MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3046489807 · doi:10.1353/gss.2020.0018

Plan Colombia: U.S. Ally Atrocities and Community Activism by John Lindsay-Poland

2020· article· en· W3046489807 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
John W. Sherman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of global south studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicConflict, Peace, and Violence in Colombia
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMilitarismPolitical scienceLawPeace treatySociologyCriminologyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Plan Colombia: U.S. Ally Atrocities and Community Activism by John Lindsay-Poland John W. Sherman Lindsay-Poland, John. Plan Colombia: U.S. Ally Atrocities and Community Activism. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2018. Some of the most important and insightful books about the decades-long violence in Colombia have been written by human rights activists—Steven Dudley's Walking Ghosts, Robin Kirk's More Terrible than Death, and Winifred Tate's [End Page 161] Counting the Dead among them. Many of these activists-turned-authors served with accompaniment-oriented organizations, like Peace Brigades International, which placed (mostly) First World volunteers alongside Colombians facing death threats. The purpose of this exercise was not direct deterrence—activists were not bodyguards and did not physically protect their charges, and hence they did not die with them. But they did invariably befriend future victims of violence, and occasionally witnessed murder firsthand. They also became well-informed sources on localized conditions and specific acts of violence, giving us a window, albeit a very narrow one, into on-the-ground conditions in Colombia's protracted conflict. In contrast, few academics ventured into the war zones. John Lindsay-Poland is a vintage activist-author, having opposed US policies in Central America in the 1980s, and US militarism in general, in a non-violent peace tradition, mainly through the Fellowship of Reconciliation. Fortunately, his Plan Colombia book avoids a micro-focus, devoting only about one-fifth of its material to a February 2005 mini-massacre, and its subsequent cover-up, in the Urabá region of northwestern Colombia. Unfortunately, that focus is on the highly unique and heavily chronicled "peace community" of San José de Apartadó, the most accompanied and robustly monitored, activist-backed site in all of Colombia. This is not to minimize the loss of life (eighteen dead), but it is striking indeed that we have such fine-tuned documentation here while the deaths of untold thousands in the Llanos, Chocó, Putumayo, and elsewhere, will forever remain unknown. Lindsay-Poland partially acknowledges this spectacular knowledge gap when he addresses the "False Positives." Thanks to Colombian human rights organizations, and confessions from a few Colombian army officers, we know that several thousand poor civilians were lured to their deaths in a quest to fulfill "dead guerrilla" body counts in the early 2000s, as mandated by the US military (the ghost of Robert McNamara lives on!). His contention that paramilitary and army violence was widespread and systemic is beyond dispute. We will never know how many Colombians died in the carnage from 1997 to 2010, which was the peak killing period since the FARC's emergence in the early 1960s. There is also little reason to doubt Lindsey-Poland's premise that state-funded terror swept away far more lives than the sloppy and vindictive guerrillas. Yet silly is his assertion that "grassroots movements inside and outside the United States can have a substantial impact on limiting or stopping US military intervention" (24). Does he believe that activism somehow limited US intervention in Colombia? [End Page 162] Activism could not even prevent army-paramilitary attacks on the heavily monitored hamlet of San José de Apartadó. What activist-authors like Lindsay-Poland consistently neglect to acknowledge is this: US policy in Colombia has materially benefitted the average (North) American. Much of this book is an indictment of that policy, and at times the author even points to economic factors and motives behind it (most overtly on p. 16). He singles out Al Gore, with his family's longstanding connections to Occidental Petroleum (which operates heavily in Colombia), but Gore is not alone in prospering from US policy. Washington's funding of the Colombian war machine was logical, given the Colombian government's longstanding and generous accommodation of US corporations (most importantly in the mining sector, where these businesses register as Canadian entities for tax and regulation purposes). In Urabá, agricultural products for export predominate, most notably bananas and palm oil. The FARC and other guerrilla groups, in contrast, openly critiqued capitalism and called for a more equitable distribution of wealth, both in Colombia and beyond. In a world where (North) Americans consume roughly seven times their proportion...

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.341
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.078
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of global south studiesSame topicConflict, Peace, and Violence in ColombiaFrench-language works237,207