Text 10163, 148 rader
Skriven 2005-03-23 00:03:00 av THURSTON ACKERMAN (1:123/140)
     Kommentar till en text av STEPHEN HAYES
Ärende: family.debate: Does t 1/2
=================================
SH>* Forwarded (from: DEBATE_FMY) by Stephen Hayes using timEd/2 1.10.y2k.
SH>* Originally from family.debate@family-list.org (8:8/2) to debate3.
SH>* Original dated: Sat Mar 19, 06:44

SH>From: family.debate@family-list.org(family.debate)
SH>To: debate3@family-bbs.org
SH>Reply-To: family.debate@family-list.org

SH>From: "Steve Hayes" <khanyab@lantic.net>

SH>excerpted from Venezuela News Roundup - March 14, 2005.

SH>Summary:

SH>An excellent [Op-Ed] in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer criticizes the US's
SH>support of democracy throughout the world. According to [the column], while
SH>US praises the peaceful demonstrations in Lebanon asking for the withdrawal
SH>Syrian troops, it remains silent on the democratic movements in Venezuela an
SH>Bolivia. Unlike the situation in the Middle East, Johann Hari writes, "The
SH>neoconservatives' warm words about democracy are sent into the deep freezer
SH>when it comes to Bolivia, or any other Latin American country that has the
SH>temerity to ask for democratic control of its own resources and of corporati
SH>operating within their borders," such as Venezuela under President Chavez. T
SH>author concludes that what the US really wants in terms of freedom is in fac
SH>"a pallid semi-democracy conditional upon a willingness to serve U.S. corpor
SH>and strategic interests."

SH>Seattle Post-Intelligencer - Mar 13, 2005

SH>U.S. PUSHES STYLE OF DEMOCRACY THAT SUITS ITS PURPOSES

SH>by Johann Hari

SH>There are two democratic earthquakes happening right now. You've probably he
SH>about the "Cedar revolution" in Lebanon but have you heard about the watery
SH>revolt in Bolivia? These countries are 7,000 miles and a mental universe apa
SH>but taken together they reveal basic truths about the nature of American pow
SH>- and about the world we share.

SH>You won't find many people eager to talk about both these rebellions.

SH>The Bush administration and its cheerleaders are very happy to talk about
SH>Lebanon, where a huge popular movement has spontaneously arisen to demand an
SH>end to the 29-year Syrian occupation. The Bush message is clear. See? We tol
SH>you Arabs wanted to be free and Iraq would begin a "domino effect" for
SH>democracy throughout the region. The Iraq war has blasted a hole in the Arab
SH>Berlin Wall. Now Arabs are beginning to stream through, demanding throughout
SH>the region that their governments answer to them.

SH>The opponents of the Bush world-view have been cautious or silent about this
SH>"ripple of change" (copyright British Prime Minister Tony Blair). Some have
SH>even sneered, claiming that any change will simply risk restarting the Leban
SH>civil war or reactivate Arab "tribalism."

SH>By contrast, left-wing campaigners are eager to talk about the rebellion
SH>erupting in Bolivia, a small, bitterly poor, landlocked country in South
SH>America. It has technically been a democracy since 1982, but in practice the
SH>Bolivian government has not been accountable to its people.

SH>No: It has been subject to the undemocratic demands of the U.S. government,
SH>to massive corporations, and their proxies, the International Monetary Fund
SH>World Bank. For example, the U.S. demands that - in the name of the "war on
SH>drugs" - Bolivia destroy the coca crops of its peasants, one of the few sour
SH>of income for more than 5 million poor Bolivians. Or, in another example, th
SH>World Bank ordered the Bolivian government to sell its water supplies to
SH>Bechtel, a Californian multinational, even though they increased water bills
SH>as much as 200 percent - in a country where thousands of children die every
SH>year because they don't have access to clean water.

SH>But then - in 2000 - something remarkable happened. The Bolivian people rose
SH>and expelled Bechtel from the country, keeping their water supply under
SH>democratic control. Over the past week, the Bolivian people have risen again
SH>They want to be allowed to grow coca without American interference, includin
SH>yes - for the huge global market in recreational drugs.

SH>And they want the massive (mostly U.S.) multinationals operating within thei
SH>borders to pay 50 percent corporation tax - the same level of tax that poor
SH>Bolivians pay. The rebellion has been so popular that the president, Carlos
SH>Mesa, has resigned.

SH>This time, the roles are reversed. The left is eager to speak while the Bush
SH>are silent. The neoconservatives' warm words about democracy are sent into t
SH>deep freezer when it comes to Bolivia, or any other Latin American country t
SH>has the temerity to ask for democratic control of its own resources and of
SH>corporations operating within their borders.

SH>Indeed, the Bush administration actually tried to destroy the democratically
SH>elected government of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela in 2000 for just this kind of
SH>anti-corporate policy.

SH>So what can we learn from this Tale of Two Revolutions? The most important
SH>lesson is that there are such things as universal values. It is a natural hu
SH>desire to want to live in a free, self-determining democracy.

SH>Lebanon and Bolivia have totally different histories and totally different
SH>intellectual heritages but both want to be democracies. So it's not right to
SH>respond to neocon rhetoric about "ending tyranny" and "spreading democracy t
SH>the darkest corners of the Earth" by howling that this belief is "utopian."

SH>But - the second crucial lesson - nor is it right to take them at their word
SH>Bolivia - and the wider U.S. strategy in Latin America - reveals the limits
SH>the "freedom" the U.S. government wants to spread. Let's look at what
SH>neoconservative "freedom" does not include. It doesn't include freedom from
SH>torture. The less-than-White House is knowingly handing suspects over to
SH>torture in Egypt, Uzbekistan and elsewhere.

SH>Nor does "freedom" mean that a democracy should be allowed to control its ow
SH>economy and resources, even to the limited extent we enjoy in Europe. In Ira
SH>the democratically elected government - put in office with stunning courage
SH>the Iraqi people - will have to hand over its economic policies (including i
SH>tax rates) to the International Monetary Fund for the next decade. If they
SH>refuse - or defy the demands of their new masters, Bolivia-style - the
SH>"international community" will reverse the cancellation of Saddam's debt and
SH>slap a $101 billion bill on the Iraqi table.

SH>It goes on: "Freedom" doesn't even mean more countries adopting U.S.-style
SH>capitalism. The model of "democracy" spread by the Bush administration is fa
SH>more extreme than the capitalism that Americans practice at home (which is
SH>itself the most extreme in the democratic world). In the United States, 85
SH>percent of water is owned by public utilities yet the United States demands
SH>other countries privatize their supply completely.

SH>So what does the Bush administration mean when it says it wants to promote
SH>"freedom?" In reality, what it wants is a pallid semi-democracy conditional
SH>upon a willingness to serve U.S. corporate and strategic interests. In a "fr
SH>country, you must allow the IMF and World Bank, in effect, to run your econo
SH>You must enforce the "war on drugs." You must privatize your entire public
SH>sphere. You must accept massive inequalities in wealth. But you will be allo
SH>to pick your own local administrator to implement these policies. When it co
SH>to anything outside the U.S. conditions - religious rules, say, or women's
SH>rights - you will be allowed to decide for yourselves.

SH>But if you push this democracy lark too far - as the people of Venezuela did
SH>by trying to control their own oil and impose restrictions on corporations -
SH>you will be crushed, and a more corporate-friendly viceroy will be installed
SH>for you to approve.

SH>There are some countries in the world so locked in tyranny that this
SH>American-imposed model of quasi-freedom is a significant advance on the stat
SH>quo. Having some say over some issues - however unacceptably limited - is mu
SH>better than living under Saddam's genocidal dictatorship, for example. But i
SH>most other circumstances - and eventually, as it develops, in the Arab world
SH>itself - the very same model will be hideously regressive. This complexity
SH>doesn't lend itself to scabrous polemics - but it is the truth.
>>> Continued to next message
---
 þ SLMR 2.1a þ Remember your relatives had no choice in the matter eithe
 * Origin: Try Our Web Based QWK: DOCSPLACE.ORG (1:123/140)