Pay Attention
“Thousands of Venezuelans have received free surgery through the program, and thousands of Cuban doctors are working in Venezuela.”
While we're off fighting in Iraq and bartering with China and sending nickels to Africa, Latin America has been changing. To those unaware of politics south of the border, a trend has emerged and will continue: a giant leap leftward. While this is a small step for Marxism and one giant leap for the poor, the ramification will be long and deep. If you don’t believe me, then let’s talk in 2010 after you take your sweet spring break trip to Cancun and let me know if it was as killer as your trip was this year.
Do yourself a favor and read every word of this essay by Gavin Esler. The issues he raises may not sound the alarm bells now, but again, in 2010, the South American political landscape will look very unfamiliar. Or maybe familiar again:
While many economies have been roaring ahead in Latin America, there is still a giant leap of a divide between the rich and the poor. Politicians, like those above (with the exception of Chile’s president), rally their support by blaming American involvement and investment on their soil. It’s no mystery that blaming someone is an easy way to be popular.
State ownership and allocation of resources will only continue and who knows how elections in Peru, Nicaragua, and Mexico will turn out. But, if they happen like those of Venezuela and Bolivia, America needs to watch out. What if there were a Latin American Union with a shared set of ideals that closes doors on US businesses and profits? Latin American has been a faithful trading partner and sphere of influence since we stole part of Mexico and called it Texas. Losing it as such an ally would have further reaches than my semi-educated self can discuss in this essay. Just because it can’t commit billions of dollars and thousands of troops to a war on terror is no reason to ignore it.
We clearly don’t need to launch preemptive strikes on countries like Uruguay or invade Venezuela and its 15 Russian helicopters to make sure everyone stays our friend. The people have voted in fair and democratic elections. The poor have come from the slums and the mountains and voted for the candidate who promises to help them, even if that candidate pointed his or her finger northward in accusation. I’m not saying we need to send secret marketers to those countries either, spreading the gospel of capitalism like Mormons on bikes. But, we do need to take notice and be able to remain in peaceful coexistence with those who think differently.
While we were sleeping, a revolution was stirring…
While we're off fighting in Iraq and bartering with China and sending nickels to Africa, Latin America has been changing. To those unaware of politics south of the border, a trend has emerged and will continue: a giant leap leftward. While this is a small step for Marxism and one giant leap for the poor, the ramification will be long and deep. If you don’t believe me, then let’s talk in 2010 after you take your sweet spring break trip to Cancun and let me know if it was as killer as your trip was this year.
Do yourself a favor and read every word of this essay by Gavin Esler. The issues he raises may not sound the alarm bells now, but again, in 2010, the South American political landscape will look very unfamiliar. Or maybe familiar again:
- Daniel Ortega, the Sandanista who was deposed under the Reagan administration by American-funded Contras (although he was technically succeeded by a democratically elected president) may very well get democratically elected again. Talk about a comeback.
- While Hugo Chavez may not be buddies with Pat Robertson, he continues to get high ratings from Venezuelans and is now expanding his goodwill missions to 11 other countries via medical campaigns to the rural and indigenous poor. Something like that makes me want to vote socialist. (FYI: The program in Mexico may be connected to a socialist candidate for that country’s next presidency.)
- Mr. Chavez has also ordered 15 helicopters (3 of which have been delivered) in order to “protect against an American invasion.”
- AND, Mr. Chavez continues to declare some privately foreign owned oil fields illegal, and then take them into state control, trying to grow Venezuela into the world’s largest oil producer. AND OPEC is having their annual meeting in Caracas (that’s the capital of Venezuela, for those of you who didn’t take Spanish I).
- Chile elected its first female president in January, Michelle Bachelet, who was considered the left-of-center candidate.
- Peru could very well elect Ollanta Humala on Sunday, who is campaigning on a platform to restrict foreign investment in Peru.
- Bolivia’s president, Evo Morales, wants to both legalize the crop that is the main ingredient in cocaine and nationalize the country’s natural resources.
While many economies have been roaring ahead in Latin America, there is still a giant leap of a divide between the rich and the poor. Politicians, like those above (with the exception of Chile’s president), rally their support by blaming American involvement and investment on their soil. It’s no mystery that blaming someone is an easy way to be popular.
State ownership and allocation of resources will only continue and who knows how elections in Peru, Nicaragua, and Mexico will turn out. But, if they happen like those of Venezuela and Bolivia, America needs to watch out. What if there were a Latin American Union with a shared set of ideals that closes doors on US businesses and profits? Latin American has been a faithful trading partner and sphere of influence since we stole part of Mexico and called it Texas. Losing it as such an ally would have further reaches than my semi-educated self can discuss in this essay. Just because it can’t commit billions of dollars and thousands of troops to a war on terror is no reason to ignore it.
We clearly don’t need to launch preemptive strikes on countries like Uruguay or invade Venezuela and its 15 Russian helicopters to make sure everyone stays our friend. The people have voted in fair and democratic elections. The poor have come from the slums and the mountains and voted for the candidate who promises to help them, even if that candidate pointed his or her finger northward in accusation. I’m not saying we need to send secret marketers to those countries either, spreading the gospel of capitalism like Mormons on bikes. But, we do need to take notice and be able to remain in peaceful coexistence with those who think differently.
While we were sleeping, a revolution was stirring…
Comments (2)
8:01 AM
Sam,
I read the article by Gavin Esler. Impressed by his ability to simply state complex issues and very dissappointed by what seems to be an obvious bias. I have not read other articles by him so I have no basis of criticizing his reporting in whole.
I was wondering what you refer to in this line from your article, "While this is a small step for Marxism and one giant leap for the poor, the ramification will be long and deep." What is the one giant leap for the poor and the ramification?
Matt
10:47 AM
Great question, Matt. What is happening in Latin America could go in several different directions, all effecting the US and other countries in very different ways.
I feel that the 'giant leap' for the poor is that their voice is being heard, or rather, some of their immediate concerns are being addressed. Sadly, I fear that these concerns are being addressed by corrupt politicians, capitalizing on sensationalism and sympathy in order to get power. This is why socialism has never worked. While it looks great on paper, corrupt individuals take advantage of people and the system is no better than any other system once it has been corrupted. However, capitalism, with its private ownership, is usually able to survive corruption. However, the fact that Chavez is giving medical care to the rural poor is another giant leap. Previously, these indigenous people had no access to health care. Even if the motives turn out to be corrupt, people are able to better their lives.
The ramifications are myriad of social programs, and as I just listed, corruption is very rampant and again negatively affects the poor in a socialist, state-ownership government. Likewise, if a major Latin American country, or even the whole continent were closed to American investment and enterprise, many companies would feel these effects. Imagine if Marriott or McDonalds had to close its hotels and restaurants in Latin America because the state decided to own these entities (this is happening with oil fields in Venezuela).
Therefore, it is important to keep an eye on what is happening around the world. While the poor are receiving help, it is at the hands of socialist politicians, who may use their popularity to ultimately negatively affect their citizens.
Post a Comment