Former Marxist revolutionary Daniel Ortega was headed back to power on Monday in a presidential election 16 years after Nicaragua’s voters ousted him to end a brutal civil war with U.S.-trained Contra rebels.
Ortega’s almost certain victory was a blow to Washington and reinforces an anti-U.S. alliance in Latin America led by Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.
Ortega, 60, has dropped the hard-line policies of his revolutionary past and campaigned on a center-left platform. He backs a free trade pact with the United States and says he has no interest in clashing with his old enemy.
He stopped short of claiming victory on Monday night, preferring to wait until final official results, but he said was ready to work with other parties to “eradicate poverty and reassure the private sector and international investors”
Many U.S. citizens fear Venezuela and this “Latin American alliance,” due to the so-called “anti-U.S.” sentiments coming from countries such as Venezuela. However, I think it is misleading to consider the sentiments “anti-U.S.” For example, Venezuelan president Chavez offered Oil to Katrina victims, and such. In reality, the peaceful country of Venezuela only opposes the neoliberal philosophy of the American government and mega-corporations, and the international policy of the American government, the IMF, the World Bank, etcetera.
I’m glad to hear Ortega say that he wants to “eradicate poverty.” However, history has shown Marxist and Communist governments have the same capability for oppression as child-killing Contras.
What do you think?
The neoliberalism policy of the US governments, GO has been highly debated these last years. Does neliberalism leads to improvements in poverty? Nothing is less sure.
I hope Ortega will not forget the writings of Keynes rather than Marx..
P.S. : when ortega says he wants to eradicate poverty, you can compare it with Chirac saying he wants to improve employements. We all want to “eradicate poverty” and to “improve employment”, isn’t? Is this politics?
People like you don’t realize how far behind African and South American countries are economically in comparison to the United States. Even if they had an 8% growth rate for the next fifty years, most of them would not catch up to the per capita GDP of the United States (assuming the US is growing at half that rate). It’s fine to have a “big heart” and to support causes, but be realistic.
If we want to salvage these countries, we’d wind up dumping more money into them than they are worth, which simply isn’t economically sound. And if you tell me this isn’t a matter of economics, it’s a matter of humility, I would gladly reply to that comment by saying the following: all humility is made possible by economics.
Of course, you can go on blaming the evil “mega-corporations” for the poverty in the world. Anyone with any background in economics has debunked that myth. Maybe the first step in preventing poverty is educating activists like that idiot Bono in simple economics? Maybe that’s the solution.
The countries are doomed to poverty and ignorance, deal with it. They are too ignorant to climb out of poverty, and that’s just fine with me.
My dear Adam,
well, I can tell you my master’s specialisation is development economics. I was graduated last June. And you know what is the most funny in your writings? Well our department is really linked with african issues (our senior economist goes every year in Burkina Faso, and we had a lecture from an old student of the university who is actually giving advices to an african government. He has taught us why african countries are so endebted, about structural adjustment and trade “agreement”). I refered to Keynes because it is highly probable that if internationa banks + international organisation would have paid more attention on the keynesian concept of “capacity of endebtement”, well, the world debt would have been less a burden for poor counries. But you skip this crucial subject about the “failures of the past” . Anyway I continue.
you write: “People like you don’t realize how far behind African and South American countries are economically in comparison to the United States.”
(By the way I am not americn, I m french)Wel, the subject of my master’ these was dealing with global inequality, so that I got some informations and knowledge about the degree of development of LAC and African countries. Thanks.
Second sentence:
“Even if they had an 8% growth rate for the next fifty years, most of them would not catch up to the per capita GDP of the United States (assuming the US is growing at half that rate).” What you are writing is greatly true and I call it the “mirage of relative versus absolute poverty”. If you are really interested about this issue, I recommend you a paper written by atkinson and brandolini (2004). They are the first authors (to my knowledge) who have aalysed the evolution of absolute inequality. Moreover, I also recommend you to have a look on the World bank report 2006 concerning Equity and development, as it is edited or supervised by one of the major reference in poverty, F. Bourguignon (who is also FRENCH).
I really laught about your development policy: “it doesn’t worth to help the developing countries. Rather send them some of our stars.”
My dear adam, I am so so sorry to read that.
WHEN WILL YOU UNDERSTAND THAT SOME STARS (MADONNA) are deeply used by the capitalist system i.e by her employees to go to poor countries and to give big marketing about the trip of Madonna with the poors. Madonna (might sings well or not) is a sex stars, a pure product from hollywood which has only one goal: cell more by any ways possible. The market likes now people who go to poor countries? It gives a better picture? well let s send our star there for a while. Second point, Madona is exactly the good example of capitalist society failure: never be satisfied and cell more and create demand everywhere. And i deeply can continue ours about failure of the capitalist system (environment, consummer society… even Rostow(1960) descirbes the ideal consumption society… I hate his view; see stiglitz for a popular criticism of globalization implemented by US governments)
Don’t you have better ways to develop? I answer for you: yes !!! And this time your are deeply right: EDUCATION. Man, that s the key !!!! It s so important !!! Oh and by the way, when you say: “The countries are doomed to poverty and ignorance, deal with it. ” well let me laugh very very loud. How many americans (from USA) barely know where France is located in the map, and let me ask you a question: how many times did your president bush leaves USA before he has been elected? Maybe maximum 5 times (that s because Texas is sooooo interesting) isn’t? Last of all about ignorance, there are thousands of african studends in europe who deeply participate to improve the general knowledge (in my master, they were maybe 10 africans, all of them with a better knowledge than what I consider the average american inhabitant). (by the way, statistics about poverty in USA (inhabitant below the poverty line) is also dramatic for the richest country of the world… and it seems that, in your view, ” it is just fine “…
well well well my dear ADAM, only one comment:
BRAVO !!!!
PS: will you be brave enought to publish this ?