Can someone explain to me the meaning of the Bolivian election?

[Doctor_J]

Does it, together with Hugo's immense popularity, a harbinger of a new wave of populism that will predominate the century? Do such leaders have a chance to "take over" *'s place in the world (or hemisphere) pecking order?

Or are these anomalies?

:shrug:

[Eric J in MN]

1. Latin America has elected lots of left-wing leaders from the 1970s

to the present.

The problem is how the US govt reacts.

In Nicaragua in the 1980s, there was a civil war funded by the Reagan Administration via the "Iran-Contra" scandal, against the will of Congress.

Eventually, people voted in a right-wing female president to end the war.

[ugarte]

2. It signals the failure of US style capitalism in Latin America

Despite what Bush and the neo-cons say, one model does not fit all.

[ieoeja]

15. Depends on what the defintion of "in" is.

If you mean US style capitalism's "use of Latin American resources for US capitalists" in Latin America, then yes. I believe we are seeing the beginning of the end of this.

If you mean US style capitalism "as it exists in the US being used" in Latin America, then no. I believe we are seeing the beginning of the beginning of this. Much of what Hugo Chavez introduced to Venezuela comes straight out of FDR's New Deal. And while conservatives have rolled back (too) much of the New Deal here in this country, the bedrock is still there. The only thing that kept the US economy through *'s administration is gov't spending on a large scale as private contribution to the economy is still not back to pre-millenium levels.

For centuries these countries had been the playground of imperialists and Laissez Faire oligarchists. During the Cold War they became a battleground between the extremes of Laissez Faire and Communism. With the USSR gone and the US in decline, they will now have a chance to make their own way. And the last 70 years have provided definitive proof of the Keynesian model for prosperity.

[RagingInMiami]

3. I think it's a backlash against bush

Traditionally, Latin American countries would be willing to play ball with the U.S. for trade and diplomatic reasons. And this usually came at the expense of their own people.

The phrase "go home, gringo" is frequently seen grafittied on walls down there.


But bush's arrogance was a little too much for them. I have a lot of family in Colombia, aunts and uncles who are economists, and they can't stand Bush although they loved Clinton.

South America is looking more towards Europe and China for their trade needs. This will go down in history as another bush blunder, in my opinion.

[applegrove]

5. I agree. They loved Clinton. Clinton loved their economists. It was

a two way street.

[1932]

29. It's a backlash against failures of Washington Consensus economics

And it's amazing how long it has taken. Those policies caused what everyone now refers to as "the lost decade" -- the 1980s -- when most of the developing world showed no growth in GDP and increasing poverty. It's amazing that those falures had to echo arround for 20 years before they finally resulted in countries like Bolivia electing progressive leaders.

[Warpy]

4. In Bolivia itself, probably not much

Bolivia has a great history of revolution as an integral part of its normal political process, and it hasn't been that unusual to have three different governments within two weeks.

However, the effect ouside Bolivia will be astounding. Just the fact that an Indio has been elected to the highest office has stunned the European ruling classes throughout South America. It's shown them it can be done, and will be done at some point. You can bet they are horrified. That he is also sounding very much like both Lula and Chavez (not to mention Castro) has sent an additional shock wave through the whole continent.

Expect to see him overthrown before he manages to get much done, especially since he has stated his intention to fight the DEA every step of the way and forbid them access to airspace in their coca eradication efforts. Every fat cat in South America will be willing to risk everything to oust him.

But it won't work. His election is giving too many campesinos hope. It can't be taken back. Eventually they know they will prevail.

That is the importance of his election.

[Cha]

12. Interesting..I hadn't read anything

about this..too much else going on for me. But, reading your post made me google it and I found this..


snips~

"As well as joining the new generation of left-wingers in power in Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay, Mr Morales would become the first wholly Indian president in Latin America. He is seen as representing the country's disenfranchised and impoverished Indian majority, which has felt left out of the wave of "neo-liberal" reforms by Bolivia's white and Creole elite. These reforms have included the privatisation of state industries and Bolivia's gas deposits, South America's second largest after Venezuela's."

"I challenge the United States to create a real alliance to fight narco-trafficking," he said, as farmers next to him chewed the plant. "This coca leaf ... has given birth to our movement. We have to produce coca for the local market. Zero cocaine ... but not zero coca."



http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=2427972005

[IndianaGreen]

6. The American empire is crumbling!

While the imperial troops are bogged down in Iraq, our beloved Emperor doesn't have enough troops to keep our colonies in line.

Don't fret, we will better off with a republic than with an empire!

[emlev]

7. There was a very good thread on this a few days ago, with link

Check and see if you can find it. I'm guessing it was Sunday. I'm sorry I don't remember the organization linked to.

[curt_b]

8. Knocking over Dominos in Latin America by Sarah Wagner

Here's a fairly long article from the progressive Venezuelanalysis.com posted in May 2005. Morales' perspective (and likely policies) are a bit more nuanced than most coverage suggests. No doubt it's another indication of progress for Latin American populism, but many indigenous and labor leaders have noted the need to keep pressure on Evo to oppose the neo-liberal agenda

"The Cold War is over, yet this battle between democracies continues. Since Mesa took office in 2003 in Bolivia there have been close to 900 (and counting) protests, and the direction the Andean nation will take is far from clear. Indications that Evo Morales is "the natural leader of Bolivia," in the words of Aruguipa and is ready to lead Bolivia are questionable. Morales and the MAS' wide-reaching social movement want to increase royalties on transnational corporations to 50% in addition to the 32% tax. However, Morales' recent discourses seem watered down and out of touch with the marches and the fiery protests of the people and the MAS leader's calls to end road blockades between principle cities and leading out of the country have not been heeded. This has not gone unnoticed. Natural leader or not, in the words of one MAS leader, Román Loayza, "the bases are by-passing us. We want to march for more royalties, but the people want nationalization. And for that we will struggle." Dionisio Nuñez, a MAS Congressman, concurs. "We are going to fight against the law," he affirmed. “The marches have to continue because in Congress not all the senators and deputies defend the people. Sometimes they defend the multinationals."

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=7969

[Polemonium]

9. For 25 years there has been no per/capita economic growth in

most of latin America. In general the shift to the left in latin America is just a reaction to 25 years of failed market driven economic policy. When multi-nationals take all your NR, and raw materials it's hard for an economy to grow (who knew).

Politics in Bolivia is an anomaly. I don't imagine the politically active population will give anyone much time to improve things before they are sent packing.

If Latin America was enjoying economic prosperity like their northern neighbors I imagine they too would be drifting into the un-compassionate right.

[rfkrfk]

10. this is meaningless to the average Bolivian

except coca chewing leaf will be cheaper

foreign companies will pay
bribe money to someone different

[High Plains]

13. Which is why they came out in record numbers to elect Morales?

He is promising a real change from the status quo.

Let's hope you are mistaken.

[Judi Lynn]

14. The average Bolivian has been the target of multinationals

and stretched beyond his ability to pay. They have been wildly misused by foreign interests.

It's obviously very serious. They are not a nation of idle, stupid coca leaf chewers, as some racists would have you believe.

Bolivia has seen a series of political upheavals, starting with a revolt against the privatization of water supplies by the U.S. Bechtel Corporation and the French utility giant, Suez de Lyonnaise des Eaux. The water uprising was sparked off when Suez announced it would charge between $335 and $445 to connect a private home to the water supply. Bolivia's yearly per capita gross domestic product is $915.

The water revolt, which spread to IMF enforced taxes and the privatization of gas and oil reserves, forced three presidents to resign. The country is increasingly polarized between its majority Indian population and an elite minority that has dominated the nation for hundreds of years. Six out of 10 people live below the poverty line, a statistic that rises to nine in 10 in rural areas.
(snip/...)

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=HAL20051124&articleId=1322

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The elder _Bush has been firmly connected with Bechtel. Privatization of the natural resources allowing people like _Bushes to bleed Bolivians mercilessly was NOT accepted. It's a goddamned shame they had to be abused to the point revolt was necessary.

[rman]

17. If Chavez can do it, why not Morales?

Improve like for the masses, that is.

[rfkrfk]

21. I am going to huff and puff and nationalize...

the oil industry.

what usually happens, they only say thay,
and renegotiate the contracts

the problem is, when a peasant sees one oil or gas well,
they think everyone will be rich. does not work that way

a few jobs, plus the gov't gets its piece of the action

things could work out differntly, though I don't predict that

[rman]

22. They think no-one will be poor, and it does work like that.

(poor as in, dying of hunger or decease)

As said, it does work like that, in Venezuela (and in Cuba).

Don't let anti-Venezuelan US press be your only source of information regarding Venezuela.


US Media's Anti-Chavez Bias
Framing Venezuela
By JUSTIN DELACOUR
http://www.counterpunch.org/delacour06012005.html


Venezuela’s Poor 33% Richer Thanks to Social Programs
http://www.voltairenet.org/article125651.html


http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/

[JPZenger]

11. Even pro-American politicians are distancing themselves from Bush

Every politician overseas wants to distance themselves from Bush. The ones who run the most anti-American campaigns appear to be doing the best, such as in Bolivia. Another politician in Bolivia who had been pro-American made it a big point in a speech to say that he does not listen to the American Embassy. He received a large ovation from a conservative audience.

[bemildred]

16. Nobody knows.

You can predict that heaven and earth will be moved in the attempt to destabilize Mr. Morales government, war seems very possible, but it's a new situation. I can see certain analogies with the rise of Mr. Chavez in Venezuela though. And the one thing that seems unassailable is that if Mr. Morales succeeds in taking power and holding it, and ruling in Bolivia, you can kiss US hegemony in Latin America goodbye, such of it as remains after 5 years of Bushite rule.

[Doctor_J]

18. Yeah, I am wondering if the REST of the hemisphere

will begin to align more with Morales and Chavez than with Bush - which will other S. American leaders support when Smirk begins his inevitable sabre-rattling?

[bemildred]

19. The Latin Americans have a common interest in their own autonomy.

So I would expect them to support each other in that, except the few left-over stooges here and there like in Paraguay. Even Colombia seems to be becoming more independent of US policy and money. Within that, Latin Americans have their own internal distinctions of power, class, nationality, and ethnicity, and their internal politics in that regard have been and will be as you would expect anywhere else.

Mr. Morales is like Mr. Chavez in that he is not from the ruling classes, and he is actively an advocate for the poor, a populist. Evo's situation seems somewhat precarious to me, but he has certain advantages, too, the Bolivian military has so far been unwilling to support extra-constitutional action, and his popular mandate is unquestionable, at least for now. I expect the first thing we will see from the Bushites is some sort of propaganda campaign attacking Evo's legitimacy as a ruler, and attempts at economic subversion.

[librechik]

20. why bother? wait around a few minutes and

the government will change.

(Old Bolivian joke)

seriously, this is one of those great times in Latin American history when an "indio" manages to get into a position of power. Who knows how it will go? Doubtless there are forces in place already to bring him down. Yet he has a lot of support from the locals.

We must wait and see. Is there a rising tide of government "for the people, by the people?"

wouldn't that be great?

[TriMetFan]

23. If the United States is not careful.....

Mexico will be heading that way.

[Doctor_J]

27. This is what I am wondering about

if the SA populism will spread to the North, or if our right-wing government will manage to inflict its will in a Southerly direction. As pointed out by mountebank below, SA should tend more naturally toward an egalitarian populist system, and I wonder if Venezuela and Bolivia are harbingers of a movement that will eventually prevail throughout the Americas.

[Nimrod2005]

24. Yes, it means more troubles in our backyard

:cry:

[1932]

28. Trouble? Strong middle classes everywhere isn't bad for the middle class

in the US.

Show some class solidarity!

[Judi Lynn]

25. It's time Latin America and the Caribbean finally found the strength

to shake off the exploitation and bullying from American right-wing Presidents and formed their own common organization. They've been run over by American greed and flat-out oppression. It's time our Republican Party started butting out of their affairs.

It's shameful to have raised so many ignorant Republican citizens who see domination of human beings as their natural right. Idiots.

[mountebank]

26. It also signifies decreasing U.S. ability to pull off outrageous coups.

While they certainly tried in Venezuela in 2002 and barely pulled it off in Haiti, I think access to information and media are making the outrageous coups of the past less and less viable in Latin America today. And this is really what was needed to keep things in lines with U.S. interests. The IMF has replaced the coup-leaders of old, and it's a powerful institution for sure, but not as powerful as military force. Therefore, I think we are seeing a move not just toward the left economically but toward less authoritarian gov't in general (though some may argue with respect to Chavez - and I think, too, that he deserves close scrutiny in this respect). Things will swing left for now, and if U.S. meddling can be kept to a minimum in the future, I imagine they will swing back toward the middle eventually and find a more harmonious balance nearer the center, though certainly much to the left of where the U.S. would like Latin America to be. Considering the economic disparities and poverty, a more socialist system makes perfect sense - U.S.-style capitalism makes no sense - and so I think we are seeing a real paradigm shift, a return to sanity, and a more realistic and democratic system taking hold in Latin America. The little experiment of U.S.-style capitalism, liberalization, and privatization is over. It's obviously not working.