First Columbia, now Bolivia...

[Hutch]

...or what is going on in politics in South America?

CNN Article:http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/americas/12/19/bolivia.election/index.html

An Indian labor activist who advocates the distribution of Bolivia's natural gas revenue to the public, Morales rose from poverty and obscurity to become the leader of Bolivia's coca farmers.

OK, a man of the people, but some of his friends...

Morales, 46, is a friend and ally of Venezuela's outspoken leftist President Hugo Chavez and Cuban President Fidel Castro.

He came to prominence blasting U.S.-backed "neoliberal" economic policies that Bolivian leaders adopted in the 1980s -- policies he said do little to help the country's impoverished Aymara and Quechua Indian majority -- and defending impoverished coca growers against U.S.-funded eradication efforts.

Still, given the country's history, I wouldn't take long bets on his being in power very long:

Bolivia is one of the poorest and most politically turbulent countries in the region, with nearly 200 military coups in its history.

Still, Brazil has move left recently in their Presidential elections, we've already met Senor Hugo, and now a guy who wants to let the farmers grow coca plants to keep our druggies well-supplied-or so it appears to the horrified media.

Curious what the reaction (if any) is in South America. Patricio? Luciana?

 

[Cleon]

Venezuela, not Colombia.

Colombia is being run by a right-wing jackass named Alvaro Uribe.

 

[shecky]

Bolivia's coca stance is remarkably progressive and sure to chafe at the USA's butt. Wonder what kind of sabre rattling will ensue?

 

[Cleon]

I think it's starting to dawn on Washington that US control of South America is coming to a close. Between Chavez, Lula, and Morales, there's pretty widespread opinion in South America that US meddling is not appreciated. In Argentina, Nestor Kirchner recently announced that they'll be paying off their entire IMF debt.

What to expect:

Well, several years ago the US tried to pull a Pinochet in Venezuela--the coup failed, of course, and massive protests put Chavez back in. I think you can expect to see more attempts at coups; whether they'll be successful or not, I don't know--but they will be bloody. (Kissinger, Negroponte, and Co. might be older, but they're not dead.)

 

[Charlie Monoxide]

I'm weak on international politics (especially North/South America).

I had always thought the primary interest that the Americans had in SA (and central America), was to keep the commies out and eradicate the lucrative drug trade (as well as the organized crime aspect of the drug trade). And in a cynical way, Manifest Destiny.

I'm sure it's not this simple. Any comments would be enlightening ....

Charlie (fantisizing the Girl from Ipanema) Monoxide

 

[Cleon]

I'm weak on international politics (especially North/South America).

I had always thought the primary interest that the Americans had in SA (and central America), was to keep the commies out and eradicate the lucrative drug trade (as well as the organized crime aspect of the drug trade). And in a cynical way, Manifest Destiny.

I'm sure it's not this simple. Any comments would be enlightening ....

Charlie (fantisizing the Girl from Ipanema) Monoxide

South America is the source of lots of stuff. Cheap agricultural products, for one. Oil, for another. You may recall the Monroe Doctrine from history class--in a nutshell, it was a declaration that Europe was not to interfere in the Americas any longer. The subtext, especially as interpreted by Roosevelt I, was that the US was free to do so. As a result, US money and political influence has been hard at work in South America (as well as the Carribean and Central America) for about a century now.

 

[Luke T.]

I don't think recent events in Bolivia will affect the price of cocaine at the pump much.

 

[hammegk]

Legalize & tax solves a vast number of problems in both hemispheres.


As to our current lack of interest in Central & S. America, the mid-East & NK have the priorities at the moment. If things get too frisky south-of-the-border I foresee a change in that prioritization.

 

[Diamond]

How will you tax it if any schmuck with a greenhouse can grow it for themselves?

 

[rikzilla]

Democracy means you get the government that the majority wants...and the country deserves. Personally I think the drug war needs to end. Legalize and tax...heavily. Give the tax money to rehab and education/prevention programs. Every so often shake down manufacturers for tens of millions ala Phillip Morris.

Meddling in S. American politics is so 70's. We should leave them to the tender mercy of the worldwide open market economy. Going Marxist is hardly the way to success. As long as democracy itself is defended and preserved the people will hold their leadership accountable at the polls...eventually.

-z

 

[Grammatron]

How will you tax it if any schmuck with a greenhouse can grow it for themselves?

How many shmucks have a greenhouse?

 

[Morrison's Lament]

How will you tax it if any schmuck with a greenhouse can grow it for themselves?

Growing coca isn't very hard, but it's harder than growing weed and you need A LOT of it.

Making cocaine hcl from the plant matter... again, not that hard relatively speaking, but not something your average joe is going to start doing in the kitchen.

--- G.

 

[hammegk]

How will you tax it if any schmuck with a greenhouse can grow it for themselves?

Death penalty for illegal sales. Who cares what you do for yourself. And aren't grass, and coca plants, laughably outdated anyway what with the miracles of modern industry/chemistry/hydroponics?

 

[Ziggurat]

Well, several years ago the US tried to pull a Pinochet in Venezuela--the coup failed, of course, and massive protests put Chavez back in.

We didn't speak out against it, which was probably a mistake, but I'm not sure where you get the idea that we were actually behind it. There were enough Venezuelans who didn't like him to try a coup on their own. Hell, even with Pinochet, we may have helped him out, but it's rather hyping the CIA's effectiveness to think that it was our coup and not his. The CIA, frankly, just isn't that good. And it's gotten MUCH weaker since then on clandestine operations, so we're not likely to see much CIA backing of coups even if they wanted to.

 

[Hutch]

Venezuela, not Colombia.

"D'oh!!"

 

[Cleon]

We didn't speak out against it, which was probably a mistake, but I'm not sure where you get the idea that we were actually behind it.

The fact that Dear Leader officially recognized the "new" government within ten minutes of the coup occurring. That and the presence of certain individuals in the Bush administration responsible for similar coups in the past.

 

[Ziggurat]

The fact that Dear Leader officially recognized the "new" government within ten minutes of the coup occurring. That and the presence of certain individuals in the Bush administration responsible for similar coups in the past.

Seeing as how the coup itself and the afteraffects did NOT play out anything like previous CIA-sponsored coups, it still seems rather to suggest that we did NOT play Venezuela like we did previous South American hotspots - so again, do you have any actual evidence that we BACKED the coup? And remember, just knowing about it beforehand isn't the same thing.

 

[Cleon]

Seeing as how the coup itself and the afteraffects did NOT play out anything like previous CIA-sponsored coups, it still seems rather to suggest that we did NOT play Venezuela like we did previous South American hotspots - so again, do you have any actual evidence that we BACKED the coup? And remember, just knowing about it beforehand isn't the same thing.

Believe whatever you like, Ziggy.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Seeing as how the coup itself and the afteraffects did NOT play out anything like previous CIA-sponsored coups, it still seems rather to suggest that we did NOT play Venezuela like we did previous South American hotspots - so again, do you have any actual evidence that we BACKED the coup? And remember, just knowing about it beforehand isn't the same thing.

I dimly recall reading about some meetings going on prior to the coup attempt, where the rebel leaders or their friends were in meetings in the White House.

I may be mistaken, as South American politics are a big blur to me.

 

[Luciana]

.
Still, Brazil has move left recently in their Presidential elections, we've already met Senor Hugo, and now a guy who wants to let the farmers grow coca plants to keep our druggies well-supplied-or so it appears to the horrified media.

Curious what the reaction (if any) is in South America. Patricio? Luciana?

When Lula was elected, I read in the international press that he planned to build and atom bomb and would confiscate multinational companies. Therefore, I'm very skeptical of much of what I hear about Evo, because the media thrives on doomsday saying.

I did not vote for Lula, actually I can't wait to see him leave office, but never once I believed he'd be that radical.

Evo Morales said time and again that coca leaves have a traditional and legitimate use in the Colombian culture and that he wants to keep it; he also says he wants to offer incentive to coca farmer to plant something both profitable and legal.

I can't speak for the whole of South America, as those countries are so diverse. What I can say that the leftists who have been elected have all turned moderate and anyway they were hardly radicals. On the contrary, Evo Morales has said time and again that he wants a good relationship with the US. He also said he will protect private property. Lula, Brazil's President, has continued his predecessor's economic policies of neoliberalism, free trade, etc.

15% of Bolivia's GDP is in Brazilian hands. They cannot afford to act irresponsably. Look at Chavez, with all that boasting, he is not crazy enough to tear money apart, so commerce with the US hasn't diminished a single dollar. Kirshner is paying the IMF before the due date (so is Brazil, Argentina announced their move just a few days later).

Btw, it is not true that anti-americanism is the motto in South American elections. While there is always a minority that will put all the blame in the world in the US's shoulder (and, when that is not available, they blame Brazil), the matter is that people are too much worried with everyday concerns - jobs health, jobs, education, jobs... - that only concrete proposals will do. Anti-US rethoric can incense a political speech - and make no mistake, that's what the international press will highlight, in detriment of all other issues - but people have fallen for this diversionary ruse too many times to fall for it again.