E-mail
Print
Counter-revolution in Bolivia
Crisis also an opportunity
By Nathan Johnson
The U.S. recently suspended Bolivia’s trade benefits, giving Bolivians even more reason to break with neo-colonialism.
Venezuela has attracted attention for the substantial reforms taking place there as well as the socialist rhetoric of Hugo Chávez. Meanwhile, Bolivia has, until recently, flown practically under the radar, while turning just as far left as Venezuela.
In 2005, Evo Morales was democratically elected as the first indigenous president of Bolivia, under the Movement for Socialism party. Since then, wealthy business leaders and their respective politicians have offered their resistance to significant reforms, including land redistribution, which have empowered the working class and bettered the lives of the nation’s poor.
The counter-revolutionary efforts of Bolivia’s wealthy elite turned violent, as Democracy Now! reports, “Dozens of people have been killed this month in unrest over attempts by oil-rich provinces to declare autonomy.” Morales quickly expelled the U.S. ambassador, for instigating with the opposition and thereby destabilizing the rule of law. In solidarity, Venezuela also sent their U.S. ambassador packing, after a U.S. coup plot was discovered aiming to depose democratically elected Hugo Chávez. The Bush administration had previously failed to oust Chávez in a 2002 coup attempt.
The United States has a long history of interfering in the internal affairs of Latin America, extending further back than the Monroe Doctrine and Roosevelt Corollary. This provocation has led to popular movements and the spread of socialist thinking through recent times. What is remarkable is that in contrast to the violence employed by the United States and its chosen lap-dog regimes, the socialist process in Venezuela and Bolivia is occurring quite peacefully and democratically by contrast.
However, when the business elite maneuvers a counter-revolution against the democratic will of the majority, violence erupts and it then becomes necessary to call out the military to restore order. As President John F. Kennedy once said, “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible [the business elite] will make violent revolution inevitable.”
The United States’ ruling class does not care that a landslide 67 percent of Bolivian voters approved of Evo Morales’ mandate in a recall referendum in August of this year. What it cares about is protecting its investments. If this entails overthrowing a democracy, so be it; that did the trick when the CIA helped Chilean dictator Pinochet come to power.
Morales has been doing everything in his power to avoid violence, including participation in a summit with leaders of other regional countries. However, the violence continues. In the latest conflict, an additional 18 pro-Morales supporters were killed. Morales will have to start using stronger force against the violent opposition, because with every innocent death it becomes increasingly clear that negotiation is not an option.
There never can be any satisfactory negotiation between the working class and owning class when the class-struggle erupts into open warfare. A slogan from the 1968 Paris uprising explains, “Those who make revolutions by halves do but dig themselves a grave.” In such a time of conflict, the best defense is to be on the offense and accelerate the revolutionary process.
In fact, the United States recently just suspended Bolivia’s trade benefits, giving Bolivians even more reason to break with neo-colonialism and predatory capitalism. The United States claims that Bolivia hasn’t upheld its end of the bargain in fighting the war on drugs. At the same time, Columbia, the “Israel of South America,” receives the most material aid from the United States, while at the same time having the worst drug record. It’s clear the real reason for suspending trade benefits is to get back at Morales for shaming the United States by dismissing its ambassador.
Just as NAFTA and other “free-trade” legislation hurts the economies of Latin American countries, thereby forcing impoverished Latinos to immigrate to the United States, those disastrous policies also incite poor South Americans to enter licentious industries for their livelihood. Alienated Americans get their escapist drugs via the alienated labor of Latin Americans. Socialists in Bolivia and across the world are working to end alienation and the class society responsible for it.
> Comments
HK on Oct 08, 2008 at 01:20 PM:
I have a question. What will all of these socialists in South America do to the American economy?
According to a statistic I saw if everyone in the world had the standard of living of an average American we would need to move onto six planets. Now our high standard of living is partially due to things like NAFTA and free trade. So if socialists in South America undo free trade that will mean that our standard if living will most likely decrease. No thank you but I don't want South American socialists ruining our economy when it is already faltering. Chavez and Morales need to be couped.
HK on Oct 08, 2008 at 01:26 PM:
Oh and BTW if a democracy votes to steal other peoples property like what the Venezualans or more particularly Chavez did to Exxon-Mobil then their democracy needs to be shut down.
Johanan on Oct 11, 2008 at 09:05 PM:
Just because the majority of a people in a country support stealing doesn't make it right.