scholarly journals Ou ficar a pátria livre ou morrer pelo brasil: a ALN e sua natureza “anti-estadunidense”

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 272-297
Author(s):  
Carolina de Castro Palhares ◽  
Pedro Henrique de Moraes Cicero

Na segunda metade do século XX, no contexto da política de poder bipolar decorrente da Guerra Fria, a América Latina vivenciou o surgimento de ditaduras civil-militares as quais, em parte, estruturam-se com a finalidade de manter a hegemonia estadunidense na região. Como resposta armada aos regimes de exceção, grupos guerrilheiros foram fundados tanto para reverter o cenário político interno quanto para denunciar a subordinação daqueles regimes aos interesses econômicos e geopolíticos estadunidenses. Partindo dessa conjuntura e apoiado nos documentos originais que tratam do tema, o artigo analisa a maneira pela qual a Ação Libertadora Nacional (ALN) denunciou, interpretou e reagiu à participação dos Estados Unidos tanto no golpe de Estado de 1964 quanto na consolidação da ditadura brasileira.     Abstract: In the second half of the twentieth century, in the context of the bipolar power policy resulting from the Cold War, Latin America experienced the emergence of civil-military dictatorships which, in part, were structured with the purpose of maintaining US´ hegemony in the region. As an armed response to the regimes of exception, guerrilla groups were founded both to reverse the internal political scenario and to denounce the subordination of those regimes to US economic and geopolitical interests. Within this conjuncture and guided by the original documents that illustrate the theme, the article analyzes the way in which the Ação Libertadora Nacional (ALN) denounced, interpreted and reacted to the participation of the United States both in the 1964 coup d'état and in the maintenance of the Brazilian Dictatorship . Keywords: Inter-American Relations; Civic-Military Dictatorships; Armed Struggle; Ação Libertadora Nacional.     Recebido em: abril/2020. Aprovado em:  setembro/2020.

2010 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. 457-485 ◽  
Author(s):  
LESLIE BETHELL

AbstractThis essay, part history of ideas and part history of international relations, examines Brazil's relationship with Latin America in historical perspective. For more than a century after independence, neither Spanish American intellectuals nor Spanish American governments considered Brazil part of ‘América Latina’. For their part, Brazilian intellectuals and Brazilian governments only had eyes for Europe and increasingly, after 1889, the United States, except for a strong interest in the Río de la Plata. When, especially during the Cold War, the United States, and by extension the rest of the world, began to regard and treat Brazil as part of ‘Latin America’, Brazilian governments and Brazilian intellectuals, apart from some on the Left, still did not think of Brazil as an integral part of the region. Since the end of the Cold War, however, Brazil has for the first time pursued a policy of engagement with its neighbours – in South America.


Author(s):  
Iñigo García-Bryce

This chapter explores Haya’s changing relationship with the United States. As an exiled student leader he denounced “Yankee imperialism” and alarmed observers in the U.S. State Department. Yet once he entered Peruvian politics, Haya understood the importance of cultivating U.S.-Latin American relations. While in hiding he maintained relations with U.S. intellectuals and politicians and sought U.S. support for his embattled party. His writings increasingly embraced democracy and he maneuvered to position APRA as an ally in the U.S. fight fascism during the 1930s and 40s, and then communism during the Cold War. The five years he spent in Lima’s Colombian embassy awaiting the resolution of his political asylum case, made him into an international symbol of the democratic fight against dictatorship. He would always remain a critic of U.S. support for dictatorships in Latin America.


Author(s):  
Jordan J. Dominy

The formalized study of southern literature in the mid-twentieth century is an example of scholars formalizing the study of modernist aesthetics in order to suppress leftist politics and sentiments in literature and art. This formalized, institutional study was initiated in a climate in which intellectuals were under societal pressure, created by the Cold War, to praise literary and artistic production representative of American values. This even in southern literary studies occurred roughly at the same time that the United States sought to extoll the virtues of America’s free, democratic society abroad. In this manner, southern studies and American studies become two sides of the same coin. Intellectuals and writers that promoted American exceptionalism dealt with the rising Civil Rights Movement and the nation’s complicated history with race and poverty by casting the issues as moral rather than political problems that were distinctly southern and could therefore be corrected by drawing on “exceptional” southern values, such as tradition and honor. The result of such maneuvering is that over the course of the twentieth century, “south” becomes more than a geographical identity. Ultimately, “south” becomes a socio-political and cultural identity associated with modern conservatism with no geographical boundaries. Rather than a country divided into south and north, the United States is divided in the twenty-first century into red and blue states. The result of using southern literature to present southern values as appropriate, moderate values for the whole nation during the Cold War is to associate these values with nationalism and conservatism today.


1997 ◽  
Vol 56 (1) ◽  
pp. 111-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Jones

The results of development are now widely thought to have betrayed expectations. Using illustrations from Bolivia, this essay argues that these dispiriting results often owe to distortions that render development something other than what it pretends to be, or is usually understood to be. The distortions derive from the use of inappropriate mental constructs, from links to foreign policy, from "expert" ignorance, and from weak sensitivity by development agencies to how their interventions are construed by local economic and power elites. While these agencies have formal mechanisms to correct some of the distortions, the mechanisms too often fail to work. Correcting these distortions is a daunting task, rooted as they are deep in national institutions and conceptions of national interest. The end of the Cold War nonetheless affords an auspicious moment for doing so. Indeed, not to is to risk turmoil in regions like Latin America. Yet international capitalist powers and local elites are not seizing the moment; exulting in victory, they continue down old paths. Further alarming is the anti-aid sentiment in the United States and Europe, with consequent political advocacy ranging from abolishment to varying degrees of reform under large budget cuts.


PMLA ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 131 (3) ◽  
pp. 701-710
Author(s):  
Arturo Arias

The Cuban Revolution Generated a New Communist Paranoia in the United States. Interest in Latin America Grew Dramatically after Castro's rise to power in 1959 and was partly responsible for the explosive growth in the number of scholars specializing in hemispheric issues during the 1960s. Latin Americans, in turn, saw this phase of the Cold War as a furthering of imperial aggression by the United States. The Eisenhower administration's authoritarian diplomatic maneuvers to isolate Guatemala by accusing the country's democratically elected president, Jacobo Arbenz (1950-54), of being a communist and by pressuring members of the Organization of American States to do likewise had already alarmed intellectuals and artists in Latin America five years before. On 17 June 1954, Carlos Castillo Armas and a band of a few hundred mercenaries invaded the country from Honduras with logistical support from the Central Intelligence Agency in an operation code-named PBSUCCESS, authorized by President Eisenhower in August 1953. By 1 July 1954 the so-called Movement of National Liberation had taken over Guatemala. Angela Fillingim's research evidences how the United States officially viewed Guatemala as “Pre-Western,” according to “pre-established criteria,” because the Latin American country had failed to eliminate its indigenous population (5-6). Implicitly, the model was that of the nineteenth-century American West. As a solution, the State Department proposed “finishing the Conquest.”


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document