Wall Street “Discovers” Latin America—Recolonization in Portfolio Form

Behind the euphemism of “diversification” lies a financial scorched-earth campaign. Latin America isn’t an investment opportunity—it’s empire’s last frontier.

By Prince Kapone | Weaponized Information | June 10, 2025

I. The Gentle Language of Plunder

On June 9, Reuters published a financial dispatch titled “Investors eye Latin America as they diversify away from Wall Street.” What appears on the surface as objective financial journalism is, in truth, a portfolio briefing disguised as news. Its purpose is not to inform but to discipline—to craft a narrative in which capital’s flight from a collapsing imperial core becomes a story of optimism, risk-taking, and opportunity. Beneath the jargon, the message is clear: the vultures are circling again, and this time they wear suits.

The authors, Rodrigo Campos and Carolina Mandl, are not reporters in any meaningful sense. Campos has spent years writing for Bloomberg and Reuters about sovereign markets and monetary policy, translating capital’s interests into polite prose. Mandl, a former Latin America bureau chief at Bloomberg, has built her career repackaging privatization and deregulation as “reform.” They are scribes for empire, transmitting the gospel of Wall Street under the guise of global insight. Their outlet, Reuters, is a core pillar of financial imperialism—owned by the Thomson Corporation, whose primary clients are hedge funds, investment banks, and multinational corporations. This is not journalism—it’s the information wing of empire’s forward operating base.

And the chorus of consent is led by familiar names. Rob Citrone of Discovery Capital, Leonard Linnet of Itau BBA, Wim-Hein Pals of Robeco, and Alison Shimada of Allspring Global. They are not neutral observers but high priests of the financial order. Their job is to identify where labor protections are weakest, where currencies can be shorted, where sovereignty has been disciplined into compliance. Their presence is not analytical—it is doctrinal.

The article employs a range of propaganda techniques to manufacture legitimacy for recolonization:

  • “Diversification” as Imperial Displacement: The piece frames the movement of capital into Latin America as a diversification strategy. But this isn’t diversification—it’s displacement. The imperial core is collapsing, its speculative bubbles imploding, and capital is fleeing to the periphery for fresh extraction. By labeling this as “strategy,” Reuters conceals the crisis that drives it.
  • “Underexposed” Equals “Untapped for Exploitation”: Latin America is described as “underexposed”—a euphemism that reeks of colonial cartography. This framing doesn’t just erase history—it reopens the map for conquest. What is “underexposed” to capital is overexploited in reality. But empire never measures exhaustion—it measures what remains to be taken.
  • Profits without People: The article celebrates Argentina’s 100% return on dollar bonds since Milei’s election. But it says nothing of how that return was achieved—through mass layoffs, pension destruction, IMF dictates, and mass hunger. The working class disappears, replaced by market indices. This is not omission—it is ideological sterilization.
  • Recolonization Romanticized: Alison Shimada calls Argentina a “forbidden fruit”—a phrase soaked in imperial fantasy. It frames Latin America as an exotic, sensualized object, ripe for entry and domination. This is not metaphor. It is the continuation of conquest through language—an echo of the conquistador’s diary rewritten as an investment prospectus.
  • Silencing Sovereignty: No mention is made of BRICS, CELAC, or the Bioceanic Corridor—projects that assert Latin American self-determination and resist imperial infrastructure. They are erased because they contradict the story being told: that Latin America is a passive zone, open for entry, bereft of resistance.
  • Empire by the Numbers: Financial statistics—rising indices, bond surges, yield curves—are deployed as proof of success. But they measure profit for foreign capital, not well-being for the people. It’s the spreadsheet logic of technofascism: where the human cost disappears and only the capital gain remains.

Reuters doesn’t need to lie to do damage. It simply selects the truths that serve capital and silences the ones that don’t. The article never claims Argentina isn’t suffering. It simply makes suffering irrelevant to the story. That’s the genius of modern imperial propaganda—it doesn’t deny exploitation; it just reclassifies it as “market access.”

Let us be absolutely clear: this is not diversification. This is portfolio recolonization. It’s not a new beginning—it’s the final scramble of a dying system looking for a new host. And what makes it possible isn’t firepower or coups—it’s narrative cover from outlets like Reuters. We expose it because we must. Because silence is complicity. Because the collapse of empire cannot be allowed to take another continent down with it.

II. When the Market Rises, Someone Else Falls

Reuters gives us data points like they’re objective facts: bond returns, index gains, interest rate differentials. But data doesn’t float in a vacuum. It comes soaked in blood, debt, and dispossession. When capital sees “recovery,” we must ask: for whom? And at what cost?

Let’s start with Argentina—the article’s centerpiece of “financial comeback.” Since the inauguration of President Javier Milei, the country’s dollar bonds have surged over 100%. Argentine stocks? Up 173%. Foreign capital is pouring in, and the talking heads are salivating. But this isn’t growth. It’s asset stripping.

This so-called “recovery” was engineered through full-spectrum class war. Milei, as we documented in “Argentina Strikes Back”, slashed pensions, gutted labor laws, shuttered ministries, and lifted capital controls—all in a matter of months. Inflation has ripped through wages, child poverty has passed 40%, and the IMF is once again in the driver’s seat. And who benefits? Firms like BlackRock and Allspring, who gobbled up distressed Argentine debt and are now feasting on the returns.

The article cites these returns without context. It reports profit like rainfall—natural, inevitable, apolitical. But behind every “gain” is a wound. Behind every “opportunity” is a policy designed to starve the people and feed the bondholders. This is not recovery. It’s recolonization measured in basis points.

Now take Brazil. Reuters presents it as a safer bet—less volatile, more stable, “better regulated.” But this too is illusion. Brazil’s interest rate stands at 14.75%, one of the highest in the world. That’s not a sign of strength. It’s a beacon for carry trade vultures. Over $9 billion in speculative inflows entered the country this year, propping up the real while the working class starves. Over 33 million Brazilians face food insecurity. Inflation continues to erode wages. And agribusiness oligarchs dominate the economy while social movements like the MST fight to reclaim stolen land.

President Lula’s rhetorical alignment with sovereignty projects—such as his speech at the CELAC-China Forum—is real. But inside Brazil’s borders, capital continues to dominate the state. The class contradictions are unresolved. The economy is still under the spell of transnational finance. The Reuters article doesn’t mention this—not because it’s irrelevant, but because it’s dangerous to the narrative.

And then there’s Mexico. The article lauds its “macroeconomic discipline” and “strong peso,” but never mentions what props it up. Mexico is now the U.S.’s primary outsourcing hub under the USMCA. Agribusiness monopolies have recolonized its countryside, as we exposed in Corn, Capital, and Colonization. 63 % of U.S. vegetable imports now come from Mexico. But Mexico’s traditional diets, seed sovereignty, and agricultural self-sufficiency have been sacrificed to enforce intellectual property compliance for U.S. food conglomerates.

Reuters frames this as a win for investors. It quotes market analysts gushing about “nearshoring potential.” What it doesn’t say is that Mexican workers earn a fraction of their U.S. counterparts and are legally barred from meaningful unionization under threat of export restrictions. It doesn’t mention that Claudia Sheinbaum’s government has rejected U.S. military occupation in public while quietly enforcing U.S. trade dominance in private.

And what does the article leave out entirely? The Bioceanic Corridor—a 3,800-kilometer infrastructure project linking Brazil to Chile via Paraguay and Argentina. Built without IMF loans. Designed to bypass the Panama Canal and decouple from U.S. logistical chokeholds. This is a living example of multipolar planning, sovereignty in steel and concrete. But Reuters ignores it—because it reveals the lie at the heart of the diversification narrative.

They also ignore the trend of trade realignment across the Global South. Brazil, Argentina, and Bolivia are all shifting eastward—toward China, ASEAN, and the BRICS bloc. Reuters doesn’t say this, because it contradicts their premise that Latin America is still an empty vessel awaiting Western investment. It’s not. It’s a battleground—where competing visions of development are colliding.

Let’s be clear: when Reuters reports that “emerging market ETFs are seeing record inflows,” they are telling us that finance capital is on the march. And when they say that Latin America is “less risky” than Asia or Africa, they’re saying that the region has been successfully disciplined into obedience. Through debt. Through austerity. Through political capture. The “safety” they describe is just the absence of organized resistance. But that, too, is changing.

This isn’t a revival of Latin America. It’s the return of the imperial scavengers. They don’t bring industry. They don’t build sovereignty. They don’t invest in life. They invest in collapse. And they do it with glowing headlines, polished statistics, and weaponized truths. But we see through it. Because we are not watching the markets—we are watching the people. And the people are starting to rise.

III. The Recolonization Playbook: Empire’s Last Frontier

What Reuters calls “diversification” is not the opening of new frontiers—it is the final stage of imperial desperation. The headlines might say that Latin America is rising, but the truth is more insidious: this is not a new beginning; it is empire’s last gasp for survival. When Wall Street looks to the South, it isn’t seeking to invest in a vibrant market—it is seeking to extract what little remains before the system collapses entirely. Capital isn’t coming to build. It’s coming to harvest.

The financial flows pouring into Latin America are the last act of an empire that no longer produces value, but only consumes it. This is not “emerging markets” in the traditional sense—it is the last frontier of imperial finance, a zone where capital is allowed to extract, enslave, and rebrand the suffering of entire populations as “growth.”

The global financial system is built on extraction. But with the old colonial structures weakening, finance has been forced to reorient. It’s no longer about expanding markets. It’s about consolidating control. What we are seeing now is the final stage of this reconfiguration: **recolonization by financial capital**. And the vultures are circling Latin America because the region is weak. It has been drained, exploited, and neglected by imperial forces for centuries. But now, as Western markets collapse, it is being rebranded as a new investment frontier—only to be drained further.

  • The Rise of “Emerging Opportunity”: The “emerging” nature of these opportunities is a thin veil for the ongoing extraction. Reuters describes Latin America as “underexposed,” but this implies that the region has been untouched, unscarred, and unexploited. This is a lie. Latin America has been the site of centuries of colonial plunder, and its people have been fighting for sovereignty for just as long. What Reuters presents as a market opportunity is nothing but the continuation of a long history of imperial dominance.
  • The Myth of “Stability” and “Growth”: Brazil, Mexico, and Argentina are touted as stable, low-risk markets. But the “stability” they talk about is nothing but the economic submission of these nations to imperial dictates. In Brazil, Lula may have resisted U.S. dominance, but his government remains shackled by neoliberal fiscal constraints. In Mexico, the strong peso hides the reality of agricultural recolonization and dependency on U.S. markets. These nations are not immune to imperialism—they are just dressed in different clothes.
  • Capital’s “Flight” as Resistance: The article spins capital’s flight as a healthy diversification move. But this isn’t flight—it’s collapse management. Capital flees the imperial core because it can no longer find profitable returns in its own decaying systems. It is a sign of an empire in crisis, scrambling to secure the last remnants of its power by inserting itself into places where there is still some wealth to be looted. But this is not economic optimism; it is desperation in motion.
  • Financialized Imperialism: No More Flags, Just Funds: The techniques of imperial domination have evolved. Gone are the days of direct conquest with military flags. Today, it’s about portfolio management. BlackRock doesn’t invade with soldiers—it invades with spreadsheets. The military-industrial complex no longer depends on armies—it depends on financial flows. These financialized empires bypass the state’s regulatory mechanisms, capturing nations through debt, austerity, and currency manipulation.
  • Exposing the Charade of “Emerging Opportunity”: Reuters frames the influx of capital into Latin America as a natural part of the global market cycle. But the capital doesn’t enter because these markets are “underexposed.” It enters because they are vulnerable. The economic structure in place ensures that Latin American countries remain weak and dependent on imperial finance. This isn’t investment. It’s colonial looting, recast as economic growth.

The Role of the International Monetary Fund

The IMF is the puppet master behind much of this. When Reuters talks about “market access,” they’re not referring to open trade or fair competition. They are talking about the IMF’s control over Latin American economies. The Fund has made sure that these nations remain locked into cycles of debt, privatization, and austerity. Argentina is the perfect example. Milei’s neoliberal agenda is no surprise—it’s simply the latest phase of the IMF’s long-term structural adjustment programs that have ensured the country remains tethered to the imperial core.

Argentina’s “recovery” isn’t recovery at all. It’s liquidation. Austerity measures designed to benefit foreign creditors, like BlackRock, at the expense of public goods and services. When Reuters says that Argentina’s bonds have returned over 100%, they’re talking about the financial exploitation of a country left bleeding. When Milei lifted capital controls, he didn’t open the gates for investment—he handed the country’s assets to the global finance vultures. The real question isn’t whether Argentina’s dollar bonds have returned, but what was destroyed in the process.

Latin America’s Real Sovereignty Struggle

Let’s be clear. The financial flows to Latin America are not signs of its “emergence.” They are the latest chapter in the long history of exploitation. The real struggle here is not about yields or bond returns—it’s about sovereignty. The question is not whether Latin America is “emerging” as an investment opportunity, but whether it will ever be allowed to emerge as a sovereign, self-determined region.

What we’re seeing today in countries like Argentina, Brazil, and Mexico isn’t just financial colonization—it’s a direct battle over control of the region’s future. It’s a contest between imperial finance capital and the forces of sovereignty that are slowly awakening across the Global South.

While Wall Street sees Latin America as an “opportunity,” the people see it as a battleground. The financial flows described by Reuters are not about growth—they are about empire recalibrating itself for one final extraction. And in the shadows of this crisis, the resistance grows stronger.

IV. We Don’t Manage Collapse—We Organize Against It

Let’s not confuse capital’s desperation with our victory. The vultures circling Latin America are not proof of its resurgence—they are proof of empire’s decline. And the danger is this: that recolonization will be sold not as extraction, but as “recovery.” That investors will be framed as “partners,” and financial discipline as “reform.” If we don’t interrupt this narrative—forcefully, publicly, and across borders—we will find ourselves cheering the enclosure of the very futures we claim to defend.

What’s happening in Argentina, Brazil, and Mexico isn’t unique. It’s a regional theater in a global drama: the imperial system collapsing inward, cannibalizing its colonies and its core alike. The same mechanisms that gutted Detroit, privatized Puerto Rico, and bankrupted Greece are now being deployed across Latin America with surgical precision.

And the media is part of the machinery. Reuters, Bloomberg, the Financial Times—they don’t merely report the news. They manage perception. They engineer silence. They delete sovereignty from the ledger and replace it with yield. That’s not journalism—it’s counterinsurgency through information.

So what must we do? Not just analyze, but intervene. Not just publish—organize. From the barrios to the boardrooms, from the favelas to the finance halls, we must tear the veil from this recolonization campaign and expose it for what it is: the financial continuation of imperial warfare.

Tactical Commitments from the Core

  • Disrupt the Circuits of Extraction: Identify the institutional pipelines—BlackRock, Robeco, Allspring, Itau BBA, and others. Track their capital flows. Follow the pension funds, endowments, and tech platforms through which empire launders its investments. Disrupt them. Divest. Sabotage. Boycott. These firms don’t operate in secret—they operate in silence. Break it.
  • Weaponize Media Infrastructure: Challenge every imperial narrative—line by line, stat by stat. Call out the “attractive yields” for what they are: socially engineered famines. Turn their data into weapons. Build popular media—revolutionary, accessible, militant—that speaks across borders and class lines. Translate resistance into power.
  • Organize from Within Empire’s Belly: If you work in finance, in academia, in tech—use your position. Not to climb. Not to comply. But to sabotage. Turn the tools of empire against itself. Use insider knowledge to expose strategy. Use access to leak the truth. Refuse complicity.
  • Internationalize the Front of Resistance: Latin America doesn’t need saviors. It needs comrades. Link with movements fighting recolonization from within—MST in Brazil, the Indigenous Guard in Colombia, striking workers in Argentina. Don’t center yourself. Follow their lead. Fight like your own liberation depends on it—because it does.
  • Make Empire Unprofitable: The goal is not to out-debate capital. The goal is to choke it. Wherever they make money from collapse, we must organize to cut off their profits. Target firms profiting from privatization, hunger, evictions, and lithium theft. Name them. Shame them. Sabotage them. No peace for parasites.

There Is No Neutrality in a Dying Empire

We who live inside the imperial core have a choice. We can keep pretending we’re not implicated. That what happens in Buenos Aires or São Paulo is somehow distant. Or we can face the truth: that our pensions are backed by other people’s starvation. That our tech is built from stolen lithium. That our markets are stabilized by their austerity. And that our silence is complicity.

We must break ranks. Not in symbolic solidarity, but in structural defection. Turn against the bankers, the fund managers, the narrative clerks. Side with the peasant fighting eviction. The union resisting privatization. The worker blocking the port. This is not charity—it is class war. And the only thing worse than standing with the enemy is pretending you’re not part of the battlefield.

This Is the Line

Latin America is not a playground for Western capital. It is not a testing ground for investment schemes or a petri dish for technocratic fantasies. It is a crucible of resistance. From Bolivia’s MAS to Brazil’s landless brigades, from Colombia’s coca growers to Argentina’s strikers, the continent is alive with insurgency.

Reuters doesn’t want you to see that. It wants you to see tickers, trends, and trade flows. It wants you to forget the people. But we don’t forget. We resist. Because the vultures aren’t just circling the South—they’re circling everywhere. This is not about markets. It’s about power. Not about returns—but about survival.

We do not manage collapse. We organize against it.

Further Reading from Weaponized Information

Leave a comment

Website Powered by WordPress.com.

Up ↑