year, twice) and award-winning television documentaries. But some people will still ignore him because he is too 'New Statesman'. He utters unpopular views. He backs them up with evidence. But that can leave you feeling uncomfortable. His new film does that in spades. Over South America.

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.

I do not wish to add more praise on my fellow-Australian than has been heaped on him so far, but it was great to see a well made documentary covering the way the US corporate empire tries as desperately to hang on to its satrapies as did the Roman and Ottoman empires.

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'm dual nationality US & UK, I've spent half my life across each nation and have always been far prouder of my American heritage but by that I mean the country, it's people but not it's government.

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