Talk:Banana republic/Archive 1

No mention of Miami after Elian Gonzalez?
Why no mention of Miami after Elian Gonzalez? That generated vast quantities of bananas thrown onto the steps of City Hall, and even a "Banana Republic of Miami" flag: http://flagspot.net/flags/us-fl-br.html AnonMoos 23:28, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Why is the store called Banana Republic?
Why did the founders of the clothing store call it Banana Republic?


 * I think Banana Republic is meant to be a "lifestyle brand" (see Nautica, Abercrombie & Fitch, etc.), and the lifestyle being sold here is of the elite playing in their Banana Republics without a care in the world.67.180.27.77 08:25, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Independent state
There are no web-based references to the Banana Republic as breakaway state due to deliberate stifling of information by the Australian government. There are several refrences to the formation of the republic self-published in dead tree format, and circulated around Sydney in many zine circles. The original constitution is still on display in Nani City, and there are several copies floaring around elsewhere in the republic. Before modifying the article please discuss here first. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.40.202.125 (talk • contribs).
 * So the Australian government has the power to censor the entire Internet worldwide, even sites that are hosted outside Australia? I'm impressed... Demiurge 20:11, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I have reverted it again. This is nonsense. There are numerous attack websites against John Howard which are freely operating.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 01:44, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Horrors of Capitalism
"United Fruit...created company towns...brought in roads, railroads, hired thousands of workers but with that they also brought all the horrors of capitalism"

That doesn't sound very NPOV to me...--74.120.133.109 20:12, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

But we don't know if the workers were paid a living wage?

Were they given good housing or just slapped together shacks or multi-family barracks with little privacy?

Were they in the fields picking crops when the company sprayed toxic pesticides?

Did they work until they dropped dead and the company give any compensation to the family?

banana republic
Why does a search for banana republic go straight to the clothing brand? I would imagine this article is of higher importance. At the minimum, it should go to disambiguation page. Any comments? 65.167.146.130 (talk) 21:55, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Central American Countries
Such as Poland? Maybe you guys have different maps to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.16.97.233 (talk) 16:38, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

It's rewritten now. The countries stayed the same, but now it reads better and accordingly to maps.

Why is Poland called a banana republic anyway? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.63.132.6 (talk) 21:36, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Keating
This statement itself, according to the economic statistics over the next year, caused a significant effect on the Australian economy.

Which statistics? How did they single out the effects of this statement from the many other influences on the economy (the Iran-Iraq war, the revolution in the Philippines, the Chernobyl disaster, etc.)?


 * If anyone can find a source to back this up, please add it. Kewpid 12:17, 22 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I removed the following text "The statement had an immediate impact on the value of the Australian dollar and, according to the economic statistics over the next year, had a significant effect on the broader Australian economy." as it amounts to the pretty serious accusation that Keating involuntarily sabotaged his own economy through flippant language.  If it can be sourced, then return it.I elliot 10:14, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
 * He sort of did, but I can only find a simple reference to the "immediate impact" on the dollar. Mark Hurd (talk) 15:07, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Gas/ Diamond republic?
Coined the name myself. What would you call states that rely on a specific type of natural resource (not agriculture)? Say certain western client states in Africa (gold/diamonds) or certain western client states in middle east (gas/oil).

-G —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.32.141.8 (talk) 19:58, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Disgracing a banana republic
What would be a #credit# to a banana republic?

"Power #tends# to corrupt, absolute power corrupts absolutely" as Lord Acton said to the Bishop (Mandel Creighton). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.104.132.41 (talk) 14:51, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

UK / U.S. / E.U.
These sections should be removed, since the appellation of "banana republic" to these three powers is obviously rhetorical. Op-eds, political speeches, and press releases are not signs that the United Kingdom, the European Union, the U.S. federal government, or the State of California are seriously considered "banana republics" by either academics or the public. In all these cases the use of the term is with the goal of portraying the opposition as unreasonable, rather than giving a serious treatise on the similarities between said opposition and an actual junta-run United Fruit Company cash crop colony. -- Zen Swashbuckler -- (talk) 16:22, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Agreed. It reads too much like the superfluous "(topic) In Popular Culture" subsections in other topics. (First time I've replied on a talk page, I hope I'm doing this right) GranoblasticMan (talk) 12:17, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

History of the banana
Do we actually need this section? Is it really relevant? Could it be shorter? DJ Clayworth (talk) 20:53, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Ireland??????
Where is Ireland in all this? Ireland is a complete banana republic. Constantly reference as being such in the national media- there's even a song written describing the country as such. The below definition, taken from the main article describes Ireland 100%.

Features of a banana republic A collusion between the overweening state and certain favored monopolistic concerns, whereby the profits can be privatized and the debts socialized.

Devalued paper currency in the international community.

Kleptocracy -- those in positions of influence use their time in office to maximize their own gains, always ensuring that any shortfall is made up by those unfortunates whose daily life involves earning money rather than making it.

There must be no principle of accountability within the government so that the political corruption by which the banana republic operates is left unchecked. The members of the national legislature will be (a) largely for sale and (b) consulted only for ceremonial and rubber-stamp purposes some time after all the truly important decisions have already been made elsewhere.

...a money class fleeces the banking system while the very trunk of the national tree is permitted to rot and crash... —Christopher Hitchens[8] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Limericksham (talk • contribs) 14:41, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Italy again?
What the hell is up with people inserting advanced republics like Italy into the banana republic category? Someone mentioned that in the introduction only, without mentioning Italy in the text body at all after that. If they want to claim that Italy is a banana republic, you can't just insert a random comment in the intro and leave it at that, you have to elaborate in the body. Furthermore, the source cited is the following: "Logke, Richard, Remaking the Italian Economy, CUP 2008." I am not sure if that source discusses Italy as a banana republic or not, but if it does, you need a more precise documentation (i.e. page numbers) to substantiate such a claim, not just a general source reference. Furthermore, something as controversial as calling Italy a banana republic needs more than one reliable source to back up such a claim. So I removed it. Contributors, please stop putting in developed, well-industrialized countries as examples of banana republics unless you can back it up with reliable, precise sources. Midtempo-abg (talk) 18:21, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Removal of US, UK, EU, and Italy
I have removed these countries as they are clearly not banana republics. Idag (talk) 18:49, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Absolutely the correct thing to do. the mere fact that someone has compared these countries to banana republics does not matter. DJ Clayworth (talk) 18:51, 22 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I'd dispute this in the case of the U.S, where there is overwhelming evidence in the form of monopolies and a rich elite (The top 0.1-1% of earners) providing massive financial incentives to the government to protect their monopolies and make every effort to increase the income gap, which have all been graphed over the last century to incontrovertibly support these claims and confirm the country's Banana Republic status. Sunyavadin 13:01, 5 October 2010 (UTC)


 * That is a description of a plutocracy, not a banana republic. Although they are not mutually exclusive, they are two different things. Midtempo-abg (talk) 21:22, 5 November 2010 (UTC)


 * In 1963 a coup took place in the United States of America. The elected President, John F. Kennedy was assassinated by the rogue elements of the CIA.  The fact that this was covered up- very badly- by Big Corporations, the underworld and high ranking government officials implicated them as accessories after the fact at the very least. Some would say President Johnson orchestrated this, but it is hard to say when the US Government chooses to keep the incriminating documents a secret for over 50 years.  Yes, our beloved America is a Banana Republic. MR. PRESIDENT. OPEN THE DAMN SAFE.

The United States of America is a Banana Republic
Control by the moneyed elite-check

Extreme political corruption-check

Reduction of the Economy-check

Reliance of the economy on only one area--double check

Anyone who disagrees with this statement is either rich, wants to be rich, or just wants to ignore facts. Since Wikipedia is about facts these belong hereByron670 (talk) 01:31, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Only one area? Really?  Which area is that?   Corvus cornix  talk  02:04, 11 March 2011 (UTC)


 * See WP:REDFLAG - you'll need multiple sources to make that claim. -- Neil N   talk to me  02:19, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

The role of the various Occupy movements
In light of Occupy Wall Street and the various Occupy movements around the country, is it finally obvious that "the United States can be described as a banana republic" is an admissible critique of the current situation ? I wouldn't take it as proven, but dismissing that critique out of hand seems highly inappropriate - it seems to me that you should have to cite something, prove something, to demonstrate that the critique is distant enough from reality that it deserves no discussion. It seems to me that there is no way to in good conscience say "that critique is not even worth discussing." Krinndnz (talk) 05:18, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

The USA as a Banana Republic...again.
The current revision of the article indicates: 'See U.S.A'. This appears to have been brought up before on this talk page, and according to one contributor, making this claim requires multiple citations. Currently, that statement is backed by one article, which is even an op-ed for Vanity Fair - hardly enough to call it a solid citation. I am removing that portion of the article. If anyone wishes to restore, please discuss the reason and additional citations if available.

ArrenRedemptio (talk) 09:49, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Banana republic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120816010916/http://users.polisci.wisc.edu/LA260/bananas.htm to http://users.polisci.wisc.edu/LA260/bananas.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:34, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Needs rewriting
This article is incomplete and incaccurate in that it largely sidesteps the role of the United Fruit Company and their role in fomenting political unrest in countries whose policies didn't favor its bottom line, and their brutal labor practices. This is important for several reasons. First of all, it is important to be historically accurate. Secondly, the way the article is written is quite offensive, with the so-called "backward" countries seeming to carry all the responsibility for the condition under which they operate (when in fact, if we are being historically accurate, this is not true). But lastly, it is also important for the simple fact that the very word "banana" in the phrase "banana republic" is not just randomly based on the "backwards" economies of bananas, but specifically on the export crop forced upon them by United Fruit. Also, the bit about the mops on the shoulders is ridiculous and again offensive. I tried to make changes to capture all of this a while back, but got a note that my changes were not "productive" and had been reverted. Maybe someone else wants to take a stab at revising the incomplete and offensive qualities of this article. This article and the two books it is in review of are good source material. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.135.175.21 (talk) 22:48, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

It’s surprising, unfortunate and disappointing that a term laced with undeniably bigoted and arguably racist undertones gained such  wide acceptance and still commonly used today. It was coined in era where such pejorative language to refer to non-European people and nations was acceptable but several decades on, it should have gradually fell out of use like it has happened  with other countless unnecessary derogatory terminology.

Especially when terms such as Vassal and Client States already exist and adequately describe nations that are in one form or another under the control of a bigger and stronger, economically and militarily, country, for example such as India through the East India company for much of the 1700s and 1800s. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.59.117.190 (talk) 04:44, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Banana Republic
It has generally been my understanding that, in addition to strong influence by foreign governments/interests and general political instability, another important element of a banana republic is the economic system, namely one based on the export of natural resources, with little infrastructure or development. Am I the only one whose heard of this factor? I guess I'll see if I can find any sources that talk about it in more detail.

Bulgaria was sometimes called a Tomato Republic due to its previous domination by the Soviet Union and its dependence on agricultural exports. --Vladko 04:26, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I think of the term as focused primarily on the exploitation of small Latin American countries by major U.S. ag corporations, such as United Fruit. Such as that the fruit company more or less owns and operates the entire country. I don't really think of it as a pejorative term for unstable Latin countries, rather a loaded term indicting these major corporations. In that sense, I think the introductory paragraph could use work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.166.54.11 (talk) 14:00, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

It’s surprising, unfortunate and disappointing that a term laced with undeniably bigoted and arguably racist undertones gained such  wide acceptance and still commonly used today. It was coined in era where such pejorative language to refer to non-European people and nations was acceptable but several decades on, it should have gradually fell out of use like it has happened  with other countless unnecessary derogatory terminology.

Especially when terms such as Vassal and Client States already exist and adequately describe nations that are in one form or another under the control of a bigger and stronger, economically and militarily, country, for example such as India through the East India company for much of the 1700s and 1800s. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.59.117.190 (talk) 04:45, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Chiquita Picture Subtext
I think that saying Chiquita is 'iconic' is MOS:PUFFERY. The citation given lacks a page number WP:PAGENUM. Sorry to be a pain, is this how and where I put this stuff? Many thanks EcheveriaJ (talk) 20:51, 6 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Agreed about "iconic"; I've removed it. Not sure I understand the rest of your question, though.  While the citation does not give a page number the URL in the citation links to page 72 of the source, which is the start of a section about Chiquita bananas.  So it's clearly that section (pages 72–75) that the citation refers to.  If we feel that the source is useful then the page range should be added.  What's not clear to me is what content in the caption the source is meant to verify.  I can't see that it verifies that Chiquita bananas are "a primary export commodity of Latin America", and everything else in the caption is blue-sky obvious now that we've removed "iconic".  So I wonder if the reference should go (I wonder if the photo should go entirely, in fact – the article has far too many images already and most of our readers probably know what a banana looks like...) Wham2001 (talk) 21:52, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry, forgot to ping you, . Wham2001 (talk) 21:53, 6 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Sorry for taking so long to reply! I agree the image adds next to nothing to the page. Maybe... Just maybe, there is some person who has access to the internet, has the ability to speak English, has the prerogative to read an encyclopaedic entry about 'Banana republics' and has never seen a banana before. I will make the bold suggestion that maybe, this probably isn't the case! Many thanks EcheveriaJ (talk) 16:15, 12 January 2021 (UTC)


 * No worries ; it was less than a week, and I've had a bunch of other stuff to do. Since we seem to agree, I have plucked the bananas out of the article.  Best, Wham2001 (talk) 22:32, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Continued Prevalence of Companies Today
Idea to introduce additional information of banana exports from Guatemala and Honduras in modern times. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CharlesH.Woo (talk • contribs) 03:35, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Marxist bias?
The way this article currently reads seems to be influenced primarily by a Marxist analysis (i.e. making repeated references to class struggle, economic exploitation, etc.), as well as having language that clearly violates NPOV (servile, abetting, etc.). I think it could benefit from a rewrite that's not biased to any particular social philosophy or political agenda.

Ryonne (talk) 21:34, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 18 January 2021 and 27 April 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): CharlesH.Woo. Peer reviewers: WishIWasOnWiki, 00matthew2000.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 15:16, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Broader use of the term
The term "banana republic" seems for a long time to have been used to refer to any Latin American dictatorship, regardless of dependance on exports or relations with the US/private industry - here is an article from a video game designer using "banana republic" and "Castro" in the same sentence. --Eldomtom2 (talk) 13:43, 17 May 2022 (UTC)