Keep the presses rolling...

el_expatriado said:
Anyone else see the President giving a presentation of the new Evita bills? What are your thoughts?

argentina-evita-aniversary.jpeg-460x307.jpg


This was my first thought...

3334857720_9210ef7db1.jpg


Do we really need Evita on a bank note? Seriously, replacing Julio Argentino Roca, a two-term President who vastly expanded Argentina's national borders and solidified its dominion over all of the Patagonian region with Evita, who did what exactly? What a waste...
Look: this is a fascist government, and its methods are like this. Day by day trying to make people "believe" in them, because it lacks of any reasonable and democratic foundations.
 
el_expatriado said:
It sounds more like populism to me.
And IT IS populism. Don't forget that "the man" was inspired by Mussolini and gave shelter to many nazis when they had to runaway from Europe. Some of those nazis lived here under their true name, like Mengele.
What could we expect from a military president like that?
And what could we expect from his "doctrine", like they use to say? Just plain and old fashioned populism.
 
sergio said:
A pity the greatest Argentine of all, BORGES, is not honored this way.
Indeed, and I'd vote for Cortazar as well.
 
How many notes? 5, 10, 20, 50 and 100 pesos. So if we talk about writers, all of them can be covered: Borges, Cortazar, Marechal, Macedonio Fernandez, and José Hernández...just an idea of beauty and pluralism.
 
ghost said:
Please tell us specifically which moment in History "we learned" anything and didn't repeat it. And don't say Hiroshima because it's simply a matter of when.

You assume that we all learn history. This thread demonstrates that some people don't. I wasn't the one asking why Evita matters.
 
There's one reason why Eva is going to be on the new bills. Cristina has been associating herself with Eva for the last couple of years, and to many people, particularly the poorly ignorant, it's as good as having Cristina's face on the bill.

Yep, blatant popularism and propaganda.

I just got back from a road trip to Paraguay. While I was there, I caught part of an oration by Cristina at a Mabe factory opening (didn't catch where the factory is). There were a couple of hundred newly-manufactured washing machines lined up, shrink-wrapped, ready to go. She was telling the crowd how great Argentina is, that factories like this are going to replace the need for imports, and the government ownership in such factories is a good thing because it leads the country in the right direction.

Let's not forget fascism as well...
 
bradlyhale said:
Regarding Roca, there's no way to justify what he did, or others who have used similar methods. You might as well be advocating for Hitler to be put on a bill.

I'm so sick and tired of people comparing people to Hitler. Are you seriously going to compare Roca, who cleared out a few settlements to Hitler, who killed over 6 million?

It seems everyone has been brainwashed by Kevin Costner movies and now the popular opinion is that the indian settlements were all peaceful. Sorry, but it was a war and the indians lost. The mapuche and tehuelche were attacking the colonists' settlements, stealing cattle, and generally making life miserable for settlers. They had war with the Argentines. They lost.

That's hardly ethnic cleansing. There were no gas chambers. So stop comparing everything to Hitler.
 
el_expatriado said:
I'm so sick and tired of people comparing people to Hitler. Are you seriously going to compare Roca, who cleared out a few settlements to Hitler, who killed over 6 million?

So, how many people have to be killed before genocide/ethnic cleansing matters? In Bosnia, the highest estimates are 66,000 people. In Rwanda, 800,000. In the Desert Campaign, ~100,000, according to highest estimates. So how many people have to die in a genocide before it matters? What's the barrier? More than a million? Why does the death count matter?
 
Back
Top