The change in US foreign policy after the Third Red Scare has galvanized feelings of anti-imperialism in much of the third world, especially after direct US intervention in Nicaragua. Many are turning to Moscow for support, if not allying with them openly.
New Deal Coalition Retained: A Sixth Party System Wikibox Timeline
I too don't feel that Goulart would side so openly with the communists, and I'm not sure communism would be so strong in Argentina as to be able to take power.
Not relatedly, I feel that Che and Focoism disregard basic human psichology, the average person doesn't like violent revolution.
Not relatedly, I feel that Che and Focoism disregard basic human psichology, the average person doesn't like violent revolution.
The Third Red Scare and the Rockefeller/Kennedy/Wallace policy of siding with everyone opposed to Communism no matter how repressive they are only forced many to make a choice between supporting Moscow and supporting Washington (at least in their leanings). Goulart personally hopes to shake off the Soviet yoke once he has the popular support.
The goal isn't to get the population to rebel openly. It's to build public support for a change in government by baiting the weak regimes to antagonize the populace - then striking.
Bookmark1995
Banned
I still find it surprising that communism takeover succeeded in Brazil and Argentina ITTL for three reasons:
1. ITTL, communist takeover was nixed in Nicaragua, and without the need for the Somoza regime to come back to power. Not to mention the ITTL obvious success of Czechoslovakia and Vietnam,
2. The brutal crushing of Yugoslavia's independence alienating sympathizers.
3. The brutality of those juntas would have stopped any uprising in its tracks.
Somoza was still in power at the time of the uprisings in Nicaragua (his removal wasn't insisted until Reagan took office), and the presence of US forces ultimately kept the revolution there from succeeding. Vietnam was a similar reason, while as for the Czech Republic, the more militant and expansionist Semichasty government wasn't yet in charge of the USSR.
As for Yugoslavia, the Soviet invasion mostly alienated western leftists toward a more hawkish position on the USSR. In the third world, most people saw it as the Soviets striking a blow against a western puppet.
There is always a balancing act with tyrannical regimes. You need to be brutal enough to squash dissent, while not too brutal as to give the population nothing to lose to rise up against you. Because of the post-Nixon assassination policies of blank check funding to anti-communist nations, many of them went the second route knowing their aid shipments from Washington were secure. This created fertile ground for Guevaraist forces to build ironroads with the population
Lost Freeway
Banned
But the US at least tried to make sure the reunified Vietnam stayed democratic. Why didn't they apply that policy elsewhere?
Bookmark1995
Banned
By the way, if your ever discuss Communist Brazil, don't forget to bring up these two...characters.
Pragmatism. The goal was to stop Communism no matter what, though both Rockefeller and Kennedy determined that they could get more leverage with providing aid than not. Wallace didn't really care, as long as Communism was kept back.
Reagan's campaign message was partly to rebuke this, hence what he did in Nicaragua.
Bookmark1995
Banned
Those are all pretty good points.
But I remember my mom telling me that a lot of Puerto Ricans were often very anti-communist, because they feared Castro invading the island. Many Latin Americans developed a good hatred of Castro.
Wouldn't the obvious success of a pro-Western Cuba, and the obvious failure of Che Guevara's Cuba scare a lot of Latin Americans away from communism?
The Third Red Scare and it's ramifications for anti-communist foreign policy, as I've said before, caused many anti-communist dictators to take the gloves off with regards to dissidents. This makes the US look in collusion with oppressors, which Guevara exploits (he is seen by many as a charismatic man of the people due to the West Cuban propaganda machine)
So it seems those damn shirts will be appearing in this TL after all
How obvious is West Cuba's failure though? I assume they have the propaganda meter pumped up to eleven.
Also, anti-Americanism in Latin America is a really potent historical force. A lot of people will consider either outright aligning with the Soviets, or at a minimum, trying to use them to balance the U.S.
That said, Brazil's going to go badly for the Soviets and their clients fast, since @The Congressman is already talking about the communists pushing out their allies, and a lot of the terrain, plus the underlying social and racial tensions that an upper class vanguard of the proletariat type communist government might exacerbate will make any kind of counter-insurgency campaign there hellish on the reds. Brazil could be TTL's Afghanistan moment for the Soviets.
One interesting note: this is around the time Pentecostalism starts to make serious in-roads in Brazil, so you could see a pretty explicitly Christian--Pentecostal plus conservative Catholic--resistance movement.
On the other hand, Argentina's more likely to get into, and lose, a pissing contest over the Falklands that will weaken the new communist-aligned government; kind of a reverse situation of what brought down the junta OTL.
Will a certain Jesuit priest named Bergoglio find himself in hot water with the Argentine communists by any chance?
Gian
Banned
About Latin America, I think this is really just a consequence of the anti-Communist strategy of "Give the autocrats whatever they want. Who gives a damn?" and the autocrats getting carte blanche to basically do whatever they want. Add to that the historic anti-yanqui sentiment in Latin America, Che's sheer popularity, and Semichastny's deep pockets to fund those communist elements, and you got something there (Ditto for pretty much the Third World, with the exception of (thankfully) Chile, the Philippines, etc.). . .
Yeah ITTL the Argies thought Britain would leave the Falklands to them, in this TL they'd be really stupid to think that, but also probably don't care, and will definitely get spanked - as their commies you can see Britain then actually invading and replacing the govt, as opposed to leaving them to it as they were American allies.
A South American JPII is great banter.
The UK is far more powerful ITTL, so no one thinks they would roll over for Argentina of all people.
But getting Argentina not to try for it will be... tricky. I'm sure the Soviets could tell them about the consequences of not trying to regain the Falklands until they're blue in the face, but not launching a military expedition will be seen by the people who support them as the communist government caving to imperialism.
I'm not sure alien space bats could convince Argentina not to try in this scenario.
Ambiguous syntax, I'm not sure if you mean the alien space bats or the ArgentiniansWho says they wouldn't try in the future?
