# Oscar Romero, liberation theology, and Latin America **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 4, 2003, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oscar-romero-liberation-theology-and-latin-america/173038 "2003-05-04T16:28:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2003, 12:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oscar-romero-liberation-theology-and-latin-america/173038/21 "2003-05-10T12:03:42Z")
“Covert action should not be confused with missionary work.” - Henry Kissinger, on the occassion of selling the Kurds down the river. I’ve met a number of cynics in my time, **Shodan**. I’ve never met one yet who didn’t regard himself as hard-headed and realistic. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2003, 12:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oscar-romero-liberation-theology-and-latin-america/173038/22 "2003-05-10T12:44:08Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Guinastasia \* > \*\*Romero was working a country where the military was passing out pamphlets saying “Be a patriot! Kill a priest!” \*\* And the people who were passing out those pamphlets were passing them out because a lot of the Salvadoran priesthood was involved in the revolutionary movement, and because the base communities were primary recruitment centers and training grounds for the Communists. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2003, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oscar-romero-liberation-theology-and-latin-america/173038/23 "2003-05-10T13:11:56Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Captain Amazing \* > \*\*And the people who were passing out those pamphlets were passing them out because a lot of the Salvadoran priesthood was involved in the revolutionary movement, and because the base communities were primary recruitment centers and training grounds for the Communists. \*\* Do you have a cite for this? Yes, I will say that the clergy was, by and large, more sympathetic or at least, more tolerant, of the revolutionaries than they were the government. At the same time, does that really justify the terrorism practiced by the Salvadoran government? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2003, 1:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oscar-romero-liberation-theology-and-latin-america/173038/24 "2003-05-10T13:59:59Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by elucidator \* > \*\*“Covert action should not be confused with missionary work.” > > - Henry Kissinger, on the occassion of selling the Kurds down the river. > > I’ve met a number of cynics in my time, **Shodan**. I’ve never met one yet who didn’t regard himself as hard-headed and realistic. \*\* Possibly. I have met several, but perhaps that’s just me. Jimmy Carter has already been cited in this thread as a man who did not see himself as a cynic. But almost the last phrases I would choose to apply to his foreign policy are “hard-headed and realistic”. The flip side of that would be a quote from Oscar Wilde, to the effect that: > [@](#): > > When a man does a thoroughly stupid thing, he often does so for the very best reasons. The US, along with every other country on earth and throughout history, is often confronted in its foreign policy with the choice between bad and worse, where choosing nothing is worst of all. Witness the war between Iran and Iraq (if **Guinastasia** will forgive the digression). Who was the right side in that war? Iraq, who started it, and had visions of Middle Eastern empire? Iran, who had already attacked the US, and had visions of Middle Eastern theocratic empire? We tend to judge foreign policy by its successes or failures. And how we decide what is a success and what is a failure depends very much on what we look for. Are human rights better today in El Salvador now as the result of US actions overall? It depends on who you ask. Are they better in Cuba? Nicaragua? Iraq? Iran? Afghanistan? Would they be better off if the US had not done what it did? It is a question that can never be answered for certain. > [@](#): > > It is difference of opinion that makes a horse race. - Mark Twain In foreign policy, those differences persist even after the race is over. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2003, 2:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oscar-romero-liberation-theology-and-latin-america/173038/25 "2003-05-10T14:29:54Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Guinastasia \* > \*\*Do you have a cite for this? \*\* Well, here’s an article from '89 [http://www.franksmyth.com/clients/FrankSmyth/frankS.nsf/7f5045700a01d03785256b6c00561192/a20c1ef6919c2f3f85256b7b00790698?OpenDocument](http://www.franksmyth.com/clients/FrankSmyth/frankS.nsf/7f5045700a01d03785256b6c00561192/a20c1ef6919c2f3f85256b7b00790698?OpenDocument) > [@](#): > > The FMLN, by contrast, builds its support from the bottom up. The guerrillas encourage peasants to organize themselves. The method is similar to that developed by Brazilian educator Paulo Freire and adopted by Christian “base communities” of the Catholic Church. . . .Peasants in these communities do not merely sympathize with the guerrillas. They see the armed and the unarmed struggle as two sides of the same coin. In the words of the young Jesuit, “the struggle of the guerrillas is the struggle of the poor.” and there’s this excerpt from Berryman’s report on the history of Liberation Theology in Latin America…admittedly, dealing with Nicagragua, instead of El Salvador [http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/40/023.html](http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/40/023.html) > [@](#): > > In Nicaragua under Somoza there were significant contacts between the small struggling Sandinista movement and church people. A Sandinista leader later candidly admitted that they had seen church organizations as “quarries” from which to mine grassroots leaders. Priests and sisters working at the village and barrio level sometimes resented the work of organizers who skimmed off leaders that they had spent years training, and who were then lost to the local organization-- or who remained, but introduced another agenda. From an interview with Fr. Miguel Ventura, a priest at a base community in El Salvador: [http://www.epica.org/Library/ventura.htm](http://www.epica.org/Library/ventura.htm) > [@](#): > > When I returned to Morazan in 1982 our pastoral work took place in the context of a political objective of an insurrection. We believed that the insurrection would occur soon. This formed the base of our actions and message to the people. . . .In the short term this meant that the people should participate in the revolution as much as they thought they could. Of course, we celebrated the Eucharist and held Bible study groups. Everything was directed at making people understand the demands of the moment and the need to organize for an insurrection in the near future. > > In retrospect, and from a Christian point of view, I don’t think we had sufficient maturity to recognize the importance of spiritual conversion. We lost pastoral workers because many of the people who had been doing pastoral work became very involved in political work and joined the FMLN as political organizers. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2003, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oscar-romero-liberation-theology-and-latin-america/173038/26 "2003-05-10T14:40:40Z")
As to the more general question, “Does that justify government repression”, but it at least helps to explain it. El Salvador at that time period was violent as all hell. You had the leftist terrorists, who were killing all sorts of people, you had the government which was ordering the army to kill all sorts of people in retribution, you had the army which were killing all sorts of people without orders, and you had the rightist terrorists, who were killing all sorts of people. Like Shodan says, there weren’t any good guys. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2003, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oscar-romero-liberation-theology-and-latin-america/173038/27 "2003-05-10T15:16:34Z")
Your depiction of this as a morally neutral situation - just folks killing folks needlessly - is valid only if it were not a situation of a criminal oligarchy ruthlessly opressing the majority, with America’s hearty cooperation. Coming from an American, this is decidedly odd. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2003, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oscar-romero-liberation-theology-and-latin-america/173038/28 "2003-05-10T15:32:06Z")
My point is though, what do you think they should have done? Why do you think these people supported communism? ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2003, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oscar-romero-liberation-theology-and-latin-america/173038/29 "2003-05-10T15:40:52Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by elucidator \* > \*\*Your depiction of this as a morally neutral situation - just folks killing folks needlessly - is valid only if it were not a situation of a criminal oligarchy ruthlessly opressing the majority, with America’s hearty cooperation. \*\* Well, but that depiction of the situation is hopelessly overly simplistic too. You had a oligarchy ruthlessly oppressing the majority since the 1850s. And the coup in 1979 brought to power people who were interested in reform and breaking the power of the oligarchy. Remember, one of the first things the '79 government did was put through a land reform program. Then after the coup in '80, the new government put through another land reform program. I’m not saying this was a morally neutral situation. On the contrary, this was a morally bad situation. All sides had bad motives, and all sides did some horrible things. So what it came down to is, does the US support the side that is friendly to us, the side that is unfriendly to us, or neither side? ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2003, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oscar-romero-liberation-theology-and-latin-america/173038/30 "2003-05-10T15:46:16Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Guinastasia \* > \*\*My point is though, what do you think they should have done? > > Why do you think these people supported communism? \*\* The Salvadorans who supported communism mainly did it because the Communists promised extensive land reform, and the average Salvadoran peasant lived in poverty, due to the concentration of land and wealth in a few hands and the general indifference by the government to the welfare of the Salvadoran poor. That set up the conditions so that the revolutions first in Cuba and then Nicaragua served to inspire revolutionary sentiment in El Salvador. What do I think who should have done? ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2003, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oscar-romero-liberation-theology-and-latin-america/173038/31 "2003-05-10T15:54:58Z")
The people of El Salvador. If we condemn them for supporting the communists, instead of looking at WHY they did, then we don’t get anywhere. I guess what I’m getting at is-what leads people (anywhere!) to embrace communism, and how can it be avoided? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2003, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oscar-romero-liberation-theology-and-latin-america/173038/32 "2003-05-10T17:56:18Z")
An oppressed peasant in El Salvador, or Guatemala, or Nicaragua, did not turn to Communists because of an appreciation of Hegelianism, or a sudden realisation of the significance of dialectical materialism. They turned to the Communists because the Reds offered the help that we would not. A direct parallel can be drawn to the situation in Viet Nam. The liberation movement did not start with, nor was it dominated by, the Viet Cong. It was the intransigence of the Catholic minority in its oppression of the Bhuddist majority that eventually radicalized the situation. You are free, of course, to regard this as a matter of interpretation, whereas I regard it as a matter of history. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2003, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oscar-romero-liberation-theology-and-latin-america/173038/33 "2003-05-10T20:30:48Z")
> [@](#): > > An oppressed peasant in El Salvador, or Guatemala, or Nicaragua, did not turn to Communists because of an appreciation of Hegelianism, or a sudden realisation of the significance of dialectical materialism. They turned to the Communists because the Reds offered the help that we would not. This seems a little simplistic. The Reds offered help to the rebels, not because they gave a tin shit that they were oppressed - the Reds oppressed people far worse than the US did - but because they were trying to expand their influence. The rebels could have been the worst oppressors on earth, and as long as they were anti-American, or at least anti-whatever government was being supported by America, and the USSR would have been in bed with them. The USSR was in the business of encouraging anti-US and anti-capitalist revolution. It would be a mistake to view the other side as dedicated to the cause of freedom, regardless of their rhetoric. > [@](#): > > I guess what I’m getting at is-what leads people (anywhere!) to embrace communism, and how can it be avoided? Probably the success of the West, politically and economically, has done more than anything else to discredit communism. In other words, the fact that the US won the Cold War is a good thing for human freedom across the world. There is a great deal to be said for setting a good example, and US aid is not always entirely confined to propping up dictators. As long as the government in place is stable enough, and has friendly relations with the US, they have a reasonable chance of getting some aid and encouragement to develop into a more reasonable society. See South Africa for an example of a repressive society, that kept out of the Soviet orbit, and had a chance to develop into a majority-led democracy. Name a Marxist country in Africa that did the same. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2003, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oscar-romero-liberation-theology-and-latin-america/173038/34 "2003-05-10T20:30:50Z")
Enough history. Everybody on this thread has been arguing about what the U.S. should have done in Central America in the 1970s and '80s, or about whether what the U.S. did do was justified. Never mind all that. We can learn from it, but we can’t do anything about it. It’s in the past. The important question is, what should we (the U.S.) be doing now? What should our foreign policy (or our covert-action policy) be, under present circumstances, with regard to Cuba? Mexico? Nicaragua? El Salvador? Venezuela? Colombia? Brazil? All countries where the hard left is either in power, or a major contender for it. Does communist ideology still have a vital role to play in these countries? Does liberation theology? And, now that the Cold War is over, why is any of this our business? Perhaps our policy should be strictly hands-off. Or perhaps, at this stage, we should start intervening on the side of the leftists! Does anyone have any opinions? ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2003, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oscar-romero-liberation-theology-and-latin-america/173038/35 "2003-05-11T00:16:38Z")
Um, **Shodan** , the communist guerillas in El Salvador were actually very much ANTI-Soviet. They were more nationalistic, than anything else. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2003, 2:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oscar-romero-liberation-theology-and-latin-america/173038/36 "2003-05-11T02:38:43Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Guinastasia \* > \*\*Um, **Shodan** , the communist guerillas in El Salvador were actually very much ANTI-Soviet. They were more nationalistic, than anything else. \*\* Maybe, but they got most of their aid from the eastern block countries, through Cuba, Nicragua, and Vietnam. From this article, looking at FLMN weaponry (It’s a PDF file): [http://www.smallarmsresearch.org/abstracts/v2n3FMLN2.pdf](http://www.smallarmsresearch.org/abstracts/v2n3FMLN2.pdf) > [@](#): > > After months of negotiations in > Havana, Cuba, the major guerrilla groups emerged consolidated under the Unified Revolutionary Directorate (DRU). In part this unity is believed to have been due to the pressure of Fidel Castro who sought to consolidate training and logistical support. Shortly after the announcement of the creation of the DRU, in May, 1980, there were indications that approximately 600 tons of weapons had arrived in El Salvador. > > Prior to 1980 crudely sanitized ex-Cuban 7.62 x 51mm NATO caliber FN FAL assault rifles, Czechoslovakian 9 x 19mm vz.23 and vz.25 submachine guns captured by Salvadoran government forces both showed limited FMLN logistical resources and pointed to Cuba as the primary supplier. Despite the removal of the national crest, markings remained that allowed the captured FN FALs to be traced to lots delivered to Cuba in the late 1950s. and > [@](#): > > The largest percentage of5.56mm M16/AR15 rifles captured have been traced to weapons either provided to the Republic of South Vietnam or issued to US units sent to Vietnam. Both US Defense Intelligence Agency serial number trace data and the Institute’s samples examined in El Salvador show the single largest source of M16/AR15 rifles provided to the FMLN has been Vietnam. From this article in the Communist magaine, The Millitant: [http://www.themilitant.com/1996/6030/6030\_12.html](http://www.themilitant.com/1996/6030/6030_12.html) > [@](#): > > Thousands of wounded FMLN fighters received medical treatment in Cuba during El Salvador’s civil war. The Cubans also played an important role in helping to unite guerrilla groups that led to the formation of the FMLN in the early 1980s. The FMLN is now a legal political party. It won a large number of seats in El Salvador’s parliament, after the signing of a peace agreement with the government in 1991. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2003, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oscar-romero-liberation-theology-and-latin-america/173038/37 "2003-05-11T03:37:34Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Shodan \* > Pretty much all the governments of Central America committed human rights violations. So did the rebels trying to overthrow those governments. The US trained some of the government officers, so the allegation is that we are responsible for their abuses. We did not support the rebels, so they are (I guess) responsible for their own abuses (or maybe the USSR or Cubans or whoever supported them). When there was hope this could be solved peacefully the armed forces/death squads decided it was ok to kill the opposition leaders in a total contempt of the rule of law, everybody knew the government to be acquainted with the perpetrators, they did nothing to bring the killers to justice, and the US administration choose to ignore it. Everybody learned a terrible lesson that day. The death squads, paramilitary groups, and even army groups killed the majority of the --people. > [@](#): > > It is similar to the situation in Nicaragua. The Somoza government was abusive of human rights. So were many of the contras. So were the Sandinistas (ask the Miskito Indians about that). Whose hands are clean? No one, but even a pseudo real politick follower should go for the one that is least evil, somehow pointing at the Miskitos is forgetting that they were also involved in contra activity (I would not blame them) but you are forgetting the mining of harbors (by the US) and speaking of the Sandinistas, you do know they lost the elections and they stepped down? How can you compare them to the antidemocratic Somoza FAMILY indeed? (I guess you don’t know they were literally a dynasty in Nicaragua) > [@](#): > > As far as I can tell, no one. And if we do nothing about the situation, the USSR and Cubans are working like beavers to expand their influence in the region, and they could care less about human rights or democracy. Have you looked at a map of the world recently? Someday I should start a thread describing this syndrome that attacks conservatives: Timeline blindness. > [@](#): > > So we pick the side we think will give us the best chance at creating the least objectionable government. It doesn’t work very well, but see the history of Cuba since the 50s for an example of what we are trying to avoid. Now that we got back to past history, you conveniently Forget that Batista was there first, paving the way for the next dictator. (As an aside I do agree Castro should go, but history to me (it wont absolve you Fidel) shows an enduring survival of extremism lasting on places the US decided to intervene openly (Vietnam) while “red” countries we decided to engage in other ways, by helping the neighbors develop (this is IMO very important) and not to openly engage them, then the people did not see us as an enemy and they in turn toppled their repressive rulers (in the former soviet block) > [@](#): > > It’s called realpolitik, and it isn’t pretty. I think it is more ugly that the ignorance of many in the US, of those actions, is an important piece of how to make that work. > [@](#): > > And the fact that Jimmy Carter condemned the very people he supported while President is another example of what a mush-headed mess he was at foreign policy. The silly twit didn’t learn anything from his term in office, except to spout platitudes while the Soviets invaded Afghanistan and the Iranians held our people hostage. And the Sandinistas started building the USSR another friendly port in the New World. And yet, those actions (by Carter and the USSR) were a piece too for the eventual collapse of the USSR > [@](#): > > Sometimes there aren’t any good guys to support, and if you do nothing, the bad guys who hate you will win. So the best you can hope for it to try to assist in creating a stable government friendly to your interests, in hopes that eventually their middle class will develop to the point when a majority agrees that democracy is what they want. And Marxists never develop a middle class. Your Marxist comment is ok, in a my cat’s breath smells of cat’s food kinda way. Stable governments out of military right wing coups? Right… Middle class? American workers many times had to die to get the rights that ensured the growth of the middle class, or had governments that gave a new deal to the people. (it doesn’t need to be Marxist to get there, you (don’t) know… I see many in Latin America get elected with platforms that could be described as new deals for the poor, raising the commie boogie man to defeat them is getting tiresome. Incidentally, after so many years of capitalism before, during, and after communism it doesn’t bother anybody that Latin American nations are still “developing”? > [@](#): > > Central America was a mess. Civil wars brewing, oppressive governments, outside agitators, great powers jockeying for position, no traditions of democracy, a huge, disenfranchised underclass and a few corrupt rich, and Romero crying out “Down with the oppressors! Power to the people! God agrees with me!” This line is ozzing with ignorance, Guin just mentioned why, I can certify what she said, your interpretation of Romero is one of the most badly informed, unaware, ill-mannered, ill-bred, naive, inexperienced, immature, adolescent, raw, bits of ignorance ever seen in these or any other boards. BTW: Costa Rica would beg to differ in your mess Central America was, they got rid of their army a long time ago, even before the civil wars, in turn they had a better chance of developing democracy, the US gave aid to the Salvadoran and Guatemalan armies when they were at their worst, I would propose a better effort would be for the US to finance the dissolve of the armies of the area, if not then, now; as to prevent future power grabs, or would the US oppose to such an idea? > [@](#): > > Sometimes you can expect things, even if you don’t deserve them. Like knowledge, from us to you: Here is the Truth Commission of El Salvador, ugly on both sides, but damming more to the ones that drew blood first, and caused the most deaths, (hint: it was not the Guerrillas) [http://www.usip.org/library/tc/doc/reports/el\_salvador/tc\_es\_03151993\_toc.html](http://www.usip.org/library/tc/doc/reports/el_salvador/tc_es_03151993_toc.html) > [@](#): > > Regards, > Shodan Stares, Ed. P.S.: **Captain Amazing** , what the communist nations furnished to the guerrillas was hundreds of times less of what the US furnished to the repressive government. Since the majority of the dead were attributed to the paramilitary and rogue (?) military units, It always looked to me that it was more than an insurrection, it was just the common sense of standing up to an effort to kill a group of people, that just wanted peaceful change first. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2003, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oscar-romero-liberation-theology-and-latin-america/173038/38 "2003-05-11T03:45:28Z")
**GIGObuster** , thank you. Another thing I’d like to point out-a lot of the infighting and wars stopped AFTER Reagan left office-and it wasn’t him who brought stability and peace to Central America, but the president of Costa Rica, Oscar Arias. (Who actually came to La Roche, once, from what I understand). ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2003, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oscar-romero-liberation-theology-and-latin-america/173038/39 "2003-05-11T03:58:25Z")
"It may seem odd for me, a military man to adopt such a comparison. Truthfulness compels me to. I spent thirty- three years and four months in active military service as a member of this country’s most agile military force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second Lieutenant to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle- man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I suspected I was just part of a racket at the time. Now I am sure of it. Like all the members of the military profession, I never had a thought of my own until I left the service. My mental faculties remained in suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of higher-ups. This is typical with everyone in the military service. I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912 (where have I heard that name before?). I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested. During those years, I had, as the boys in the back room would say, a swell racket. Looking back on it, I feel that I could have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents. " Excerpt from a speech delivered in 1933, by Major General Smedley Butler, USMC. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2003, 3:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oscar-romero-liberation-theology-and-latin-america/173038/40 "2003-05-11T03:59:56Z")
Also, here is the infamous homily Romero gave a week before he was killed: > [@](#): > > I would like to make an appeal in a special way to the men of the army, and in particular to the ranks of the National Guard, of the police, to those in the barracks. Brothers, you are part of our people. You kill your own peasant brothers and sisters. And before an order to kill that a man may give, the law of God must prevail that says: Thou shalt not kill! No soldier is obligated to obey and order against the law of God. No one has to fulfill an immoral law. > In the name of God, and in the name of this suffering people whose laments rise to heaven each day more tumultuous, I beg you, I ask you, I order you in the name of God: Stop the repression! There’s a big difference between that and “Power to the people-God agrees with me!” Romero also told the Pope: > [@](#): > > But Holy Father, in my country it is very dangerous to speak of anti-Communism, because anti-Communism is what the right preaches, not out of love for Christian sentiments, but out of a selfish concern to preserve its own interests. Keep in mind, that when Romero was named to be archbishop, he was considered a very conservative choice. He started out thinking that the repression was exaggerated. However, very quickly, he realized that as a Christian, he had a duty towards the people, and a duty to speak out against what was going on. The fact that he was shot WHILE SAYING MASS, I think, is very, oh, how should I say it-fitting, almost? What is the difference between what Romero said to the soldiers, and John Paul today, speaking out against the war in Iraq? Not much, in my not so humble opinion. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oscar-romero-liberation-theology-and-latin-america/173038.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/oscar-romero-liberation-theology-and-latin-america/173038.md?page=3)