To be read as a direct continuation of Part 10; https://watchitdie.blogspot.com/2025/11/lets-all-go-to-movies-pt10.html
Ever since the US Democrat Party faced the prospect of defeat at the 2014 Mid-Term Elections the US has been suffering with the intellectual poison of the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement. As is so often the case the US has not been content with containing this poison within its own borders, instead exporting it and inflicting it on the World.
Central to the Black Lives Matter movement is Critical Race Theory. This dictates that all social and political issues have to be viewed in the context of Race. It is particularly obsessed with the issue of Slavery. Or, to be truthful, it is obsessed with The Atlantic Slave Trade. It does not permit you to know that Slavery is something which has been practiced by pretty much all Cultures and Races throughout all of the World and Human history. Really from the moment when one strong Human discovered they were able to force a slightly weaker Human to do things for them.
Critical Race Theory certainly forbids you from knowing that the etymological root of the word; "Slave" is; "Slav." A White ethnic group from the Caucasus Region of Eastern Europe. An ethnic group which, literally, could not be more; "Caucasian." Acknowledging that would force Critical Race Theory to also acknowledge that in most examples of Slavery there has been no Racial element whatsoever. Demonstrating that you can't even discuss the issue of Slavery exclusively in terms of Race utterly destroys Critical Race Theory central tenet that all issues must be considered in terms of Race.
The history of Brazil is the history of The Atlantic Slave Trade. So this is another big topic which "I'm Still Here" (2024) allows us to discuss.
Around 1420 explorers from The Portuguese Empire discovered a small group of uninhabited islands in the Atlantic Ocean, around 800km (500miles) South-West of Portugal and around 500km (300miles) West of Morocco. Naming these islands; "Madeira" (Wood) The Portuguese Empire claimed them as its own and began to settle them. It did this by dividing the islands into Captaincies, granting Donatário status to three Knights; João Gonçalves Zarco, Tristão Vax Teixeira and Bartolomeu Perestrelo. Shortly afterwards Portuguese Peasants, former prisoners and members of the lower Nobility were allowed to move to Madeira to try and start new lives.
The early settlers discovered that Madeira’s climate wasn't particularly good for growing things like Wheat. However it was very good for growing Sugarcane. So Madeira’s Donatário switched from Subsistence Farming, growing food to eat, to Cash-Cropping, growing Sugar for sale across the known World (Europe and Asia) and using the proceeds to import food to eat. To help grow, harvest and process Sugarcane into Sugar for export Madeira’s Donatário did use some Slave Labour. However its role was much smaller than during The African Slave Trade which came later.
Further dispelling the myth that Slavery was only something White Christians did to Black people during The African Slave Trade the Slaves used by Madeira’s Donatário were predominately Barbary/Berber Pirates. North-African Muslims of The Ottoman Empire (1299-1922) who used to raid ships in the Mediterranean and settlements along Europe's Southern coast in order to seize White Christians as Slaves for sale within The Ottoman Empire.
The US actually went on to fight two wars against The Ottoman Empire to protect Europe from Babary Pirates; The First Barbary War (1801-1805) and the Second Barbary War (two whole days in 1815). According to some the US Marine Corp went on to use many of the same Humvees during their 2003 Invasion of Iraq.
With Barbary Pirates being Slavers no-one had any problem with using captured Barbary Pirates as Slaves. Madeira’s Donatário also didn't have much problem using the Slaves the Barbary Pirates were holding when they were captured as Slaves. They also added to the small number of Slaves they used on their Sugar Plantations by capturing members of the "Gaunche" population of the near-by Canary Islands, around 200km (120 miles) East of Madeira. The name; "Gaunche" or; "Gaunchinet" literally means; "Person of Tenerife" with Tenerife being the largest of the Canary Islands. Although recognised as a distinct Ethnic group in its own right the Gaunche are considered the decedents of and closely related to Barber Settlers from North-Africa. So can't properly be considered an Indigenous or Aboriginal population.
As a result the Slaves used on Sugar Plantations by Madeira’s Donatário were a mix of White Europeans and what we would now consider to be North-African Arabs. There's nothing to indicate any Slaves from Sub-Saharan Africa, what we would now consider to be Black.
In 1453 The Byzantine Empire (330-1453) fell to The Ottoman Empire (1299-1922). This blocked Christian Europe's access to Asia via The Silk Road. In 1484 an Italian explorer by the name of Christopher Columbus had the idea of sailing West to Asia, opening up a faster, alternative to The Silk Road. Initially he pitched his idea to The Portuguese Empire which turned him down, twice. His calculations were clearly wrong. In April 1492 Christopher Columbus got The Kingdom of Spain to sponsor his exploration and he set sail. In August 1492 Christopher Columbus' exploration hit a bit of a problem. In the form of a massive, yet previously unknown, landmass we now call The Americas.
In April 1500 the Portuguese explorer Pedro Álvares Cabral became the first European to discover what we now consider to be Brazil. Although it had an abundance of interesting trees you could make a red dye out of; "Pau-brasilia (Wood-with an ember-like glow)" The Portuguese Empire couldn't see much use for this newly (to them) discovered landmass. Thinking of it more as an annoying speedbump on a new trade route to Asia. However, from the experience of The Silk Road The Portuguese Empire knew it had to establish some sort of physical presence there in order to keep the trade route to Asia open.
In order to establish that physical presence The Portuguese Empire just did what it had done in Madeira. Divided the area up into Captaincies and give each of The 15 Captaincies of Brazil to a Donatário to run as they saw fit. As with their counterparts in Madeira Brazil's Donatário discovered the local climate was pretty good for growing things like Sugarcane, which could then be sold as the very profitable Cash-Crop, Sugar. Again as in Madeira Brazil's Donatário made some use of Slave Labour, in the form of members of the Indigenous or Aboriginal population.
With Madeira emerging as a major trading hub due to the Sugar trade The Portuguese Empire was able to use it to explore further along Africa's Atlantic Coast during this time. In around 1471 they arrived in what is now considered the nation of Ghana. Finding the area to be rich in Gold they colonised it by dividing it up into Captaincies and appointing Donatário to run it. The area became known as; "The Portuguese Gold Coast." In 1642 The Portuguese Empire lost a war for control of the area with what was then The Republic of the Seven United Netherlands (The Dutch Republic). The area then became known as; "The Dutch Gold Coast."
In 1621 the Dutch West India Company (GWC) was established. The Dutch Republic gave this Private Corporation a monopoly on all trade from The Dutch Gold Coast across to Dutch Colonies in The Americas. Places such as "New Netherland" in what is now considered the US States of New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Connecticut, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island and the modern nation of Suriname which borders Brazil to the North. Here the Dutch West India Company linked up with the Dutch East India Company (VOC) - the World's first Multinational Corporation.
Like The Portuguese Empire the Dutch West India Company discovered that the local climate in The Americas was pretty good for growing Sugarcane, which could then be sold as the very profitable Cash-Crop, Sugar. The Dutch West India Company's operations in The Dutch Gold Coast brought it into contact with The Ashanti Empire. A Colonial Power itself The Ashanti Empire established itself by militarily conquering its neighbours and seizing them as Slaves. Slavery being something which has been practiced by, really, all Races and Cultures against all other Races and Cultures across the World throughout of all of Human history. One of the first things The Ashanti Empire did when it encountered Portuguese and then Dutch traders was try and sell them Sub-Saharan or Black Slaves. Assuring the White Europeans that it was perfectly acceptable to keep and sell Black people as Slaves.
The Dutch West India Company quickly noticed how the Donatário in Madeira and Brazil's use of small numbers of locally captured Slaves helped boost the profits from their Sugar plantations. They then realised that if they used large numbers of Black Slaves provided to them by The Ashanti Empire in their Sugar plantations in The Americas it would boost their profits by large amounts. Thus The Atlantic Slave Trade began.
With The Atlantic Slave Trade boosting its profits massively the Dutch West India Company soon became far richer than the Donatário of The 15 Captaincies of Brazil. So declared war on them to seize more territory - The Dutch Invasion of Brazil (1624-1654) sometimes known as; "The Sugar Wars." This forced The Portuguese Empire to take The 15 Captaincies of Brazil back under its control. Taking them out of what we would now consider the Private Sector into the Public Sector (Nationalisation). In order to survive The Portuguese Empire was forced to adopt the business model of the Dutch East India Company and start participating in The Atlantic Slave. Soon every plantation in The Americas growing things like Coffee, Cotton, Tobacco and Bananas, not just Sugar, had to start participating in The Atlantic Slave Trade in order to not be forced out of business by competitors who were participating in The Atlantic Slave Trade.
Christopher Columbus' accidental collision with The Americas came right at the end of a period of European history known as; "The Dark Ages." During this time the rule of the Roman Catholic Christian Church was absolute. Anything which challenged the total authority of the Catholic Church, such as art, science or philosophy was illegal. This was the era of The Spanish Inquisition. It was also the era in which Galileo Galilei observed, correctly, that the Earth orbits the Sun. Not the other way around, as the Catholic Church dictated. Something which saw Galileo imprisoned, tortured and banished for 350 years.
So Christopher Columbus was actually being quite brave. Approaching the Catholic King who an expelled all of the Jews from Spain for help in proving that the Earth was globe-shaped, rather than flat. Apparently he promised them riches.
In 1517 a group of White Anglo-Saxon Catholic Christians began protesting (Protestant) against the total authority of the Catholic Church when Martin Luther wrote his; "Ninety-Five Theses: Disruption on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences." Eventually this ended the total authority of the Catholic Church in Europe and ushered in; "The Age of Enlightenment." With science and philosophy being legal again many began to question whether it was morally right to own other Humans, of any Race or Culture, as Slaves.
By the early 19th Century those who thought owning other Humans as Slaves was morally wrong had become the majority. So for the very first time in Human history the selling of other Humans as Slaves became illegal. Notably through the UK's Foreign Slave Trade Act (1806) which specifically targeted The Atlantic Slave Trade.
When Brazil officially left The Portuguese Empire and became The Empire of Brazil in 1822 the price Britain demanded to recognise it, alongside trade concessions, was for Brazil to end its participation in The Atlantic Slave Trade. Having expelled British rule in 1776 the US didn't end its participation in The Atlantic Slave Trade until 1865, following a civil war over the issue; The US Civil War (1861-1865). Although the US State of Virginia ended its participation in The Atlantic Slave Trade in 1778, under Thomas Jefferson. One of many details Black Lives Matter and Critical Race Theory seem unware of.
At around 18:00 on 7/1/26 (UK date) I'm still thinking complete thoughts are worth more than manic, scattered paragraphs.
Edited at around 17:50 on 19/1/26 (UK date) to quickly add tobacco above and copy & paste;
Critical Race Theory and Black Lives Matter are equally obsessed with; "Colonialism." By which they mean The European Colonial Era during which The Atlantic Slave Trade took place. Don't bother ask them a single question about The Saka Conquest of the Tarim Basin or that massive big wall China had to build to try and stop itself being Colonised by Genghis Khan and The Mongol Empire (1205-1294). All you'll get is blank stares.
The European Colonial Era is another big topic I'm Still Here (2024) allows us to discuss. The History of Brazil is The History of The European Colonial Era.
In 1453 The (Colonial) Byzantine Empire fell to The (Colonial) Ottoman Empire cutting Europe's access to Asia via The Silk Road. This prompted Christopher Columbus to try and find another route between Europe and Asia by sailing West. In 1492 he accidentally collided with the unexpected landmass we now know as The Americas. In 1500 Pedro Álvares Cabral explored The Americas further and became the first European to land in what we now know as Brazil. In 1519 the Portuguese Explorer Ferdinand Magellan completed Christopher Columbus' expedition by sailing South around The Americas and onto Asia, returning to Spain in 1522 after completing The First Circumnavigation of the Globe.
With this much faster route between Europe and Asia opened up Europe began trading with Asia on an unprecedented scale.
In 1600 the British East India Company (EIC) was founded by British Merchants trading in East Asia. Rather than being established as a Private Corporation the British East India Company was founded by Royal Charter, a uniquely British legal arrangement in which the British Monarch uses their Royal Prerogative to create a Corporation which has legal powers similar to that of a Municipal Authority. The City of London district of Britain's capital city London is still run by The City of London Corporation rather than, say, the neighbouring district of Southwark which is run by Southwark District Council. Making the British East India Company an early example of what I would consider Hybrid-State Totalitarian Capitalism.
In 1602 Dutch Merchants trading in East Asia created the similar Dutch East India Company (VOC). However as an exclusively Private Corporation, making it the first ever Multinational Corporation. In 1621 Dutch Merchants trading in The Americas formed The Dutch West India Company (GWC). The early success of the Dutch East India Company prompted merchants in many European nations to establish similar Corporations to trade with Asia, The Americas and Africa. Such as the French West India Company, the French East India Company, the Danish Africa/West India Company and Britain's Royal African Company.
These European Corporations were so much wealthier and technologically advanced than the societies in which they operated they were able to take over those societies entirely. In the 1920's the term; "Banana Republic" was coined to describe US Corporations takeover of governments in Latin America. However those US Corporations had inherited their Latin American plantations from The Spanish Empire following the US' victory in The Spanish-American War (1898). They simply continued to run them as The Spanish Empire had done.
The growing wealth of these European Corporations meant they soon became essential to the Economies of the European nations in which they were established. Too big to fail. So the European nations had to step in to protect them and, by extension, their national Economies. For example the Dutch West India Company invaded Brazil in an effort to seize the 15 Captaincies of Brazil during The Sugar Wars (1624-1654). This forced The Portuguese Empire to take the 15 Captaincies of Brazil back under its control and go to war with the Dutch West India Company.
Facing the might of The Portuguese Empire the Dutch West India Company quickly went into decline. Following The Sugar Wars the Dutch West India Company was only kept in business by its involvement in The Atlantic Slave Trade. Something which is also true of the Danish Africa/West India Company and the British Royal Africa Company. Eventually all of the European nations had to step in to support their European Corporations from their rival European nations. Creating an early version of what I consider Hybrid-State Totalitarian Capitalism in which certain Private Corporations received special rules and special protections from the nations in which they were established.
In the late 18th Century France overthrew its Monarchy in The French Revolution (1789-1799). Rather than resulting in the Liberal-Democracy it hoped to bring about The French Revolution instead led to The First French Empire (1804-1815) with Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte ruling as a King in all but name. Even before fully establishing himself as Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte then set about declaring war on pretty much every other European nation; The Napoleonic Wars (1803-1815), which were actually a series of seven wars rather than a single war. As the various European nations fell to The First French Empire the various Hybrid-State Private Corporations they were intertwined with also fell to The First French Empire. By the time of Napoleon's defeat and the fall of The First French Empire almost all of the Colonial Corporations like the Dutch West India Company had ceased to exist.
One notable exception was the British East India Company. This actually became more powerful following The Napoleonic Wars, eventually absorbing much of the Dutch East India Company. However by 1857 its treatment of the indigenous population where it operated had become so bad that the indigenous population rebelled; The Indian Rebellion of 1857. In order to avoid losing its assets in India entirely The British Empire was forced to take control of the British East India Company and rule over its territories directly; The British Raj (1858-1947).
That is probably the main lesson that I'm Still Here (2024) is trying to teach Black Lives Matter about The European Colonial Era. That The European Colonial Era has ended and that it ended a very long time ago. So much has happened since then that the era Black Lives Matter insist all political and societal issues must be considered in terms of actually has very little influence on the World we live in today.
Brazil's own exit from The European Colonial Era was certainly an unusual one. During The Napoleonic Wars (1803-1815) The First French Empire invaded Portugal; The Peninsula War (1808-1814). This saw the Portuguese King, John VI and his Royal Court leave Portugal for Brazil. There they established Brazil as the seat of The Portuguese Empire, rather than a mere Colony of The Portuguese Empire. When King John VI returned to Portugal in 1821 he left his son Pedro as the Prince Regent of Brazil. This seems to have been done on the understanding that the following year Pedro would make himself Emperor Pedro I and establish Brazil as a nation independent from The Portuguese Empire, becoming The Empire of Brazil (1822-1889).
The rather exceptional way in which The European Colonial Era came to an end in Brazil allows us to compare it to how the European Colonial Era came to an end in other places.
The European Colonial Era ended even earlier in Black Live Matter's home nation, the US. In 1765 the decedents of European Colonialisers in the US rose up in Revolution - The American Revolution (1765-1783) - and fought a war to expel The British Empire - The American Revolutionary War (1775-1783).
The US' immediate neighbour to the South, Mexico, also brought about the end of The European Colonial Era in a similar way. With The Spanish Empire being weakened by The Napoleonic Wars the decedents of European Colonisers rose up and fought a war of independence to expel The Spanish Empire - The Mexican War of Independence (1810-1821).
It is perhaps another of Black Lives Matter's more poisonous lies that the US' victory in The Mexican-American War (1846-1848) saw the White Europeans of the US Colonise the indigenous Hispanic population of States like California. When The Mexican-American War was a war between two groups of the decedents of European Colonisers. Hispanics are White Europeans, their defeat at the hands of a slightly different group of White Europeans doesn't make them indigenous to Mexico or anywhere else in Latin America.
Arguably the US' immediate neighbour to the North, Canada, still hasn't been able to emerge from The European Colonial Era. Continuing to be directly ruled by the British Crown.
For the most part though the event which ended The European Colonial Era was The First World War (1914-1918). This was the result of the European Colonial Powers behaving as they had done during The Napoleonic Wars and the hundreds of years of European wars which had preceded it. Both The Austro-Hungarian Empire and The Russian Empire saw the assassination of Franz Ferdinand, heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne, as an opportunity to seize bits of European territory off of each other. The Allied Powers rallied around The Russian Empire in an effort to seize bits of European territory from The Central Powers which had rallied around The Austro-Hungarian Empire.
All quickly discovered that the invention of technology like machine guns and Oil fuelled motor vehicles meant warfare had very much changed since The Napoleonic Wars. Gone were the days of battles being fought between neatly ordered ranks of soldiers with muskets and bayonets and Saka-style cavalrymen over the course of a single day. With both sides almost politely shaking hands when night fell and the battle ended. Instead the European Colonial Powers found themselves trapped in a four year long stalemate which ate up all of their wealth and resources and killed some 38 million of their people. A lesson the people of Latin America, particularly Bolivia and Paraguay, learned for themselves in The Chaco War (1932-1935).
Such was the cost of The First World War to the European Colonial Powers that four of the main Empires which had started it did not survive it. The Austro-Hungarian Empire was completely defeated while The Ottoman Empire, The Russian Empire, The German Empire were overthrown by popular revolutions by their own people.
In the years immediately following The First World War several more of the European Colonial Powers were overthrown by National-Socialist or Fascist Coup d’états. Italy in 1922 under Benito Mussolini. Spain in 1936 under Francisco Franco whose dictatorship lasted until 1975. The Portuguese Empire itself with The 1926 Coup d’état which established the Ditadura Nacional (National Dictatorship) that remained in place until 1974.
The European Colonial Powers which did manage to survive The First World War had been weakened to the point that they could no longer maintain a tight grip on their Colonies. Technically Ireland didn't stop being a Colony of The British Empire and become the independent Republic of Ireland until 1949. However following The Irish War of Independence (1919-1921) it became a self-ruled territory, answerable to The British Empire in name only. A similar Dominion Status was also conferred on a number of other Colonies of The British Empire at this time, such as Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Newfoundland and South Africa.
The rise of National-Socialism or Fascism in what used to be The German Empire, The Italian Empire, The Spanish Empire and The Portuguese Empire coupled with the rise of Marxist-Socialism or Communism in what used to be The Russian Empire and The Austro-Hungarian Empire led to The Second World War (1939-1945).
The immense cost of The Second World War finally put an end to the European Colonial Powers that had managed to survive The First World War. The British Empire came to an end in 1949 with its Irish Dominion becoming and independent nation. Along with the former possession of the British East India Company which became four independent nations; India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka.
At around 18:20 on 19/1/26 (UK date) I'll try and complete the next thought as soon as possible.
Edited at around 16:45 on 27/1/26 (UK date) to tidy all the above and copy & paste;
The European Colonial Era gave way to The Neo-Colonial Era. This is another topic I'm Still Here (2024) allows us to discuss in a lot of detail. The History of Brazil is The History of the Neo-Colonial Era.
The Neo-Colonial or New-Colonial Era has its origins in the; "Dollar Diplomacy" policy which US President William H. Taft established in 1912. The idea being to replace Bullets with Dollars by using US economic strength rather than US military strength to pursue US strategic interests, particularly in Latin America.
The European Colonial Era in the US ended when The American Revolution (1765-1783) expelled The British Empire. However this still left the US completely surrounded by colonies of European Colonial Powers. In 1812 The British Empire tried to take the US back as a colony in The War of 1812 (1812-1815). The European Colonial Era ended in the US' immediate neighbour to the South, Mexico, in 1821 following The Mexican War of Independence (1810-1821). However in 1861 The Second French Empire invaded Mexico in order to establish it as a French colony; The Second Franco-Mexican War (1861-1867).
In response to these efforts to return The Americas, including the US, to the European Colonial Era the US adopted The Monroe Doctrine in 1823. Broadly speaking this states that any attempt by any European Colonial Power to establish colonies anywhere in The Americas would be viewed as an attempt to reverse The American Revolution, allowing the US to intervene to prevent it.
In 1902 Venezuela defaulted on its debts to international creditors. Three of those creditors; The British Empire, The German Empire and The Italian Empire placed Venezuela under Naval Blockade, demanding the payment of the money they were owed. In 1904 the International Court of Arbitration ruled that the debts Venezuela owned gave its creditors authority to seize Venezuelan property and territory to recover those debts. Almost exactly like a Court can grant a creditor authority to break into a debtor’s home and use force to recover the money owed. The International Court of Arbitration also gave priority to the nations which were already taking military action; The British Empire, The German Empire and The Italian Empire over nations which weren't already taking military action, such as the US.
This ruling by the International Court of Arbitration represented a new threat to The Monroe Doctrine. Establishing the non-repayment of debt as grounds for the European Colonial Powers to use military force to re-establish colonies in The Americas. In response US President Theodore Roosevelt added an amendment to The Monroe Doctrine; "The Roosevelt Corollary." This allowed the US to intervene in any nation in The Americas in response to; "Chronic wrongdoing or impotence which results in the general loosening of the ties of civilized society." Such as a failure to pay debts.
Since US Awards Season 2025 there has been much talk of President Donald Trump adding his own corollary to The Monroe Doctrine. Although there has never been any coherent expression of what this means, let alone a formal amendment to The Monroe Doctrine. However I really feel I should take the time to point out that The Monroe Doctrine along with any and all corollaries to it are merely policy documents. They have absolutely no legal force under even US Law. In terms of International Law they carry all the same weight as a child's wish.
During US President Taft's tenure Honduras became heavily indebted to The British Empire, creating a risk that The British Empire could seize Honduran territory as payment for those debts. Rather than waiting for things to get that point President Taft devised Dollar Diplomacy as a way for the US Private Sector, led by banker John Pierpont (J.P) Morgan, to buy up Honduran debt. Making the US rather than The British Empire the main creditor, removing The British Empire's ability to seize Honduran territory as repayment of the debt. An intervention under The Roosevelt Corollary before things had escalated to the point where military force was required. The Roosevelt Corollary was really a response to the US lacking the military power to join The British, German and Italian Empires in their 1902 blockade of Venezuela.
The thinking behind Dollar Diplomacy was not new at the time. It's a misconception that The European Colonial Era was the result of Europe nations using military force to seize territory. Instead it was done almost exclusively by Private Corporations through trade. However the Value-Exchange of that trade was wildly irrational. Both sides thought they were exchanging something which had little value to them for something which had a lot of value to them. Migratory Hunter-Gather societies like Native American tribes must have thought the people who wanted to buy land to build permanent homes would be dead within a year.
European Corporations like the Dutch West India Company, Britain's Royal Africa Company and the Danish Africa/West India Company didn't kidnap Black Africans to be used as Slaves. Instead The Ashanti Empire kidnapped Black Africans to be used as Slaves. The Ashanti Empire then traded them to the Dutch West India Company, Britain's Royal Africa Company and the Danish Africa/West India Company. It turns out that Slave labour has a way of massively boosting productivity while Rum has a way of reducing productivity.
The Industrial Revolution is generally considered to have occurred in Europe during the 18th and 19th Centuries, at the height of The European Colonial Era. However The Industrial Revolution was preceded by The Second-Agricultural Revolution, which occurred at the start of The European Colonial Era. The Second-Agricultural Revolution is really considered the industrial revolution of farming.
Prior to The Second-Agricultural Revolution no-one really owned farmland. It was shared in common with everyone using it for Subsistence Farming, growing food to feed themselves and their families. During the Second-Agricultural Revolution farmland was enclosed for the first time. It was given an owner, like a Brazilian Donatário, who then employed people to work it for them. With this requiring less people it freed people up to do other forms of work, specialising in making specific things like textiles and bricks.
This Proto-Industrialisation saw the creation of the first factories. Although, arguably, the industrialisation of milling wool to produce textiles dates back to deep in The Dark Ages, long before The Second-Agricultural Revolution. The advanced technology of Proto-Industrialisation meant that the European Corporations were actually wanted in the Asian, African and American territories they were trading with. The first territory that the British East India Company established in what became the British Colony of India was a factory it opened in Masulipatnam in 1611. Something it did at the invitation of Emperor Jahangir after he had seen how factories could boost production and make him richer.
During the course of The European Colonial Era, particularly through The Napoleonic Wars, the role of Private Corporations and trade shrank and was largely replaced by the role of Nation states and military force. The US freed itself from The European Colonial Era through military force, as did its Southern neighbour Mexico. The US really ended The European Colonial Era throughout The Americas through military force; The Spanish-American War (1898). Rather than being a revolutionary new idea President Taft's Dollar Diplomacy was really an attempt to shift the balance back away from war in favour of trade.
Although Dollar Diplomacy is largely considered to be a failure at the time President Taft's desire to shift away from Colonial wars back to trade was almost immediately proved right. Just two years later in 1914 the European Colonial Powers declared war on each other and destroyed themselves in The First World War (1914-1918). They were completely finished off by The Second World War (1939-1945) which ended with the use of Nuclear weapons against The Japanese Empire. The Second World War was immediately replaced by The Cold War (1945-1990). This saw The Capitalist First World square off against The Communist Second World. With both sides being heavily armed with Nuclear weapons any use of military force would quickly result in Nuclear War and the destruction of everybody on Earth.
With the use of Bullets being rendered impossible there was a massive shift back towards using Dollars instead. The Neo-Colonial Era began.
It is very easy to dismiss the genuine altruistic, humanitarian motivations behind Neo-Colonialism. The Monroe Doctrine was not adopted to establish US control over The Americas. It was adopted to prevent European Colonial Powers re-establishing their control over the US. Following the US-led expulsion of European Colonial Powers from The Americas in The Spanish-American War (1898) the Roosevelt Corollary was adopted to prevent European Colonial Powers re-establishing their control over The Americas. Dollar Diplomacy and Neo-Colonialism were just a different method of upholding The Monroe Doctrine with the Roosevelt Corollary.
What caused Venezuela to default on its debts in 1902 was a civil war triggered by poverty amongst the Venezuelan people. What caused Honduras' debt to reach unsustainable levels in 1908 was a civil war triggered by poverty amongst the Honduran people. What caused the fall of The German Empire was a revolution triggered by poverty amongst the German people. The failure of The Weimar Republic which replaced The German Empire to end that poverty led to its downfall and the rise of the National-Socialism (Fascism) of Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany. What caused the fall of The Russian Empire was a revolution triggered by mass poverty amongst the Russian people. Seeing Russia adopt Marxist-Socialism (Communism), setting the stage for both The Second World War and The Cold War.
What is clear from all those examples is that poverty causes instability. It is that instability which makes nations vulnerable to foreign interference. Prior to The Second World War that foreign interference in The Americas was from European Colonial Powers. In the Cold War that foreign interference in The Americas was from the Colonial, Communist Soviet Union.
So if you want to protect nations from instability and foreign interference you have to eliminate poverty. This is something clearly demonstrated during The Fifth Brazilian Republic (1964-1982/5), in which I'm Still Here is set.
While there is no denying the violence and oppression of Brazil's Years of Lead the Military Dictatorship was not a regime kept in power through violence and fear. Instead it was genuinely popular and continues to be genuinely popular amongst many Brazilians who lived through it. The reason for that popularity is that through the barely believable "Brazilian Miracle" it was extremely good at lifting huge numbers of Brazilians out of Rural Poverty and into Urban Prosperity. Although many Brazilians, arguably, got poorer in real terms during the Brazilian Miracle the Military Dictatorship massively reduced inflation, giving people the impression they were getting richer. It also provided people with payment-in-kind; the ability to live in modern houses with modern amenities like indoor plumbing and electricity. Which although hard to put a Dollar value on genuinely made a lot of people's lives better and feel better.
Even if you are doing it for purely altruistic, humanitarian reasons when you help people you are exerting control over them and making them dependent on you. Even if you only stop helping them because you genuinely can no longer help them their situation will worsen as a result of your decision.
The amount of control over people helping them gives you increases massively when it is conditional. In Democracies people tend to vote for governments which make their lives better. If your help is the reason why people's lives are getting better and you condition that help only to candidates who are going to do what you want at the exclusion of those who aren't. Then you are effectively choosing the next government, overriding the Democratic will of the people.
Providing that help on the condition that it has to be repaid, a loan rather than a gift, further increases your control over the people you are helping. Even if the people elect a government that isn't going to do what you want then the debts that new government owes you for the help you gave its predecessor can help you force it to do what you want anyway. This is something clearly demonstrated during The Fourth Brazilian Republic (1945-1965).
Eurico Gaspar Dutra, the first President of the Fourth Republic, brought Brazil much closer to the US. He broke off ties with the Soviet Union and helped the US bring 20+ nations of The Americas together under the pro-US Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance (1948) which sought to give some legal and military force to the Monroe Doctrine with the Roosevelt Corollary. President Dutra particularly adopted the US model of Infrastructure Development as a driver for Economic Growth. With the US Big Three Auto companies offering to build factories and sell their vehicles at a discount President Dutra borrowed massively from private US lenders, such as JP Morgan and the Big Three themselves, to build some 500km (300 miles) of new Freeways.
The tenure of Getúilo Vargas, the second President of the Fourth Republic, was really too chaotic for any great Economic policy. Although he did try to tackle the debt driven crisis he'd inherited from President Dutra through a program of Nationalisation. President Vargas ended up committing suicide rather than resigning over a crisis, the assassination of Rubens Florentino Vaz, which may well have been an attempt to set him up. President Vargas' replacement, Café Filho, was himself incapacitated by a Stroke and had to be replaced by Carlos Luz. Due to fears that Carlos Luz would not allow Juscelino Kubitschek to succeed him as President the Brazilian Military replaced Carlos Luz with Nereu Ramos. As a way to ensure that Juscelino Kubischek became President, despite it being unclear whether Kubitschek had won the 1955 election or not.
Upon becoming the sixth President of the Fourth Republic Juscelino Kubitschek picked up where President Dutra had left off, just six years earlier. He massively adopted the idea of borrowing money to fund Infrastructure Development as a driver of Economic Growth. Particularly undertaking the massive infrastructure project of building Brazil a new capital city, Brasília. President Kubitschek also massively loosened the rules on foreign investment offering generous land grants, tax breaks and profit remittances for foreign Corporations who, essentially, brought out Brazilian Corporations under the guise of Associated Capital. The majority of the foreign Corporations President Kubitschek borrowed money from and allowed to invest in Brazil on generous terms were US Corporations. President Kubitschek's policies all but bankrupted Brazil. Forcing it to take out a, massive for the time, US$300m loan from the US government.
President Kubitschek's successor Jânio Qandros, the seventh President of the Fourth Republic, set about distancing Brazil from the US, re-establishing diplomatic ties with the Soviet Union. However the massive debt Brazil owed the US government prevented President Qandros from delivering on his Economic promises to voters and he was forced to resign in 1961.
Brazil was then taken to the brink of civil war by attempts to stop João Goulart becoming President; The Legality Campaign. Eventually becoming President João Goulart set about reversing President Kubitschek's rules of foreign investment and introduced a massive program of Nationalisation. Although strictly speaking done by his ally, Leonel Brizola, President Goulart's tenure saw the Nationalisation of Companhia Telefónica Nacional (National Telephone Company) which had been owned by the US' ITT Corporation, run by Harold Geneen. A close friend of then CIA Director John A. McCone.
Through Operation: Brother Sam the US then led the Brazilian Military in overthrowing the government of President Goulart and establishing the Military Dictatorship of The Fifth Brazilian Republic. During this time the Brazilian Economy was run almost exclusively for the benefit of US Corporations. When the barely believable Brazilian Miracle inevitably imploded it left Brazil as the most heavily indebted nation in the World. Arguably it was pressure from Brazil's many, many (non-US) foreign creditors which forced the end of the Fifth Republic, the return to Democracy and the establishment of The Sixth Brazilian Republic (1982/5-Present).
If the start of The Neo-Colonial Era can be tied to a single event or date then it would be United Nations Monetary and Financial Conference held at the Mount Washington Hotel in Bretton Woods in the US State of New Hampshire. This so-called "Bretton Woods Conference" itself lasted for over three weeks in July 1944.
Parties at the Bretton Woods Conference agreed to make their national currencies exchangeable with each other. Prior to that you couldn't use British Pounds Sterling to buy US Dollars, Brazilian Reals, Argentinian Pesos etc. What we now think of as an everyday part of taking a foreign holiday was simply impossible. Instead you had to use your currency to buy something like Gold and then use that Gold to buy the currency of the country you were travelling to.
If you were trading with a foreign country on a daily basis the inability to exchange currencies directly made the process infinitely more complicated. Particularly as prior to the Bretton Woods Conference not everyone even agreed to make their currency exchangeable with Gold. Forcing you to go and find whatever weird polished shell they were using to support their currency. British Pounds were traditionally tied to the value of Sterling Silver, rather than Gold.
Although they agreed to it at the Bretton Woods Conference European Colonial Powers really didn't want to make their currencies exchangeable, carving out delays to them having to do it. Whereas the US immediately made the US Dollar exchangeable. Effectively making the US Dollar the global trading/reserve currency. A position which was strengthened by later agreements which allowed currencies to be tied to assets other than Gold, such as Oil.
During the First World War and Second World War The British Empire brought a lot of, particularly food, from Brazil and Argentina. However they did so on credit, taking out loans essentially. When those loans became due The British Empire repaid them into trust accounts in the Bank of England in the form of British Pounds Sterling, which couldn't be exchanged for other currencies. Which is really a convoluted way of saying Britain refused to pay its debts. At the end of The Second War the US brought those debts from Brazil and Argentina in US Dollars. Something which particularly allowed Juan Perón to Nationalise railroads in Argentina which had previously been owned by British Private Corporations. Giving The British Empire one final swift, hard kick out of The Americas.
The Bretton Woods Conference also created the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), which went on to become the first of the five organisations of The World Bank Group. The IMF and the World Bank set out to eliminate the instability created by the general wrongdoing that loosens the ties of a civilised society which the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine warns about. Essentially they remove the risk of conflict as a result of a nation defaulting on its debts by acting as lenders-of-last-resort, a guarantor underwriting all the debts of nations who agreed to become members before and since the Bretton Woods Conference.
The outcomes of the Bretton Woods Conference really established Neo-Colonialism and Dollar Diplomacy as the policy of the Capitalist First World during the Cold War.
When a Third World nation was becoming economically developed enough to be able to join either the Capitalist First World or the Communist Second World the Capitalist First World would entice it to join them by offering it loans from Private Corporations. Just as happened in Brazil under President Dutra and President Kubitschek. When the nation became unable to pay those loans a combination of the IMF and the World Bank would step in. Paying off the Private Corporations and taking ownership of the nation’s debt.
In order to get the debt repaid the IMF/World Bank would typically demand that the debtor nation switches is Agricultural sector from growing food for its people to eat to Cash-Cropping. Growing crops like Sugar, Tobacco, Cotton, Coffee etc to be sold internationally for cash.
From the time of the 15 Captaincies of Brazil the Brazilian economy was heavily focused on Cash-Cropping, essentially being modelled on the economy of Madeira during the Sugar Boom. This succeeded in making a small number of people, the Donatário, huge amounts of money. However it also delayed Brazil’s Industrialisation and trapped the majority of Brazil’s population in Rural Poverty. The Industrial Revolution really only arrived in Brazil after the First World War, when the mutual blockade of its main European trading partners forced it to move away from Cash-Cropping.
The IMF/World Bank demands for Cash-Cropping for debt repayment created all the same problems that it created for Brazil up to the 1920’s; delayed Industrialisation and a population trapped in Rural Poverty. It also created a much more serious problem. With all agriculture given over to Cash-Cropping debtor nations were no longer able to grow food to feed their people. An IMF/World Bank director might not be concerned that the people of, say, Brazil or Kenya are starving to death. However the people who are starving tend to get quite upset about it. So they force their governments to import food to feed them. In order to buy this food from abroad a nation which already cannot afford to pay its debts is forced to get even deeper into debt. Trapping it in this never ending cycle where its economy is destroyed in an effort to pay the interest on its debts only for its debts to get ever bigger.
The IMF/World Bank would also normally demand that nations adopt Economic Structural Adjustment Plans (ESAP’s) in return paying off the Private Corporations. Typically ESAP’s involved Privatising large parts of a debtor nation’s economy. The idea being to grow the nation’s economy by making State Owned Enterprises (SOE) more efficient and profitable. Although not the result of an IMF/World Bank ESAP the opening up of Brazil’s Oil Industry by ending Petrobras’ monopoly at the end of The Fifth Brazilian Republic is an example of this.
The catch was that in order to boost efficiency IMF/World Bank tendering rules meant that the Private Corporations taking over the SOE’s had to be the one which made the most attractive bid, regardless of where it was located. In practice this meant that it was foreign owned Private Corporations who got to take over large sections of debtor nations economies. They would only bid if they were given generous concessions, such as being offered very low tax rates. As happened in Brazil under President Kubitschek and during the barely believable Brazilian Miracle.
This created all the problems it created for Brazil under President Kubitschek and during the Brazilian Miracle. It reversed Industrialisation with domestic producers essentially being put out of business by much larger foreign rivals. Those foreign owned Private Corporations would then engage in the sort of Industrial Cash-Cropping seen during the Brazilian Miracle. Using local factories to cheaply produce things which are then sold overseas for a massively inflated price. All while keeping the profits to themselves thanks to low tax rates. Having lost its domestic industries the debtor nation then has to incur more debt by importing goods from overseas. Further trapping it into a never ending cycle in which its economy is destroyed to pay interest on its debts while its debts grow ever bigger.
A particularly spiteful aspect of the Neo-Colonial Era was First World Nations providing Export Credit Guarantees to Arms Companies. At the root of Dollar Diplomacy and Neo-Colonialism is the fact that poverty creates conflict which creates vulnerability.
Particularly First World Arms Companies flipped this altruistic, humanitarian idea on its head. Realising that if you could start conflict you could create vulnerability. So in resource rich Third World nations they would get two or more groups to fight each other. That conflict made them vulnerable and that vulnerability forced them to sell their natural resources at far below the market value. At the same time the Arms Companies were selling all sides weapons. Knowing that when they failed to pay for them their First World Nations would step in and pay for them under Export Credit Guarantees. The First World Nations were happy to do this because they would simply add it to the nation’s debt knowing that the IMF/World Bank would step in to take over the debt and pay them off.
You can still see this aspect of the Neo-Colonial Era at work in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). There over 100+ different armed groups are all fighting each other and the Congolese Government for control of the very resource rich east of the country. These groups are all supported by Rwanda and the nations which support Rwanda. Rwandan Government forces have themselves invaded the DRC. As a result of the vulnerability these conflicts create all of these armed groups are forced to steal the DRC’s natural resources and sell them far below market value through Rwanda. Since Awards Season 2025 US President Trump has repeatedly claimed to have ended the war in the DRC. Not only hasn't President Trump ended the war in the DRC, Trump hasn’t even begun to understand the question.
Like all eras of Human history the Neo-Colonial Era was the result of a large number of individuals making a large number of individual decisions over a long period of time. So there are many reasons why Neo-Colonialism shifted from its altruistic, humanitarian roots in Dollar Diplomacy into something much more sinister and exploitative.
However one big reason is probably that The Cold War was a war. Both the Capitalist First World and the Communist Second World saw it as an existential battle for survival. Defeat meant their way of life being destroyed and them either being killed or enslaved by the other. The alternative to Neo-Colonialism was firing Nuclear weapons at each other. Something which would result in the deaths of billions of people, if not all of the people. In comparison causing some people to suffer some economic hardship was a small price to pay to avoid losing a battle and keeping a nation aligned to the Capitalist First World.
Another big reason is probably the involvement of Private Corporations. In the US, and across the First World, Private Corporations which are traded in the Stock-market are legally obligated to maximise the profits for their shareholders. Directors of Private Corporations can go to jail if they don’t. Although not strictly speaking the same thing I have recently been seeing stories about Paris Jackson suing the Trust set up to manage her late father, Michael Jackson’s estate. Based on a skimming, rather than reading of the stories one of the main issues of contention seems to be the Trust not acting get the maximum profits from the assets it holds. So involving Private Corporations in Government policy is always going to see those Private Corporations act in the interest of maximising their profits. Perhaps the improperly close relationship between the likes of ITT Corp CEO Harold Geneen and CIA Director John A. McCone, what I term Hybrid-State Capitalism, prevented Government from reigning in the worst impulses of the Private Corporations.
I should point out that the Communist Second World did not adopt the outcomes of the Bretton Woods Conference so did not engage in Neo-Colonialism. Instead they established the alternative Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (CEMA/Comecon). Central to Communism is the idea that Capital is not needed for the economy to function. So Comecon didn’t entice emerging Third World nations to join by offering Capital loans from Private Corporations. Instead it directly provided commodities such as Oil and Wheat etc. Although not officially loans those commodities came with strings attached. Most typically that the nation would have to adopt Communism and join the Soviet Union. It was a much more directly Colonial approach than the looser Neo-Colonialism of the Capitalist First World. The most vocal critics of Neo-Colonialism tend to be supporters of Communist Imperialism whose plans were thwarted by Neo-Colonialism.
I should also point out that one of the most famous Humanitarian disasters of the Neo-Colonial Era was The 1983-1985 Ethiopian Famine. The event which triggered the Live Aid fundraising concerts and the Live Aid charity which continues to operate to this day. The 1983-1985 Ethiopian Famine was not a result of Neo-Colonialism. At the time Ethiopia was run by the Provisional Military Administrative Council (PMAC/Derg). A Communist Military Dictatorship which was part of the Communist Second World and ‘supported’ by Comecon.
At around 18:25 on 27/1/26 (UK date) I wouldn't like to guess when I'm going to complete the next thought by.
Edited at around 16:20 on 2/2/26 (UK date) to tidy the above and copy & paste;
When The Cold War ended it rather felt like the end of history. That's certainly how Francis Fukuyama described it in his 1992 book; "The End of History and The Last Man Standing." The great ideological divides that had shaped Human history such as between Capitalism and Communism during the Cold War or between Science and Religion in The Age of Enlightenment were at an end. Humanity had finally united around a single ideology. Humanity may not have united behind Western Liberal Democracy as Fukuyama had hoped but it had certainly been united by Capitalism. The Communist Soviet Union dissolved and embraced Capitalism and even Communist China had been enthusiastically embraced Capitalism since the late-1970's, as the Primary Stage of Communism.
With there being no great ideological divides, no great ideological wars to fight there was no longer any need for trade and Economics to be used as tools in those wars. With there being no Comecon there was no longer any need for the exploitative and dependence building aspects of Neo-Colonialism to block Economically emerging nations from joining Comecon and the Communist Second World. Instead people were able to focused solely on making goods and services that improved people's lives and selling them to people at a price they could afford, wherever they were in the World. This marked the start of The Globalised Era.
The issue of Globalisation and the fact the World was in a new Economic Era began to enter the public consciousness at the start of the 21st Century, 1999-2001, due to what were widely referred to as; "Anti-Globalisation Protests." A term I've never been comfortable with.
Contrary to what some people seem to believe the term; "Globalisation" or; "Globalist" doesn't mean; "Jews." Instead Globalisation refers to anything and everything which helps you understand that the Earth is Globe shaped. So to be opposed to Globalisation you have to be opposed to things like Ships, Aeroplanes, Trains and the Internet. Anti-Globalists don't explicitly say that they believe the Earth is flat. However they do reject the fundamental truth that the Earth is globe shaped.
One of the key aspects of the 1999-2001 protests is that they themselves were Globalised. Particularly making use of what was then dial-up Internet they were coordinated by likeminded people in many, many different nations of the World. So rather than being Anti-Globalisation protests they were actually Pro-Globalisation protests against specific, technical aspects of Globalisation.
The first big protest of the 1999-2001 era was the June 18th "J18" 1999 (18/6/1999) "Carnival Against Capital" which was organised to coincide with the G8 Summit taking place in Cologne, Germany that same day. The J18 protest took place in over 40 cities at the same time, places as diverse as Belarus, Nigeria, Uruguay, the US and Germany itself. The biggest and most attention grabbing part of J18 were the events in London, UK which descended into a mass riot resulting in widespread property damage across the City of London financial district.
Central to the London J18 Protest was the Jubilee 2000 Campaign. Inspired by the Hebrew/Old Testament Book of Leviticus this saw the start of a new Century as the Jubilee year. In which; "Those enslaved by debts are freed, lands lost because of debt are returned and community torn apart by inequality is restored." While the Qu'ran went on to explicitly ban Usury. As such J18 wanted to see US$90bn of debts incurred by the poorest nations during the Neo-Colonial Era, debts there was never any chance of being repaid, written off. Far from being an attempt to stop the Globalised Era the Jubilee 2000 campaign and the London J18 Protest were about permanently consigning the debts of the Neo-Colonial Era to the history books. Allowing the poorest nations to fully embrace the Globalised Era.
Beyond writing off debts that were never going to be repaid Jubilee 2000 and the London J18 Protest also sought changes to the way the IMF/World Bank operated. In order to make sure that nations wouldn't, through the policies of the IMF/World Bank, find themselves in a position where they were trapped in debts they would never be able to repay.
So rather than demanding that all of a debtor nation's farmland be turned over to Cash-Cropping in order for the debt to be repaid as fast as possible maybe allow the debt to be repaid over a longer period of time. Allowing the debtor nation to use some of its farmland to feed its people, rather than having to incur more debt to import food. Increasing the amount of interest the creditor can collect over the longer repayment period and reducing the likelihood that the debt will become so large it has to be defaulted on and will never be repaid.
I do hesitate to use a sort of onesize-fits-all example of the type of changes being suggested to the IMF/World Bank. One of the big changes being suggested to the IMF/World Bank was they stop using a onesize-fits-all approach to their ESAP's. Regardless of where the debtor nation was or what its individual circumstances were the IMF/World Bank would often just issue the exact same ESAP. When taking a more in-depth look and tailoring ESAP's to each debtor nations individual circumstances, strengths and weaknesses, would produce far better results.
It must be said that for the most part the IMF/World Bank and other creditor organisations, such as Private Corporations, were actually very receptive to J18 and Jubilee 2000's, it almost feels too strong to call them; "Demands." Once they had explained to them the problems being caused by the way they operated and had better ways of operating suggested to them they were only too happy to adopt those changes. Leaving everyone a bit baffled at what all the clouds of teargas and heavily armoured mass ranks of riot police trying to block those discussions were all about. The discussions which were being had in the form of protests and riots at the start of the 21st Century are now just being had through email. Which certainly doesn't look as dramatic on the TV news but is definitely a better way of going about it.
If the start of the Globalised Era can be tied to a single event and a single date then it would be the Multilateral Trade Negotiations (MTN) resulting in the Marrakesh Declaration on April 15th 1994 (15/4/1994). This established the World Trade Organisation (WTO) on January 1st 1995 (1/1/1995). The World Trade Organisation is the international body which serves the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). Rather like how the International Criminal Court (ICC) is the international body which serves the Rome Treaty (1998).
Established in 1948 the purpose of GATT, stated in its preamble, is to promote international trade through a; "Substantial reduction of tariffs and other trade barriers and the elimination of preferences, on a reciprocal and mutually advantageous basis." Entering into force when the WTO opened in January 1995 the purpose of GATS is the same, only for services rather than physical goods. Reflecting the increasing role of the knowledge economy; things like Movies, TV Shows, Music and Hospitality in More Economically Developed Countries. The WTO serves both of those treaties by providing a forum for nations to negotiate ways to remove tariffs and trade barriers and to provide arbitration for disputes between member nations.
Following its adoption in 1948 GATT initially made very little progress in reducing tariffs, other trade barriers and eliminating preferences. A substantial reason for this was the Cold War and Neo-Colonialism. Tariffs and preferential treatment being a very good way of enticing and coercing nations to join your side and do what you want. If a nation is being a good ally then you can reward them by offering them lower tariffs and other preferential treatment. If they are being a bad ally, such as cozying up to Russia or refusing to join you in your invasions, then you can punish them with higher tariffs. When Juan Perón refused to sign GATT and restored diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union the US responded by excluding Argentina's agricultural exports from the Marshall Plan to Europe, crippling Argentina's Beef industry.
Another substantial reason for GATT's slow progress was the consensus that existed across the Capitalist First World on the work of the British Economist John Menyard Keynes; "The Keynesian Consensus." Keynesian Economics dictated that Governments should interfere as much as possible in the Economy, stopping just short of a Communist full takeover of the Economy. Keynesian Economics was the idea behind US President Franklin D. Roosevelt's "New Deal" during The Great Depression (1929-1945) which was then expanded to become The Marshall Plan in Europe after The Second World War. It was the driving idea behind using Infrastructure Development as a driver of Economic Growth, seen in Brazil under Presidents Dutra and Kubitschek and during the so-called Brazilian Miracle.
For reasons I hope will become obvious efforts were often made to be discreet about it. However Keynesian Economics can be something as simple as a Steelworkers Union telling an incumbent politicians that it will get all if its members to vote for the politician's re-election if the politician can deliver pay rises at certain Steelmills. So the politician simply uses public money to pay the wages at those Steelmills, delivering the pay rises for the Union and getting themselves re-elected.
If one Steelmill's wage bill is being paid by the government, rather than the revenue they get from selling their Steel, then they can charge much less for their Steel. Allowing them to undercut rivals who aren't having their wage bill paid by the Government. This type of State-Aid is what is known as a; "Non-Tariff Barrier." To counteract that non-tariff barrier and protect their Steelmills a nation has to impose a tariff on the subsidised Steel, bringing its price up to the level of Steel made by Steelmills who are having to pay their wage bills out of the revenue they get from selling Steel. Throughout the years of the Keynesian Consensus during the Neo-Colonial Era these sort of non-tariff barriers created by state-aid where common and widespread across all industries and nations across the Capitalist First World. As a result tariffs had to be as common and widespread across all industries and nations in order to cancel out the non-tariff barriers.
Taken to the extreme Slavery is an example of Keynesian non-tariff barrier. If the government allows you to not feed your workforce, let alone pay them, then your costs of production fall massively. So you're able to reduce your prices massively. While Slavery was ended as a legal practice at the end of The Atlantic Slave Trade it continues as an illegal practice globally and continues to be a particular problem in the Cotton trade.
Although I think we should be congratulating them for ending Slavery, rather than shaming them for how long it took a good recent example of this is Uzbekistan. Their Cotton industry has officially been Slavery free since 2022. A former member of the Soviet Union Uzbekistan would force its large number of Government employees along with University and school students to abandon their usual work and go pick Cotton during harvest season. This something which was alluded to just after US President Trump's re-election in November 2024. When a handful of Black American University students were sent text messages telling them they'd been selected to pick Cotton and told to await instructions about the Cotton Plantation they'd be sent to.
What you can do in a situation like that is what you can do with less extreme examples of non-tariff barriers. Impose a tariff equal the saving made through using Slave labour to bring the price up to market value and eliminate the advantage gained through using Slave labour.
Of course another option would be to ban the import of goods produced using Slave labour entirely. That is what the US did under the Presidency of Barack Obama in 2016, in direct response to Uzbekistan. It repealed the consumptive demand clause of the Tariff Act of 1930, allowing a total ban on goods produced using Slave labour.
The problem with that approach is that as soon as you introduce a total ban you are breaking off contact and losing any influence over the people using Slave labour. The chances are that while you won't be buying goods produced using Slave labour they'll just be sold to someone else and the use of Slave labour will just continue. Arguably it is morally better to continue to buy some products made using Slave labour and use tariffs as a coercive measure to end Slave labour. You don't have to stop at imposing a tariff level which brings the price up to market value. You can set the tariff level which increases the price to far above market value, punishing the use of Slave labour. That though is really a moral question of how much responsibility you have to intervene to improve the lives of others.
The other problem is that for some goods there is only a limited choice in who you can buy them from. One of the great many insane things President Trump has done since Awards Season 2025 was impose a 37% tariff on all imports from Botswana. Something Trump claimed was necessary as an emergency measure to correct a US$300m trade imbalance with Botswana. The reason why there's a trade imbalance between the US and Botswana is that Botswana has Diamonds while the US doesn't. No amount of political and economic pressure on Botswana is going to make Diamonds appear in the US.
While Botswana is a beacon of good practice Diamond mining is another industry in which Slavery is still rife. You if can remember all the way back to the 2025 Super Bowl Half-Time Show it referenced the Second Liberian Civil War (1999-2003) which blended in with the Sierra Leonean Civil War (1991-200). Both of these conflicts were fuelled by the use of traumatised, drug addicted Child Slaves, both as soldiers and to mine Diamonds. It was actually how Charles Taylor was eventually found guilty of Slavery, contrary to Article 7.1(g) of The Rome Statue (1998), along with a host of other Crimes Against Humanity. Nelson Mandela set Charles Taylor up on a date with the supermodel Naomi Campbell. To impress her Charles Taylor gave Naomi Campbell Diamonds he'd used Child Slaves to mine. Naomi Campbell then gave those Diamonds to Nelson Mandela who put them in a safe, allowing them to be used as evidence at Charles Taylor's trial at the ICC. Naomi Campbell appearing at the ICC to give evidence was a pretty weird day for everyone.
So excluding suppliers who use Slave labour might result in you having to exclude all of the suppliers. Suggesting the person who wrote it might be brighter than the person who repealed it, that is the situation the consumptive demand clause of the Tariff Act (1930) allowed for.
Even before his re-election in November 2024 President Trump has made tariffs one of the centrepieces of his second term. However at the time of Awards Season 2025 President Trump hadn't actually done very much, making it hard to assess his tariff policies.
The WTO has a permanent headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland. It has over 600 permanent employees, not counting the delegations employed by their respective nations. The overwhelming majority of the WTO's day-to-day work is concerned with the arbitration of tariff disputes. If a nation accuses one nation of imposing a non-tariff barrier, such as the state-aid I mentioned above, and the first nation objects. Then the WTO assess whether a non-tariff barrier has been imposed and if it has whether the responding tariff is set at a fair level. Or it least it was until 2019, when President Trump blocked appointments to the WTO's appellate body. Something which seems wildly inconsistent with Trump's sudden love of tariffs.
So rather than being some radical idea of Trump's tariffs are a perfectly normal, everyday part of international trade. Even if it is a topic which is so boring it rarely makes the news. I doubt President Obama's repealing of the consumptive demand clause of the Tariff Act (1930) even made much of an appearance on Bloomberg terminals.
So at the time of Awards Season 2025 there was a possibility that President Trump's use of tariffs would be sensible, surgical and to the benefit of both the US and global economy.
Going back to the example of Steel. While it has fully embraced Capitalism China's economy still involves large numbers of State Owned Enterprises (SOE's), State-Aid at its most extreme. Its Steel industry is made up almost exclusively of SOE's. Receiving all of their money from the Chinese Government Chinese Steelmills don't have to recover any of their costs of production by selling Steel. They very often just make Steel to keep the furnaces running, rather than to fulfil any customer order.
Inspired by the Silk Road, since 2013 China has been building The Belt And Road Initiative. A massive, global, network of Freeways, Railroads, Seaports and Airports across Asia, Europe and Africa. You can now get on a train in the island of Britain and ride it all the way to the island of Hong Kong. Obviously you wouldn't want to, sitting on a train for that long would drive you utterly insane. However in terms of moving goods across the World it is a massive improvement, driving Globalisation and making trade truly global. However a large factor in the Belt And Road Imitative is that it gives China something to do with all the Steel it is producing. It's not a Neo-Colonial style debt-trap, China's just giving it away for free. It's cheaper than China having to find a way to store all the Steel it's producing.
While the World order as we know it would probably collapse if China didn't defend itself at the WTO and in other diplomatic forums you often get the impression that they're only going through the motions. They know what they're doing with their Steel industry and they think nations such be responding with some level of tariffs. In order to restore a level playing field for the good of the global economy.
Of course since Awards Season 2025 President Trump has given us a lot more insight into his understanding, or lack thereof, of tariffs. Particularly his so-called; "Liberation Day" in April 2025 where he imposed a baseline 10% tariff on all nations in the World. To anyone with any understanding of tariffs this was just completely insane. It made no distinction between nations, such as China, which the US considers trade rivals and nations, such as Canada, which the US considers allies and is legally forbidden under treaty, the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), from imposing tariffs on. Not even going to the level of differentiating between nations Trump's tariffs certainly don't get into the detail of what tariff and non-tariff barriers each sector of each nation's economy are using against the US and how Trump's tariffs are supposed to counteract them.
Far from being the detailed, precise, surgical application of tariffs which is a perfectly normal part of international trade Liberation Day gave everyone who does know what tariffs are the impression that Trump is a man who simply doesn't understand trade, let alone tariffs.
As part of his re-election campaign Trump's base was fired up with promises of tariffs. It's quite common in politics for newly elected politicians to make concessions to their base. So there was still an outside possibility that President Trump had some credibility on trade and economics. He was giving his base the tariffs they were demanding. Then through the process of having to scrap the majority of the insane tariffs educating his base in what tariffs are and how they can work to improve the US and global economy. Along with what they are not and what they cannot do.
Since then any illusion of President Trump's credibility on matters of trade and economics has been comprehensively shattered. Far from reversing tariffs Trump has doubled down on them. Shouting; "TARIFFS!" now seems to be his response to everything. Rather like a small child who can't resist shouting out the new swear word they've just learned, even though they have no idea what it means.
What Trump thinks tariffs are only became completely clear when he signed his One Big Beautiful Bill Act in July 2025. This slashed taxes across the board, almost completely eliminating them for his millionaire advisers like Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. It is obvious that the Trump administration view tariffs as a replacement for the taxes it claims it is cutting.
When President Trump says he is imposing tariffs on China, Canada, Mexico, Botswana etc he's not telling the truth. What Trump is doing is imposing a tariff on the US. Specifically the US citizens who import things from the country Trump names. Those importers then sell those things onto other US citizens, it seems unlikely they won't ask their customers to pay a share of the tariff Trump has imposed on them. In short the Trump administration doesn't understand tariffs as a tool of international trade. The Trump administration views tariffs simply as a Federal Sales Tax.
The US has a long history of using tariffs as domestic taxes. In his Federalist Papers Framer of the US Constitution Alexander Hamilton argued that tariffs would be the primary form of taxation for the nation he was trying to build. One of the key events that triggered the American Revolution was The Boston Tea Party (1773). Contrary to popular misconception this was a protest against the failure to impose tariffs on Chinese Tea imports. One of the first acts of the newly formed United States was The Tariff of 1789. This imposed tariffs with the express purpose of paying the US' national debt.
The US' Founding Fathers and Framers of the Constitution were very clear though. The authority to impose taxes and tariffs lies solely with Congress, the Legislative Branch. Rather than the Presidency, the Executive Branch. It is one of the eighteen Enumerated Powers of Congress detailed in Article 1 of the US Constitution. Specifically Clause 1 of Section 8 of Article 1 expressly gives only Congress the power to lay and collect tariffs, referring to them as; "duties."
All of Trump's Tariffs have been imposed by Executive Order or diktat. Marbury v. Madison (1803) gives the US Constitution Super-Legal status. It automatically strikes down any law or diktat which contradicts it. As a result Trump's Tariffs do not and have never had any legal force.
The US now seems to find itself on the brink of one of the deepest Constitutional Crises it has ever experienced. As we wait to discover whether the Executive Branch has corrupted the Judicial Branch, the Supreme Court (SCOTUS), to the point it will attempt to deprive the US Constitution of its power to strike down diktats which contradict it.
At around 18:05 on 2/2/26 (UK date) I'll have to complete this thought at a later date.
