Talk:Banana republic

Untitled
Old talks at Talk:Bananaland. Kaihsu 19:06 Apr 14, 2003 (UTC)

FFII - Link to EU Council website
In the FFII quote, the term 'Banana Republic' is linked to the homepage of the EU Council. This seems to be a popular technique to increase the Google rating for this combination, and, although I also am highly annoyed by the way things are done there at the moment, I dont think Wikipedia should take side in this debate and/or lend itself for this Google boosting thing.

I very much suspect that both the FFII paragraph and the link were the actions of  an anti-software patent person; the FFII refer to the 'banana union' on their website. The included quote seems more about selling their cause than enlightening anyone as to the meaning of the term 'banana republic' and the third paragraph also seems very POV. I suggest, in my capacity as an anonymous coward, that it's  removed.

>>>>>

Dunno about the software patents, but the "The American Empire: A Banana Republic?" is basically a polemic rant. I suggest reading it for yourself and deciding if it is an appropriate link.

Wrong Page layout
It appears to me that this page is laid out based on a linguistic layout, i.e. the places where that phrase or term appears. The fact is, the main usage of this term (denoting a country who's political scene is dominated by a Multinational Corp which controls its major commodity markets) is a political concept, and not just a linguistic term.

Surely what is needed is a layout which gives headings for each and every Banana Republic that has existed, and evidence of this. References in popular culture can take a small part at the bottom. (The Gap subsid. can be ignored as it has it's own page).

Consider the alternative
Consider the fate of the Banana Republics without foreign investment. Revolutions very often were expropriatory in nature.

Walter E. Wallis

The 'investment' benefited mostly the well-off but it made little to almost no difference to the standard of living of the majority of the population. It could be argued that without foreign 'investment' and interference the general population would have been much better off.

There really was no need to fabricate and validate a new word that has underlying bigoted connotations when words such as client and vassal states already exist that describe smaller countries under the influence and control of bigger nations or companies within it such as the East India Company. It seems that this pejorative term’s acceptance has being driven by thinly veiled bigotry in order denigrate without consequence.

INDIA, the dummy democracy
should India be added into the list of the banana republics? Its various features suggest that it should. With the political situation resembling the dynastic monarchy[ Nehru-Gandhi] and the sons,daughters or wives of various politicians bagging seats, the heavy dependence on agriculture, heavy opposition to any kind of progressive policies, a caste and corruption based system where people vote on the basis of the caste of the candidate and the amount of cash and booze they receive rather than their political and moral worth, over 500 billion dollars of black money stashed away, lack of support to entrepreneurs without any background, the list goes on and on. The mind boggling fact that only 8 years of the post independence era was not under the rule of the Nehru-Gandhi family underlines the state of the country.According to recent UN stats there are more poor and undernourished people in just 8 out of 28 states of India than in entire Africa. and moreover there is a net rise in poverty percentage in the exploding population of India.In recent times, there has been huge scams in government. the most popular one is the "2G spectrum scam" which is noted as largest scam in terms of money in the world till date along with several other scams from India.

Section on 'Modern interpretations'
The sources cited under 'United States' don't actually suggest the US is a banana republic. Citation 24 literally argues why the US is not a banana republic. Citation 25 is using the term 'banana republic' as an insult or perjorative rather than trying to convey that the US falls under the political science definition of 'banana republic. It's like calling a country 'fascist' or a 'dictatorship' as a perjorative. It's an expression rather than a serious claim that said country falls within the technical meaning of the word.

In any case, I don't think the latter of these citations is in line with the Weight policy.

I would suggest removing the United States from this for lack of supporting material. At most, maybe a section can be included instead on how the term 'Banana republic' is also used as a perjorative expression in modern times.

Edit: I have removed the sentence in question. I think a case could be made to add it back if the article included a discussion on how the term is sometimes used in political discourse and commentary to criticise aspects of a government, but otherwise, it would be misleading. If anyone wants to add it back feel free to discuss your reasons here.

Combustible Vulpex (talk) 08:02, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Cabbages and Kings citation
I'm starting this topic to address a series of edits I'll be making to the first reference, to Cabbages and Kings:


 * 1) I'm replacing the Google Books URL with a link to an Internet Archive holding, as the pages parameter was previously linking to IA anyway. I'm doing this for consistency's sake and because both the Google Books and prior IA links were to a 1913 edition, not the first edition as cited.


 * 1) I'm moving the reference to appear after "coined the term" per WP:TSI; as it stands, its placement suggests it is a citation regarding Chiquita.

– spida-tarbell ❀ (talk) (contribs) 21:42, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 1) I'm going to add a citation that says explicitly that this book coined the term, because the fact that the book contains the phrase -- even if the books is the earliest example of it -- is not sufficient to support that statement.

Pakistan, Bananas and IP edits
@AKS I know IP edits that delete stuff without explanation should be nuked pretty much always, but I actually agree with the edit in this case, kind of. The former prime minister of Pakistan's comments over his arrest warrant are probably not a serious source in the context of the content of this article. JackTheSecond (talk) 19:11, 1 March 2024 (UTC)