PARTISAN REVIEW
365
here is what would seem to me to be a perfect example not, I believe,
of psychosis or irrationality, but of the rather clear and systematic
operation of the very same underlying drive which I mentioned,
which I think is a very reasonable drive for those people who in fact
have in their private lives the primary goal of expanding and ex–
tending the power of that group, that component of the economy that
they represent. No surprise whatsoever that when they move into the
executive branch of the government, they do precisely and exactly
the same thing. And they say that they do. So that's just another
example to show, I think, that this null hypothesis is correct.
FREDERIC TUTEN: I'm curious to know why you think we haven't
operated in the same way as we operated in Guatemala years ago
in places like Chile and Peru. Are we just biding our time or do we
have Brazil as a buffer?
CHOMSKY: Well, I think there are objective limits on American power.
It's one thing to launch a kind of covert invasion of Guatemala, and
it would be something very di:fferent to invade Peru or Chile. Don't
forget that at almost the same time that Eisenhower initiated the
covert invasion of Guatemala, he did not do the same in Bolivia.
There he picked a different way: namely, he supported some moder–
ately leftist forces, which in fact were the most right-wing forces that
existed there with any popular base. And ultimately through that
mechanism in about a dozen years he had succeeded in reopening the
country to American capital as intended . Now, in South America
I think that the main U.S. policy is to try to groom Brazil as the
gendarme of South America. During the last Bolivian coup, it was
different from 1952. In fact, Brazilian newspapers had pictures of
Brazilian tanks in La Paz - they hadn't even taken the insignia off,
they were so blatant about it. They could not do that in 1952. Now
Brazil is going to be, I think is intended to be, the subimperial gen–
darme for Latin America which will .)lltimately threaten Peru and
Bolivia and countries to its north and so on. But I just don't see what
else the United States could do in Chile and Peru that would succeed
in meeting the demands of its ruling group. The ITT thing is an
example of what some people would like it to do, but I don't see how
they could carry. it off at this stage.
JOEL KOVEL: I agree with
Mr.
Chomsky that the primary line of ex–
planation has to be economic in these matters, but I disagree with his
contention that the primary motivation can be accounted for by
rational factors . It seems to me that your two arguments could be
brought much closer together i.f we grant that what seems rational
is really a rationalization which includes in the totality of its action a
rational function. The economic processes in America are destruc-
