Central America's Forgotten History: Revolution, Violence, and the Roots of Migration

by Aviva Chomsky

Restores the region’s fraught history of repression and resistance to popular consciousness and connects the United States’ interventions and influence to the influx of refugees seeking asylum today.

At the center of the current immigration debate are migrants from Central America fleeing poverty, corruption, and violence in search of refuge in the United States. In Central America’s Forgotten History , Aviva Chomsky answers the urgent question “How did we get here?” Centering the centuries-long intertwined histories of US expansion and Indigenous and Central American struggles against inequality and oppression, Chomsky highlights the pernicious cycle of colonial and neocolonial development policies that promote cultures of violence and forgetting without any accountability or restorative reparations.

Focusing on the valiant struggles for social and economic justice in Guatemala, Nicaragua, El Salvador, and Honduras, Chomsky restores these vivid and gripping events to popular consciousness. Tracing the roots of displacement and migration in Central America to the Spanish conquest and bringing us to the present day, she concludes that the more immediate roots of migration from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras lie in the wars and in the US interventions of the 1980s and the peace accords of the 1990s that set the stage for neoliberalism in Central America.

Chomsky also examines how and why histories and memories are suppressed, and the impact of losing historical memory. Only by erasing history can we claim that Central American countries created their own poverty and violence, while the United States’ enjoyment and profit from their bananas, coffee, mining, clothing, and export of arms are simply unrelated curiosities.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Politics, Latin American History, War, World History, American History

304 pages, Paperback

First published April 6, 2021

About the author

Aviva Chomsky is professor of history and coordinator of Latin American Studies at Salem State University. The author of several books, Chomsky has been active in Latin American solidarity and immigrants' rights issues for over twenty-five years. She lives in Salem, Massachusetts.

Reviews

[David Wineberg · Rating 5 out of 5]

The history of Central America is the history of outside interference and destruction. It began with the Spanish invaders, the reason Columbus Day is a day of mourning throughout the region. In the first 150 years, the Spanish oversaw a reduction in population from 5-6 million to just 600,000 by 1800. In Aviva Chomsky’s Central America’s Forgotten History, the mistreatment of Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador and Nicaragua are all different, a cornucopia of tactics that have kept them all violent, vile and oppressive – just the way America wanted it. It’s a horrifying, if comprehensive run through the descent of a once balanced society into violence, poverty and constant fear. It is a story of murder, slaughter, torture and dispossession. The “discovery” of Central America was not an improvement for any of the natives.

With the implementation of the Monroe Doctrine in 1823, Americans began ousting the Spanish and proceeded to grind the countries of Central America into hellholes of poverty, violence, and chaos. For immense profit, of course.

Both colonizers had a policy of eliminating the natives. They both considered Mayans subhuman, just as Americans viewed their own native populations. They had no rights, were pushed out of their lands and homes for the benefit of rich whites and mixed race Ladinos, and were slaughtered at will, all with total impunity. And all the while, they were heavily taxed for the privilege.

By 1829, Simon Bolivar was already able to claim: “The United States seems destined by Providence to plague (Central) America with miseries in the name of Freedom.”

All over Central America, small rebel movements took shape, all fighting the same fight, but usually alone. The movements and their members never coalesced. Chomsky points out right off the top that to be a Central American today means to suppress both memory and the effects of the oppression. The only way they can go on is to pretend none of it ever happened. History for Central American is largely blank.

While America might have claimed everything it did was for the good of Central Americans, it was in fact simply in favor of the dollar. Villages were destroyed, ways of life were destroyed. Death squads wreaked havoc at will. Men had to sleep outdoors in the mountains because of constant attacks by the Contras or other death squads. Horrific killers roamed the countryside unmolested, and then moved to the USA and became citizens, sometimes bringing their violent ways with them. US aid, such as it was, went towards training and equipping the death squads and to lining the pockets of the elite leaders and soldiers.

After 200 years , there is nothing the USA can point to in terms of nation-building in Central America. By 1933, US Marine Major General Smedley Butler was able to testify: “I spent most of my time being a high class muscle-man for Big Business, Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street.”

The countries were so chaotic that they all suffered from huge influxes of refugees from their neighbors, fleeing similar horrors on their side of the border. This, of course, simply caused additional problems for the countries as well as further misery for the refugees. It was a treadmill to oblivion. The short leash the Americans kept the nations on meant the only logical goal for asylum seekers was the United States. That’s where peace was, along with jobs and all the material goods they saw in their own countries, but could not get for themselves without going into crippling debt. There was absolutely nothing of any value on offer in any neighboring country, thanks to the depradations of the USA. Even today, so-called caravans of Central Americans walk from their countries to the American border in the hope of joining millions of the their countrymen in starting over far from the American-made hell of home.

In Guatemala, for example, 83% of those killed were indigenous Mayans. And 93% of the killings and other atrocities were by the military and paramilitary. El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala still rank in the top ten most violent countries in the world, Chomsky says. And none of them are even at war. Normally, one needs an insurgency in order to just justify counter-insurgency forces. Not here. Counter-insurgency forces of the governments are the main source of death and violence.

The United States moved into those countries with force, rewriting local laws to suit American corporations, such as enabling part time employment to avoid providing any benefits, just like back home. Special emphasis in the book goes to Ambassador John Negroponte, who basically ran Honduras himself, instructing politicians and military officers in what they needed to do at all times. Honduras itself was derisively called the USS Honduras for all the military bases and totally US-controlled areas of the country. Land was continually taken from the locals who couldn’t pay the taxes, and given in ever larger tracts to US corporations to exploit, starting with horrible conditions for the local laborers, now forced to seek livelihoods at the pleasure of the Americans in their own countries.

In Nicaragua, alcoholism and domestic violence ranked the highest in Central America (which is saying a lot), along with a patriarchy and associated issues, social and criminal. The rise of the Sandinistas to fight these conditions actually began a hundred years ago. The Americans fought them off, creating the Contras, training and supplying them. And despite Congress’ efforts to stop the Contras, President Reagan found more and devious ways to divert cash and arms to them to continue their terrorism of the public. What Reagan feared most was the possibility of a good example for the rest of the region to emulate. It could never be allowed to happen. The result is 80s is called The Lost Decade there.

Today, the shambles of national economies in the region mean they are largely dependent on remittances from emigrants to the USA. Salvadorans emigrate to the USA in the tens of thousands a year. There are now 2.3 million of them. Their remittances of $1 billion represent 10% of the gross national income of El Salvador, twice as much as coffee, the biggest export. It is so important that President Duarte lobbied President Reagan not to increase deportations (as he planned to) because it would cripple the country’s economy and stability. So Central American nations remain totally beholden to the USA, even today.

The utter chaos the US engendered in Central America immediately reminded me of the strategy currently deployed by Saudi Arabia. The kingdom seeks to keep any country in its region off balance if it shows even the slightest inclination to go its own way. So from Syria to Azerbaijan to Chechnya to Qatar to Iran to Yemen to Somalia to Sudan, the Saudis are in there, fomenting disruption, distrust, instability, bombing and war as necessary to keep any of them from possibly setting a good example for others. It is a ring of chaos surrounding the haven of Saudi Arabia. So with Central America.

Chomsky’s text is enormously fast-moving. There is a ton of facts to transmit, and no room for padding. There are no flowery descriptions, no scene-setters, and no coloring. Very few adjectives. She does not profile suffering locals or tell their life stories and family histories. Instead, the book is packed with loaded statements. It often seems that every sentence in a paragraph could be its own book. There is so much to tell, and so little of it well known (and even less of it understood) that Central America’s Forgotten History will be a revelation to most readers.

David Wineberg

[Joelle Lewis · Rating 5 out of 5]

You need to read this book before you pass judgments on those who are undocumented.

[Zeb Kantrowitz · Rating 4 out of 5]

During the later part of the twentieth century, during the cold war, America spent a fortune of manpower and material to prevent communism from spreading from Cuba to Central America. Most of the time we turned dictatorships into killing machines as we trained local armies in counter-insurgency (even if there wasn't one).

All of Central America is not profiled, just Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, and Nicaragua. Belize, Panama and Costa Rica are never mentioned. From the late 196os through the end of the 1980s, guerrilla warfare and rightest armies fought out wars of violence and torture across all of these nations. It wasn't like they were peaceful before, mostly they were a type of slave plantation agricultural society.

But after the Cuban revolution, the Indigenous and Peasant Campesino peoples began to demand their freedom and for land. The powers that be brought in help from the American Military and in many places wiped entire cultures off the map and place others in concentration camp conditions.
Sometimes there would be a breakthrough and the Armed Forces would turn the government back to the civilian side, but seldomly did this last and the Military would overthrow the government and go back to using "Death Squads" to terrorize the population.

There are parts of the narrative where there is to much detail, except for a text book, and other times things are just passed over quickly. Though the US is held to account, it always seems as if the White House lets the Military loose to do what they want. Like Vietnam, we spent a lot of time and money trying to save people's freedoms by killing them off.

[Vic u · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was an incredibly well-written book that traces the rich history of Central America. Since Spanish colonization to the present, the people of Central America have faced incredible hardships from external imperialist forces, most recently the United States. The 20th century saw the rise of revolutionary movements in the region, inspiring socialist and anti-imperialist movements across Latin America. Tragically, many of these movements were suppressed through American intervention and support for right-wing death squads. The aftermath of civil wars in the 1990s and 2000s witnessed widespread privatization due to neoliberal policies, leading to massive levels of migration. To gain a genuine understanding of the root causes of the prevalent issue of "unauthorized" immigration from this region, this book is essential reading. Aviva Chomsky aptly points out that many Americans advocating for the deportation of undocumented Central Americans lack knowledge about the region's history and often cannot even name a single current leader. This book begins to undo the historical amnesia about Central America that has swept millions of Americans. She ends the book with a powerful and radical demand for reparations for Central America by the United States.

[Luis · Rating 1 out of 5]

Unfortunately this book is yet another anti-America diatribe. Aviva Chomsky's book is a trail of tears, in this case the victims are the central American masses who, in her view, have been colonized by the United States. Everything that has gone wrong in Central America from the unfair distribution of land, to the civil wars, to the violent aftermaths and the eventual exodus of millions of people from the region to the US is the fault, directly or indirectly, of US policy.

It is quite irksome, disingenuous and false to take an approach to history where the people you are writing about have almost no agency whatsoever and are nothing but pawns of the evil American empire. It is an example of the sewer that American academia finds itself currently, where the narrative is more important than the facts. Ms Chomsky never delves deeper than in the surface because if she had she would have made some very interesting discoveries, such as: that Central America has always been plagued by corrupt, irresponsible governments who have only served wealthy elites and not the people, that was the case long before the US was powerful regional hegemony and it is the case to this day; That during the cold war it was not just the US who aided militaries in the region but the soviet union and Cuba funded, trained and provided arms for the guerillas. She refuses to even talk about the thousands of innocent victims of the guerillas. At no point does she criticize the ruthless dictatorship of Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua and only praises it, ignoring that to this day Ortega has remained in power through fraudulent elections, corruption, repression, and the shutting down of the media. For 30 years in El Salvador, the parties who signed the peace treaty were in power and instead of governing justly they continued the same failed model of corruption and neglect which led millions to leave to the US. But to me the most egregious omission of this book is the fact that it never mentions the elephant in the room: Costa Rica. If you look at the Map, Costa Rica is very much Central America. And the reason why Ms Chomsky ignores Costa Rica is because it is a country that belies her thesis and it contradicts her narrative of Central Americans as victims without agency. Costa Rica is known as the Switzerland of Central America, US 'imperialism' has never prevented it from being a stable, prosperous democracy and it is precisely because they have historically acted in a manner contrary to other Central American countries. Costa Rica never experienced turmoil in the cold war, there are no Costa Rican gangs and you will not see millions of Costa Ricans leaving their country in mass because there has never been a need to. In fact, Chomsky never mentions that if Nicaraguans have not migrated to the US like Salvadorans or Hondurans have, it is not because of the triumph of the Nicaraguan revolution, they have migrated to Costa Rica by the hundreds of thousands.

Shame on me for believing that an intellectual is capable of seeing beyond her bubble and prejudices to give us an objective analysis of the topic at hand. I was naive to think that the daughter of an America hater, Noam Chomsky was capable of more.

[Abigail · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was an informative book that traces the history of U.S. intervention into Central America and the negative effects that are still occurring in these countries. One of the things this book does well is emphasize that it is not enough for Americans to feel pity or empathy for the plight of Central Americans. Americans must recognize the role that their own country’s foreign policy has had across this region and make changes at home. Humanitarianism calls for aid to alleviate poverty in these countries, but ultimately falls short of creating true change by calling out the very system that has created these problems. This book is a call for the American public to take responsibility for the actions of their country and to make meaningful changes from within. As an American this was really powerful, especially today where it feels like so many individuals use activism as a performance on social media and claim that meaningful social change is impossible. Coming out of this book I feel inspired by the amazing work of Central American activists and feel hopeful for the work that still needs to be done in my own country.

[Lauren Bander · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book is supposed to be about the importance of remembering how the U.S. has used neocolonial tactics to assert power over Central America, but Chomsky only presents evidence and little analysis. She begins the book by comparing the Central American struggle to the Holocaust, which is counter-productive to the point of the book—it’s not oppression Olympics! Chomsky is asking the U.S. to take responsibility for its neocolonial policies toward Central America while contrasting the historical memory of Germany to that of the U.S. The U.S. has done a poor job of remembering ANY of its colonial or neo-colonial actions, so the Holocaust comparison is low-hanging fruit. Chomsky should have talked about the special case of the U.S. and Central America instead of comparing the U.S. to Europe, which is not a productive way to talk about U.S. foreign policies.

Then Chomsky spends the rest of the 250 pages fact-dumping. Chomsky does a poor job of organizing the book into themes that make sense for the previously uninformed reader. Basically, this is one long timeline of the Central American revolutionary period. So unless you’re good at memorizing timelines, this is too dense. This book only makes sense if you’re already familiar with Central American history and in need of a refresher.

There was so much potential for Chomsky to deep-dive into WHY a particular event was forgotten or how it shaped the world today. But Chomsky chalks it all up to the selfishness of the U.S.—which in part is true, but I would have appreciated more nuance. Instead of an enlightening insights, I felt like I was reading a history report winth too many quotes and not enough analysis.

[Savannah Payne · Rating 5 out of 5]

this book was great. im honestly trying to remember the central american history that i learned in school but this book is aptly titled. they say the winners write history and aviva chomsky brings to light the decades and decades of exploitation, colonialism, corruption, etc in central america at the hands of US involvment. like yeah i know reagan is the WOAT but he is actually even worse than that. the US-backed repression and violence that met the Nicaraguan socialist revolution are quieted by anti-communist campaigns in the capitalist world. the twisted justification for involvement (read: repression, extrapolation, violence) is so absurdist it pains me to think of how these stories were loosely taught to me in school? chomsky focuses on migration in the latter part of the book-- a hot topic in the US that so many have failed to address and emphasize the historical reasons behind it.

this reads a little like a history textbook but takes a truth-seeking approach that acknowledges the fears and even dangers of uncovering this -forgotten history-. a must read

[gpears · Rating 4 out of 5]

comprehensive history of us and western intervention in central america..highlights resistance, mass organizing, and the indigenous experience…learned a lot about a region i was pretty unfamiliar with! but something about the organization of the book made it hard to follow at times as it jumps through time

[Ashley Clubb · Rating 5 out of 5]

Finally finished this as an audiobook! Whew. Brought me back to some of my favorite classes in college that examined histories and power structures of Latin America. Definitely read as an approachable textbook, but I wouldn't recommend as an easy read.

[Katelyn Donaldson · Rating 3 out of 5]

*3.5 stars

I learned a lot about the revolutionary histories of the 20th century in Central America, along with the repressive regimes/oligarchies that were supported by the US.

This book does a good job of putting well known events into context and describing the roots of migration—war, stolen land, and business/government corruption.

I liked the contents of the book, but simply feel like the thesis is really weak. I’m not sure if she’s trying to convince the reader of the US’ meddling or of the fact that the US’ forgets about its’ harmful meddling. Either way it feels pretty elementary/not fully developed.

[Michael Skora · Rating 5 out of 5]

Incredibly valuable reminder on how US military and neoliberal interventions in Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, and Nicaragua perpetually destabilized the countries and peoples within. Chomsky importantly discloses how so many Americans have the privilege of forgetting the atrocities committed in Central America and than acting shocked when millions of migrants with few other options arrive at the Southern border.

[Brandon Jaimes · Rating 5 out of 5]

Neoliberalism is a plague on this Earth! Chomsky illustrates the subtle and not so subtle ways that the US government interfered in Central America. Economic restructuring was a key strategy that enabled the proliferation of foreign business and the exploitation of Central American workers.

[Elizabeth Sanders · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a good read if you want to find out more on Central America war and about how the US was in it.

[Adam · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a really eye-opening book for me. I can't recall ever learning about Central America in school and there's no way even if schools did teach it that they would include the material in this book. If you don't know anything about Central American history, this book is a must read before you can make an educated opinion on the current migrant crisis.

The main thing I thought was missing was a brief history or explanation to why Costa Rica, Panama, and Belize had different fates from the countries she covered. I understand why she doesn't cover them much, as those countries aren't the homes of the vast majority of Central America's migrants to the US. But it would have provided some additional context that would have been nice. I finished the book left wondering what happened differently in those places.

[Scott Martin · Rating 4 out of 5]

This books looks at the more modern history of the countries in Central America vis-a-vis their relationship with the US. It is a complex and sometimes painful relationship, one that has led to various wars and conflicts. The impacts of American involvement from the end of the 19th century to the 21st still resonate in this dynamic part of the globe.

Chomsky takes pains to point out that Central America is not a monolithic region, but one of different people and experiences. They are still facing a multitude of problems, internal and external, and while not all at the feet of the US, many do trace their origins from them.

The author takes a left-leaning view, which will turn off a portion of the American public she wants to educate. Still, there is enough here to educate any reader, political leanings aside. Worth at least a read.

[Dan McCarthy · Rating 4 out of 5]

A straightforward history of Central America, the refugee crisis, and what the United States' role in the situation. The book breaks the stories down chronologically and by country.

It would be impossible to read this story, with America's sins laid out so clear, and not understand why our hegemonic presence in the hemisphere is not a force for good in any way.

[Elizabeth · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book reminded me of why I tend to read mostly narrative non-fiction. It was definitely a struggle to get through, and I’ve read an entire book on the history of kitchen utensils and found it very interesting, and I’m very interested in Central American history as one of my grandparents is from El Salvador.

First, I didn’t like how the Aviva takes away almost all agency from the citizens of these countries. To me the entire book really smacked of the racism of low expectations. Second, she tried to blame every single thing on the US. Did the US do a lot of harm, absolutely.
But the Central Americans also have agency.

Also there was a complete glossing over of the human rights abuses inflicted by various groups, like the Sandanistas, in order to not disrupt her narrative.

She would also do a lot of ‘government policy A dealing with mining was changed. Now 70% of the citizens are malnourished.’ She would not present how one government policy led to the citizens suffering, nor give any real causal links.

Finally, something that I noticed was absent almost entirely from the book was the voices of actual Central Americans. I learned almost nothing about the people themselves, and instead just all of these things that were done to them. I think this book would have been much better if Aviva had let the Central Americans themselves speak instead of only writing her interpretation of them.

[Joey · Rating 4 out of 5]

My heart rate was about 150 the whole time reading this.

[Chaim Wigder · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a book every American should read. Chomsky masterfully traces the current migration "crisis" here in the US to our own policies in Central America over the past several decades, exposing both the moral bankruptcy of right's anti-immigrant rhetoric, as well as the limits of tone-deaf liberalism, which expresses humanitarian concern for migrants while often refusing to acknowledge its own complicity in the very systems and policies that created the crisis.

While we all seem to vaguely know that Central American migrants are fleeing "poverty" and "violence" in their own countries, few Americans are aware of how US intervention in those countries—explicitly aimed at crushing their social movements for change by propping up right-wing dictatorships and regimes favorable to US corporations—have created and continue to perpetuate those conditions.

I had some limited knowledge of the social movements in Latin America in the twentieth-century, and US opposition to them, but this book really clarifies the extent of US involvement in crushing the will of the people of Latin America over decades (in large part by aiding and funding death squads to carry out destruction and genocide of populations in order to protect US corporate interests, but also by forcing neoliberal economic policies on those same countries through blatant economic extortion, threats, sanctions, and regime change). These bipartisan policies, pursued not only by right-wing Cold Warriors like Reagan but also the liberal heroes of the Clinton and Obama Administrations, have been erased from the discourse about immigration that we see today in the media and in mainstream political discussions.

The book focuses on the history of Guatemala, Nicaragua, El Salvador, and Honduras. Because of the wide scope, Chomsky's writing often feels scattered and chronologically confusing at times. This makes the book one that is best read carefully and attentively. But the effort is well worth it. It will leave you with a much greater knowledge not only of Central American history, but of the history of US foreign policy and its disastrous effects on its own continent. I also wasn't much a fan of Chomsky's insertion of the whole "forgetting" theme as a major thesis of the book. It seemed a bit contrived as a poetic device that didn't add to the overall historical narrative or the arguments, and felt rather cliche. But this is only a small part of the book, mostly confined to the first couple of chapters.

As Chomsky says in the closing chapter, "Trump's policies are only the most recent iteration of over a century of US domination and exploitation of Central Americans." The only way to fight back against the present right-wing attack on immigrants is to study this history and understand that this is not just a question of domestic policy but one of foreign policy, of the role of the United States and the mayhem and destruction we often impose on the rest of the world in order to maintain our own level of material comfort. This latest crisis is, once again, our own chickens coming home to roost.

[Andrew Sternisha · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a useful book for any US-American who cares about the flood of immigrants to the southern border of the USA. It includes a lot of history that most Americans don't know on the impact of US capitalism and the Monroe Doctrine on Central American countries. However, I do not believe that there is much that would be new to informed readers who are familiar with Central American history.

In fact, that is where much of my criticism begins. First, Chomsky discusses El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala, and Nicaragua at length, but skips Panama, Belize, and Costa Rica. I am not as familiar with the histories of Panama and Belize, but Costa Rica seems to have avoided many of the negative impacts of US capitalism and pseudo-colonization of the region, so including that would have proven beneficial, as this is not a large book.

Chomsky also does not allow much agency for the people of the countries she studies. They may have had some agency when forming their various movements, but then the US acts and automatically shuts everything down, which is an overly simplistic narrative and one that smacks of being US-centric, which is a common flaw of many academics when discussing "third-world" countries during the "cold war", namely, Odd Arne Westad.

While US actions were indeed reprehensible in my opinion during this era and many presidential administrations, including the venerated Reagan Administration, and companies overstepped the bounds of reason in pursuit of profit of geopolitical influence, the reality is that the other side often also committed atrocities that Chomsky does not discuss.

One thing I found interesting in this book was her emphasis on the role of the Catholic Church in these movements. I have seen some work on this, but she places it a bit more at the center of the narrative than many scholars.

This book, with all of its flaws, is likely still useful for a US public that today seems to have no understanding for why so many people from the countries that Chomsky discusses are seeking to enter the US. I think we can all learn valuable lessons in empathy and we should also note that this is part of the blowback of US policy. The term blowback is used often in the circles of US foreign policy scholars, but it is often reserved for discussions of violence against the US in places like Afghanistan. While there is little violent action against the US from Central American countries (contrary to Trump's baseless claims), the humanitarian issues at the US-Mexico border are absolutely blowback for the US meddling in the affairs of other countries.

[Æ · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is the first book in my unofficial series I’m calling “Understanding US Immigration”.

This book talks about the seven countries of Central America: Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Panama. It briefly talks about the rise of Spanish colonialism, and the creation of a caste system between “Ladinos” (people of Spanish ancestry) and Indigenous peoples or “Indians”. Sound familiar? “As in the United States, racism against Central America’s Indigenous populations existed on multiple levels and was expressed in policies ranging from genocide, erasure, coerced assimilation, legal exclusion, forced labor, and myths about ‘disappearing Indians.” Most exploitation was of the natives, compared to the US, which mostly imported slaves instead of forcing the natives to labor. Both used the lie of “civilizing the savage” to justify subordination and even extermination.

The US also has had an extremely large impact on the history of all Central American countries. This includes, but is not limited to:
• Refusing to accept election results if it didn’t go the way they wanted (Guatemala 1952, Nicaragua 1984)
• Literally annexing and creating the country for the interests of corporations (Panama)
• Invasion (Guatemala 1954, Nicaragua 1912-1933 & 1981-1990, Panama 1989)
• US-backed coups (Guatemala 1954, Honduras 1963 & 2009)
• Slavery/corporate colonialism (google: Banana Wars)
Etc.

What this book really shows is that the USA does not care about democracy or self-determination for nations within its political influence (i.e. any country) if that country’s actions results in negatively impacts the bottom line of US-based international corporations. That is the modus operandi of US foreign policy.

Specifically for Central America, the corporations of interest are the United Fruit Company (now Chiquita) as well as coffee, sugar, and cotton plantations. The story is always the same:
• Country elects political leaders who want to make life easier for peasants who work on plantations owned by multinational corporations.
• They enact a welfare state and the dreaded LAND REFORM
• Corpos run to the US government
• The US lies and claims the country is being influenced by the USSR (no longer necessary these days)
• the US invades or funds rebels to instigate a coup or both so they can install a new puppet dictator to brutalize the people and appease corporate interests
• Neoliberal Chicago Boy economist ghouls come in to do “structural adjustment,” AKA: write laws to dismantle and privatize all government industry and services, gutting social safety nets. Then, replace them with “free trade zones,” signing away the nation’s wealth to foreign investors. This resulted in plummeting median wealth and health for the people.

“‘By the end of the Cold War,’ writes Greg Grandin, ‘Latin American security forces trained, funded, equipped, and incited by Washington had executed a reign of bloody terror—hundreds of thousands killed, an equal number tortured, millions driven into exile—from which the region has yet to recover.’”

A tail as old as time. It’s not just Central America, but essentially any country that crosses the US.

But I’ve told this story over and over again. what did I learn that’s different here compared to similar books?

1: The US government was (is?) absolutely involved in the international drug trade.

“US-built airstrips and US-funded private airlines […] became key nodes in the transport of cocaine and marijuana from Colombia into the United States, and the secretive bases in Honduras proved an irresistible transit point. The US Drug Enforcement Agency briefly opened an office in Honduras in 1981. When the office began documenting the extensive Honduran military involvement in the drug trade, the office was abruptly closed in 1983.”

2: This gave me a better understanding of colonialism and racism.

“Where populations were small and virtually impossible to control, as in North America, the British developed a kind of colonial enterprise called settler colonialism. Rather than ruling over the people they colonized—like the Spanish in Mexico and Peru, or the British themselves in India—settler colonial projects were based on eliminating the people who were there and replacing them with a white, European population.”

“Traditional colonialism and settler colonialism shared an ideology of European superiority that continues to infuse the world today, now commonly termed racism. What we today call people of color are formerly colonized peoples. Simply acknowledging the colonial roots of race and racism helps us to understand how profoundly the past has shaped the present.”

“It’s also worth noting that most of the wealth and power in today’s world is concentrated in the former colonial powers (the United States and Europe), while most of the poverty is concentrated in their former colonies (Africa, Latin America, the Caribbean, South and Southeast Asia). This division too has its roots in a long history of colonialism.”

3: How US-backed Neoliberal hyperindividualism resulted in rising Central American immigration to the US

The US government destabilized Central America through a century of neocolonialism, repression, coups, puppet dictators, counterinsurgencies, and “structural adjustments”. The dogmatism spread by the US and its ilk since the 1980’s has been “hyperindividualism — Look out for yourself, don’t expect anyone to help you!”

These two facts resulted in something obvious. The people who want to make a better life for themselves in their families do what makes the most sense for themselves as individuals: emigrate. And where do they go? Why the largest economy they can reach, of course! The good ole US of A.

The book went more into the the complexities of the US immigration system and its history. That’s a topic I hope to talk about further along in my quest.

4: The AFL-CIO has historically stood with the US government against pro-labor nationalist governments in Latin America (and likely in other places).

“Although the AFL-CIO campaigned against Reagan in 1980 and opposed many of his domestic policies, the federation wholeheartedly adopted his framing of Central American revolutions as communist threats to the security of the United States. […] The organization offered money and resources to unions that agreed to follow its political orientation. It intervened in unions’ internal politics, promoting candidates and positions that eschewed radicalism. It worked closely with the US Embassy, US multinationals operating in Latin America, and the CIA, earning the federation the nickname ‘AFL-CIA’ among many critical Latin Americans.”

One of the many reasons why I’m not a big fam of the AFL-CIO. More specifically the first half of that acronym. See: "A History of America in Ten Strikes" by Erik Loomis for more on that.


That’s about it.
Read the book if you’re into this sorta stuff.

[Clogs · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a great history and well constructed story/narrative of the history. Just the right amount of detail to be entertaining to read and still be accurate and informative.

It was also, I felt. A quite balanced perspective of the history. With all the shitty things the US and Spain has done in Central America it’s easy to turn every conversation into a blame game. This book didn’t do that. But it wasn’t apologetic to those colonialists a either. It certainly identified all the shitty things they did.

It really made me think more broadly about power systems and hierarchies in general philosophical terms. For example, many of the indigenous elite used the power structures of the colonialists to advance their own status and wealth. Utilizing the new market and religious systems that were in place.

It seems that every system and every culture has the elites who amass resources and basically everyone else. The really interesting there there is that in some cultural s the elites seem to ‘take care’ of those who provide for them and in others they are subjugated.

Also, that Nicaragua actually had a successful revolution BEATING the worlds largest army AND winning a war crimes case at The Hague! The reason Nica is so relatively peaceful now is because of the roots laid by the successful revolution. No other country in Central America has that.

Also, timing. The Spanish were in Latin America for 100 years BEFORE Columbus. wow.

[Brent Bauman · Rating 4 out of 5]

I wish this were required reading to be able to vote in America. Absolutely tragic, the book was extremely informative bouncing between Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua and Guatemala. Basically looting the countries wholesale, then overthrowing their elected governments when they got wise to what we’re doing. After decades of chaos, death, rape and torture (all of which the US paid for and trained the soldiers to do) we then installed neoliberalism through debt financing to essentially put the countries in eternal bondage.

The dots were meticulously connected and there can be no doubt in the end that americas “you break it, you buy it” policy doesn’t extend to itself. As when we broke all the countries and their people came here to escape the very death squads we trained and financed, we put Trump in charge, who responded at the border with absolute cruelty and apathy.

This book made me sad

I took one star off because the author glossed over many details of violence that I would have liked further detail. For example several war criminals were found (under US asylum no less) an sent back to stand trial for crimes against humanity, however what they did was never really divulged with any detail as to I still the reader with true disgust. Perhaps that was the point, but I would have liked further information

[The Bamboo Traveler · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a good book for anyone wanting to know the history of Central America. Before coming to Central America, I always wondered why the countries were so poor and why so many people were migrating to the United States. This book clearly explained the reasons: unequal distribution of land and resources, the U.S.'s role in preventing social and economic reforms, the power of the wealthy landowners of Latin America, and neoliberalism. War and revolution in Central America failed to make significant or enough improvements in the lives of the poor of Central America. I think many realized that war didn't work. Perhaps the forces of the wealthy and corporations and the American government are just too great. And so they have chosen another way: migration. I wonder whether things would be different for Guatemala and thus Central America (more prosperous and safer) if there had been no coup in 1954, Arbenz had stayed in power, and his land reforms had gone through putting more of the land in the hands of the people.

[Zain Talukdar · Rating 3 out of 5]

“Traditional colonialism and settler colonialism shared an ideology of European superiority that continues to infuse the world today, now commonly termed racism. What we today call people of color are formerly colonized peoples. Simply acknowledging the colonial roots of race and racism helps us to understand how profoundly the past has shaped the present.”

Pretty important piece of post-colonial history retelling the plight of Central Americans in the 20th and 21st century at the hands of the US. Extensively extensively detailed which almost felt like sorting through the forest from the trees, but jam packed with evidence to support that Central America was deeply exploited for neoliberal and capitalist gain at the expense of basic human rights for those governed. Did a great job of also tying in Cold War legislation and 21st century legislation into what we see both in the US and Central America today. A very heavy book to digest, will require a couple more reads to retain a lot of the details.

[Martha Schniepp · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a really great overview of recent decades worth of US foreign policy and intervention that directly resulted in the level of violence and poverty in central America in recent years, and also why we have seen an influx of immigration into the US as a result. It’s very eye opening and useful, it should honestly be required reading in the USA. A lot of this has been suppressed or hidden because nobody wants to acknowledge our complicity in these problems, but doing so is the only way forward. It’s especially challenging to read this years later, as Trump’s second term has been significantly more cruel and racist in the first few months. I wish more people understood the roots of these problems and advocated for real change at home, with our government, versus whatever we have picked now.

[Rosa Davis · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really important read. I learned so much which still felt like not enough. One fact that stuck to me is that Reagan and Obama had more in common in dismantling peacefully elected central American presidents. We all know Reagan's administration was full of bastards but I didn't realize that Obama's were no saints either. It was pretty atrocious what the contras in each of the different countries in Central America did to innocent people with the United State's blessing. I was sort of aware of it but not to this extent. I really don't blame the immigrants, who happen to be in the majority from these countries than Mexico, for trying to come to the United States to flee the violence and poverty that the US practically inflicted on them.

[Alex · Rating 4 out of 5]

The United States has egregiously interfered with governments elected by the people of Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador and Nicaragua and this book reports these interventions in case you weren't paying attention when the Sandanists and Contras were fighting. Interesting that Guatemala's government was overthrown by Allen and John Foster Dulles policies around the same time the US overthrew the Iranian Mossadeg government. And we know how well that helped the Middle East. Now the US continues to reap what it's sown with Narco corruption and drug trafficking polluting our cities and rural towns. Conservative policy screwed up these countries and now we're supposed to trust Conservatives to limit immigration of people fleeing the mess they created?

[Kaethe Gallagher · Rating 3 out of 5]

I’m honestly not sure how I felt about this book, although it was better written than Long Honduran Night. It was dense with info and covered a lot of history so I appreciate that I was able to learn a lot without having to read a textbook. And yet, with having read both these books, I feel informed, but in a way that is uncomfortable. But I suppose it’s necessary if I want to learn and be informed.
Both authors, of this book and Long Honduran Night have a slant, an agenda, and I was hoping to learn about Honduras without that- to form my own opinion, rather than be told what I ought to believe. I wouldn’t call either of these writers historians or journalists, but with so little info on these histories, you take what you can get.