SATURDAY: USAID around the world...

SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2025

...as described on the Fox News Channel: What does USAID do in Latin America?

All in all, we have no idea. The same can be said of most people. Triggered by the ongoing attempt to terminate the federal agency, the Associated Press recently published a news report on that very question.

The report appeared on Wednesday, February 5. Headline included, the report began like this:

USAID is going away. Here’s what it’s been doing in South America

The dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development will deliver a major blow to efforts including humanitarian assistance in Colombia, conservation efforts in Brazil and coca eradication in Peru—South American countries that have been a priority for the support.

Even if some foreign aid resumes after the 90-day suspension ordered by President Donald Trump, many USAID-backed projects focus on areas he has derided as ideological: climate change, biodiversity and minority and women’s rights, so several recipients fear their projects are now dead.

So began the AP's lengthy report. Like almost everyone else, we don't have the kind of personal knowledge which lets us assess its accuracy or its overall quality.

That said, the article described a range of initiatives the agency has supported. Below, you see an account of USAID's work in our major country. You can read the full AP report simply by clicking here:

Trump told reporters Monday that shutting down USAID “should have been done a long time ago.” Billionaire Elon Musk, who is leading government cost reduction in the new administration, said the agency was run by “radical left lunatics.”

In Brazil, USAID’s largest initiative is the Partnership for the Conservation of Amazon Biodiversity, which focuses on conservation and improving livelihoods for Indigenous peoples and other forest communities. About two-thirds of the world’s largest rainforest is in Brazil.

One Brazilian organization USAID has supported is the Amazon-based Roraima Indigenous Council, which operates in 35 areas including the territory of the Yanomami tribe, totaling some 157,000 square kilometers (60,600 square miles), larger than Greece. This direct support is representative of a shift at USAID over the last few years, to prioritize funding grassroots organizations.

In a region vulnerable to illegal gold mining and drug-trafficking, the Roraima Indigenous Council is using the money for improved family farming, adapting to climate change and income generation for women.

Now everything is at risk, Edinho Macuxi, the tuxaua (leader) of the Indigenous Council, told the AP. In recent weeks, his organization, which represents some 60,000 people, laid off workers and canceled activities due to lack of funds...

[...]

In recent years, USAID also supported arguably the most successful sustainable resource effort in the Amazon, the managed fishing of pirarucu, the region’s famously giant fish. The U.S. funds built a slaughterhouse where fishers could work during the legal catch. Indigenous and riverine communities helped recover what was an endangered species, at the same time getting income and food.

In 2024, USAID disbursed $22.6 million to Brazil. Over half, close to $14 million, went to general environmental protection, with the Amazon, which stores crucial amounts of carbon from the atmosphere, as a top priority.

In the case of Brazil alone, that was $22.6 million shoveled right out the door!

Was that a good use of federal money, or was it instead the latest example of "waste, fraud and abuse?" Are the programs in question well managed? Are American interests served by these efforts? Are the humanitarian efforts actually successful on the local level?

It's imaginable that opinions about such questions will differ. In a slightly more rational world, the lengthy AP report could be a starting point for a sane discussion of such issues, which have suddenly come to the fore in the realm of Musk and Trump.

Imaginably, that could happen in a more rational world. Our world isn't like that. 

In theory, a news report like that could trigger a serious discussion. Today, we thought we'd show you what viewers of our nation's most-watched "cable new" program have been told, in recent days, about the work of USAID in the region in question.

We start with the 60-year-old Greg Gutfeld, speaking on the most-watched TV show in all "cable news." He cleared his throat last Wednesday evening, then emitted this:

GUTFELD (2/5/25): ...You cannot fix USAID any more than you could have fixed Joe Biden, and it is the same problem. You have a corrupt, broken product operating under the guise of empathy and compassion.

You know, as USAID promotes gender equality in Madagascar, they did help fund the Wuhan virus and they killed 15 million people. You can't fix Joe, you can't fix USAID, yet they will deny the corruption to the very end, and this is the problem when a single ideology contaminates an entire system.

All in all, it didn't sound good! The gentleman continued:

GUTFELD (continuing directly): The media is 90% to 95% liberal—there is data for that—and what did you get? You get a hoax matrix that covered for Joe and tried to destroy Trump. 

Then you have the academia—90 to 95% of the faculty is liberal. Maybe you can find one Republican per major department, and then what do you have? Rabid anti-west activism. Pro-terror activism. USAID is almost uniformly peopled by one party, and we are paying for it. That's the difference.

At that point, Dana Perino said it was time for a break.

Question! Is USAID in the grip of "rabid anti-west and pro-terror activism?" Or is it just academia which is so afflicted? 

As the gentleman orated, it was hard to tell. But of one thing there was no doubt—USAID was said to have killed 15 million people. 

Gutfeld made that specific claim twice during his peroration, as you can see by clicking here, then sitting through his full speech. (Full disclosure: USAID was said to have killed only 12 million people in Gutfeld's initial statement.)

(Fuller disclosure: Has USAID been promoting "gender equality in Madagascar?" We're not entirely sure why that would be wrong. But a cursory Google search turns up no claim to that effect, not even in reporting at the Fox News site.)

At any rate, that's what viewers in Red America heard on Wednesday night. USAID killed 15 million people, or maybe as few as 12 million. Also, the agency seemed to be connected to "rabid pro-terror activism."

Perino took it to a break. The next day, Gutfeld expanded his analysis:

WATTERS (2/6/25): Greg, I haven't seen a lot of actual regular citizens complain about—

GUTFELD: A very good point, and now we come full circle, Dana, which I will touch on shortly. But your point is well made.  

Where are the grassroots protests?...Instead, you're getting these shrieking Democrats who are acting like drug addicts watching the cops flush their drugs down the toilet—because they are!

So it's really hard to get energized about USAID. And is it because it is a front that creates artificial social instability in foreign countries, portrayed as aid, with the illegitimate goal of installing a puppet of our liking? 

So think about what they are doing in small countries. You will follow me, Dana—trust me. 

They do DEI, identity-driven activism with gender and trans. They make disinformation an urgent cause, while also playing up the latest climate apoplexy.

The fellow continued from there. For the record, Gutfeld still explicitly describes climate change as "a hoax."

On this day, Red America heard the fellow extend his critique. Now, Fox viewers seemed to be told that USAID is about the business of "creating artificial social instability in foreign countries...with the goal of installing a puppet of our liking." 

In service to that end, USAID "make[s] disinformation an urgent cause, while also playing up the latest climate apoplexy." Or so Fox viewers were told.

For the record, in what specific country has USAID "created artificial social instability with the goal of installing a puppet of our liking?"

No example was given this night, and no example was sought. Five Stepfords sat on the panel this night, including the fully transformed Harold Ford.

Everyone agreed with everyone else. Each Stepford agreed with every word each other Stepford produced. 

We were going to show you what Jesse Watters said about USAID. But for today, let's close right now, with this comment:

The night assault which destroyed sacred Troy was an assault of the Late Bronze Age. The journalism we've just described is a deadly night assault of our own Information Age.

Briefly, let's be frank! No serious discussion of any topic exists within our failing culture. In the process, the walls of our own Troy are being overrun. 

(In our view, Blue American orgs have been bad enough. Red American orgs have been worse.)

Is anyone describing this process? Given the way Musk and Trump are now "flooding the zone," that has become an extremely difficult undertaking. That said, ignoring the predecessors to the current flood has been the norm in Blue America for a very long time.

Is there a way to turn back this assault? We know of no obvious way "back out of all this now too much for us."

Meanwhile, we close with this:

What has USAID actually done in Latin America or elsewhere in the world? Given the way our culture now works, there's essentially no way (to find) out.