« BACK TO FORUM
Moderators:
AminaYasmine, Liamjod, mnopq
 Author |
 Post
|
 |
|
Issy
Joined: Dec 5, 2006
Posts: 2
Poster Rank:
Tongue-tied
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male & 25
Country: Ireland
Province/State: Wicklow
City: Bré
|
Evo Morales at the World Social Forum!
February 1, 2007 - 06:01 AM
|
|
I recently read a speech given by Evo Morales to the afore mentioned WSF (you and find it at http://www.axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/article_23847.shtml ) which summed up pretty well the way things seem to be going throughout Latin America; where we are finding countries are electing leftist leaders who are pledging to give countries back to the people by nationalizing industry and resources.
What I'm wondering is this;
Granted this is not a new phenomenon and there have been attempts in the past by Latin American countries to move towards becoming more Socialist states which were ruthlessly suppressed by CIA sponsored mercenary armies. And if you take recent reports of U.S troop build up in the area in countries like Paraguay its obvious that U.S foreign policy is still as hegemonic as ever but it doesn't seem to be working anymore. At the height of the Cold War Evo Morales would never have been elected and Hugo Chavez would have died in his crib, but this isn't happening, and these leaders are being elected in Latin America, and to some extent in other parts of the world Spain, Ukraine etc. My question is this, what has changed on the world stage that this now seems to be the trend? and, is there hope yet for countries elsewhere i.e. Africa, Asia etc.?
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
mnopq
Joined: Dec 20, 2005
Posts: 134
Poster Rank:
Chatterbox
User is
Offline
 Virtual Volunteer
Gender: Male
Country: Egypt
Province/State: Al Qahirah
City: Al Qahirah
|
Re: Evo Morales at the World Social Forum!
February 5, 2007 - 11:12 AM
|
|
IssI wrote:
My question is this, what has changed on the world stage that this now seems to be the trend? and, is there hope yet for countries elsewhere i.e. Africa, Asia etc.?
Cold War divided the world largely into two camps (and the non-aligned countries brought together by Tito, Nasser and Nehru).
Yes, perhaps Morales wouldnt make it to the top then, or maybe he would, given enough support from whichever of camps. Many countries during the cold war directed substantial amount of their resources towards militarization and underlying sectors of industries. Freedom was a rare word and pronounced with much care. In principle, back then any kind of action of a government could be justified by giving the excuse of having a real danger in face of either Sovets or Americans (a nuclear war). Hence, all opposition and any possible insurgency inside countries was being put down. And dominant were mostly not a chain of countries like now but mostly one or another - the US or Soviets.
Alliances would NOT be possible to make based on oil, forestry or any other commodity or good. The danger of a nuclear war swept everyone blind.
Morales came to power thanks to Chavez, because Chavez tries to build up an alternative to American hegemony in the region - Bolivarian revolution. But this is done largely based on oil-rich Venezuelan resources and aims at having an economic and political counterweight to the North Americans. There is no common threat, although Chavez's maniacal militirization at the expense of Russians is still making world leaders frown.
Thats the difference: common threat was there then and no economic or other long-living non-military alliances could be formed if one of Cold War superpowers didnt allow it (and they didnt by far and large).
Nowadays, in the absence of a common threat and "proliferation" of democracies coupled with lowering tax barriers and accelerated globalization, countries have other priorities than during the Cold War.
It's at least my opinion.
Some info about Morales and Bolivia's currentpolitical situation can be read on The Economist.
H.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Merlyn
Joined: Sep 6, 2006
Posts: 13
Poster Rank:
Soft-spoken
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 25
Country: Sudan
Province/State: Al Khartum
City: Khartoum
|
Re: Evo Morales at the World Social Forum!
February 7, 2007 - 01:59 PM
|
|
Cold war was a totally unique experience to practice the medival idea of European "balance of power."
It was the balance that kept the world running, albeit on a high-voltage cable.
Most of what you see as independent and sometimes even charismatic leaders in third world countries is aresult of the globalization. It affects all and everywhere. A catastrohpe in Cancun will affect villagers in Aydarabad...
Teh globalization made it possible to have economic and other cooperations and leveragin on those some emerging leaders, who would otherwise stay unnoticed and dispossessed by their countries.
This post was edited on: 2007-02-07 at 01:59 PM by: elemental
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
|
Display posts from:
|
« BACK TO FORUM
|
Forum Jump:
|
All times are GMT-05:00
|
» Check that you are logged in!
You cannot create new threads in this forum
You cannot post replies in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot edit/delete your posts in this forum
|
|
Administrators:
Liamjod
Moderators:
AminaYasmine, Liamjod, mnopq
|
|
Home
Community
