Resulta que empezamos el mes con los últimos ramalazos de aquella masacre en Porvenir, Pando, ocurrida un 11 de septiembre y que la prensa internacional ha hecho muy poco por destacar. Decía en este blog el 4 de diciembre que por fin la comisión investigadora de aquellos hechos luctuosos nominada por UNASUR y liderada por el abogado argentino Rodolfo Mattarollo le hacia entrega de su informe al presidente. En el informe se decía claramente lo que todos sabíamos y la oposición boliviana de ultraderecha se negaba a reconocer. En breve, no existió enfrentamiento entre dos grupos armados sino una cacería de campesinos indígenas por parte de grupos cívicos de Pando ligados y organizados por la prefectura liderada por Leopoldo Fernández. http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/spanish/latin_america/newsid_7763000/7763930.stm
Es ésta la noticia del mes y del año, pues los acontecimientos de septiembre y la violencia desatada en el oriente boliviano representan sin ninguna duda el momento más oscuro de la gestión de Evo Morales y el peor ejemplo de violencia desde el octubre negro del 2003 que se denominó como ‘la guerra del gas’. La tan rumoreada guerra civil no se llegó a producir sino que la paciencia interminable del gobierno y la intervención de UNASUR, así como la expulsión del país del embajador estadounidense Philip Goldberg que alentaba a la oposición, tuvieron como resultado una pacificación rápida de las poblaciones afectadas y un fracaso rotundo de la estrategia golpista de la ultraderecha de la que aún no se ha restablecido.
La segunda noticia de importancia este mes ha sido el trabajo de la justicia boliviana que por fin ha empezado a arrestar a aquellos que instigaron y participaron en la violencia organizada para intentar derrocar al gobierno más popular de la historia republicana del país. Por fin!! Pudo decir la población mayoritariamente apoyando a los procesos legales que tienen que acabar con la impunidad en el país. Han sido más de tres meses de aquellos hechos y la idea de que Leopoldo Fernández y sus secuaces vayan a pasar la navidad en la cárcel es algo que nadie hubiera imaginado meses atrás. Por fin, grita la población, pero no la minoría opositora que aún declara a Leopoldo como un perseguido político y mártir de su causa política y que tiene la capacidad mediática de hacer resonar sus rebuznos en la mayoría de periódicos y canales de televisión que no hacen sino repetir las mismas mentiras.
Por cierto que la sarta de calumnias que se imprimen en los periódicos todos los días contra este gobierno ha sido tema de discusión este mes, no porque se reconozcan como tal, sino porque el presidente arremetió públicamente contra un periodista del periódico La Prensa cuyo titular le acusaba directamente de ser un contrabandista. Resulta que la noticia durante más de una semana ha sido que el gobierno atenta contra la libertad de prensa y tiene instintos autoritarios. Si estuvieran en Inglaterra, ese periodista estaría en la cárcel.
Las otras noticias del mes han sido más positivas. Por una parte, el día 20 de diciembre se declaraba a Bolivia país libre de analfabetismo y por otra, este mes se reunían en Bahia, Brasil, los jefes de estado de todos los países de America Latina, reunidos por primera vez a instancia latinoamericana sin Estados Unidos que siempre ha manejado el cotarro en la Organización de Estados Americanos (OEA). Las resoluciones adoptadas en esta reunión también son importantes porque marcan una mayor independencia del continente en relación al imperio del norte en cuanto a sus economías (se está hablando de una integración económica con moneda única), política (la integración política de UNASUR, con base en Cochabamba es imparable) e incluso militar. Para mostrar esta nueva confianza internacional de un nuevo bloque liderado por Brasil, se decidió invitar a Cuba a formar parte del grupo de Rio, restableciendo así su condición como país de primera en la comunidad de naciones latinoamericanas, después de aquella expulsión vergonzosa de Cuba de la OEA en 1962 a instancia de los Estados Unidos.
Dicen que Porfirio Díaz, Presidente mexicano, una vez se compadeció de su país que estaba ‘…tan lejos de Dios y tan cerca de los Estados Unidos’. Parece ser que por fin su país, como el resto de América Latina, está dispuesto a distanciarse un poquito de su vecino del norte.
Feliz navidad. Nos vemos en el 2009.
Wednesday 24 December 2008
Sunday 21 December 2008
Bolivia, tercer país latinoamericano libre de analfabetismo
Por fin, en un acto celebrado ayer día 20 de diciembre en Cochabamba con la presencia de personalidades internacionales, el Presidente de la republica pudo declarar a Bolivia país libre de analfabetismo, algo que la UNESCO ha calificado como de evento ejemplar.
El esfuerzo, que ha contado con el apoyo de cientos de especialistas y consejeros tanto cubanos como venezolanos, ha costado más de 60 millones de bolivianos y casi tres años de trabajo intenso para llegar hasta las 825.000 personas analfabetas del país que, de acuerdo con el censo de 2001 constituían un 14 % de la población.
Es fácil denigrar el hecho de que alguien no sea capaz más que de firmar su propio nombre y leer de manera básica. También es fácil ignorar el alcance de la campaña de alfabetización como lo han hecho los prefectos de Oriente que no atendieron las celebraciones de este logro en sus propias regiones o que critican este momento de orgullo nacional como mera propaganda.
Sin embargo, para Julio, un alfabetizado de 76 años, el aprender a leer y a escribir es una questión de dignidad que le confiere el derecho a tener un carnet de identidad con su propia firma en vez de uno con su huella digital y le convierte, por primera vez en su vida, en un ciudadano de primera. ¿Acaso se ha preocupado algún gobierno en la historia del país en llegar a este punto? Por supuesto que no, pues su poder estaba basado en la opresión y exclusión de una clase analfabeta y pobre, frecuentemente de zonas rurales, y en su mayoría compuesta por mujeres.
Bolivia cambia y lo hace de manera acelerada. El siguiente paso de esta campaña comenzará pronto en Paraguay donde el nuevo presidente Lugo ha mostrado interés en replicar la campaña de alfabetización. En cuanto a Bolivia, la campaña de post-alfabetización ‘yo si puedo seguir’ se pone en marcha en febrero de 2009 para conseguir que toda la población llegue a cursar estudios de primaria.
¿Es este el primer paso hacia una recuperación nacional de dignidad? Sin duda alguna.
Saturday 20 December 2008
Wake up, Latin America, it’s time to start dreaming: Towards a new Latin America of the 21st century
There is no better example of the degree of anger the Bush administration generates around the world than this week’s shoe attack against the President of the United States at his last press conference in Baghdad. But if this zapatazo as the Latin American Press has referred to the incident, was a literal attack on the President, there are signs of many more metaphorical zapatazos to the US and its sense of might. This week, Latin America finally stood up to its neighbour with a single voice. It is now President Obama’s turn to outline the next US administration’s policy towards Latin America.
Kepa Artaraz
http://upsidedownworld.org/main/content/view/1674/1/
It is not only Egyptian journalists that are angry with the world’s superpower. The entire world is angry with reputedly the worst American administration in living memory. The blunders have gone far and wide, from its Middle Eastern policy and the invasion of Iraq, the so called war on terror that was seen as justification for secret detention centres, human rights abuses, the use of torture as a legitimate questioning method, Guantanamo Bay and rendition fights, to the imposition of a economic regulatory light touch that has led to the biggest financial crisis since 1929.
Clearly the world has a lower opinion of the US now than it did in 2000, even after the biggest presidential election shambles in history that saw George W. Bush appointed as the new US president by his father’s friends. Neocons wanted to impose US might around the world – shock and awe was the name of their bombing campaign that began the invasion of Iraq – and yet, eight years later America appears weaker, not mightier, than ever.
A sign of that weakness is the superpower’s powerlessness to stop a new correlation of forces taking place in the world. The United States is, by far, the most powerful military force in the world, something that is not going to change any time soon. However, the geopolitics of capital point in the direction of China, the new creditor of the United States, currently holding the biggest reserves of US dollars in the world, and to other emerging nations such as India and Russia. Is the post-communist unipolar world led by the US about to change?
The answer is yes, and no. In a recent article Serge Halimi complains that the G20 is useless because its most recent meeting in November not only did not challenge the established international financial order but it supported it. So the new emerging powers of India, Brazil and Russia, led by China, did not overturn the sacred truths of the Washington Consensus but reinforced them, calling for more, not less, free trade, and an emergency agreement in the Doha round of the World Trade Organisation.
It would be foolish for the emerging economies to attempt to overturn the economic system that has seen them become global economic players in the last two decades. No, they will do anything to return to the situation we were in before the ugly sub-prime monster reared its head, in part because, as is the case with China, its economy is joined at the hip with that of the US. One produces what the other consumes so the current financial crisis affects everybody.
But on the other hand, it seems obvious that the global power centre of gravity is rapidly changing to the East on the one hand, and towards the South on the other. A case in point is Latin America, where a newly found assertiveness and unity of voice might well be the direct result of US weakness.
This week, a similar attempt on the dignity of the US as that perpetrated by the infamous shoe attack has taken place in the city of Bahia, Brazil, where, led by world statesman and President of Brazil Lula, a mega summit brought together the meetings of the organisation of Latin American and Caribbean countries, MERCOSUR and UNASUR. As president Correa from Ecuador argued, the gathering was symbolically important as it was the first time in history that all Latin American countries met by themselves in a meeting agreed by themselves without the presence of the US.
Three key resolutions at these various meetings can be seen to challenge US power in the region. The first is the decision to accept Cuba as member of the Rio group. Coming on the eve of the fiftieth anniversary of the Cuban Revolution and after 46 years as a political pariah in the continent when, following US demands, Cuba was expelled from OAS in 1962, the tide is finally turning, thus beginning the political rehabilitation of the country at Latin American level.
It could have gone further as President Morales of Bolivia demanded that the US either accepts Cuba back to the OAS or leaves the organisation. Lula disassociated himself from that position arguing that the new president of the US needs time to outline his policies towards Latin America before Latin America either welcomes or condemns these views. He did, however, condemn the US embargo on Cuba and joined a chorus of support for the island and expectation that the new US administration will review this policy.
Secondly, the presidents of UNASUR officially received the report by the investigative commission they themselves set up in September to look into the murder of 20 peasants in the northern region of Pando, Bolivia. They unanimously confirmed that what took place in Pando was a massacre and a serious breach in human rights and were united in supporting the democratic process of change in Bolivia and in declaring impunity a thing of the past. The declaration is a clear affront to extreme right wing groups in Bolivia and to their supporters in the US who, through the expelled US ambassador in the country, were fomenting civil strife and violence in August and early September. The United States has been conspicuously quiet about these events.
Thirdly, the meeting in Bahia creates a Latin American Security Council and common defence programme. Does this mark the last rites for a US Monroe Doctrine that, since 1823, has given itself the right to intervene in any number of Latin American countries, both directly and indirectly, supporting every dictatorship as long as it defended American interests? Is this a salvo to the IV fleet re-established this year to patrol Caribbean and Latin American waters?
Clearly, the events this week in Bahia mark a new departure for a region that is proceeding towards an accelerated process of political, economic and military integration. In the process, Latin America also aims to be more independent from the US. And so the proposals first discussed barely a month ago at the ALBA meeting in Caracas of creating a single Latin American currency are reinforced by the creation of a development Banco del Sur that replaces dependency of countries in the region on the World Bank and the IMF.
Clearly there is a new correlation of forces in the world and some of the more assertive and self-assured – even hostile and rancorous – views expressed in Bahia are an indicator that the countries of Latin America are starting to question every bastion of US power, from its self-appointed role as the world’s policeman, to that of defender of the international financial institutions that countries like Ecuador claim have inflicted on them illegitimate, immoral and illegal debts.
They say that former Mexican President Porfirio Diaz once lamented that his country was ‘so far from God and so close to the United States’. This week, that distance to the United States seems to have increased just a little bit.
Kepa Artaraz
http://upsidedownworld.org/main/content/view/1674/1/
It is not only Egyptian journalists that are angry with the world’s superpower. The entire world is angry with reputedly the worst American administration in living memory. The blunders have gone far and wide, from its Middle Eastern policy and the invasion of Iraq, the so called war on terror that was seen as justification for secret detention centres, human rights abuses, the use of torture as a legitimate questioning method, Guantanamo Bay and rendition fights, to the imposition of a economic regulatory light touch that has led to the biggest financial crisis since 1929.
Clearly the world has a lower opinion of the US now than it did in 2000, even after the biggest presidential election shambles in history that saw George W. Bush appointed as the new US president by his father’s friends. Neocons wanted to impose US might around the world – shock and awe was the name of their bombing campaign that began the invasion of Iraq – and yet, eight years later America appears weaker, not mightier, than ever.
A sign of that weakness is the superpower’s powerlessness to stop a new correlation of forces taking place in the world. The United States is, by far, the most powerful military force in the world, something that is not going to change any time soon. However, the geopolitics of capital point in the direction of China, the new creditor of the United States, currently holding the biggest reserves of US dollars in the world, and to other emerging nations such as India and Russia. Is the post-communist unipolar world led by the US about to change?
The answer is yes, and no. In a recent article Serge Halimi complains that the G20 is useless because its most recent meeting in November not only did not challenge the established international financial order but it supported it. So the new emerging powers of India, Brazil and Russia, led by China, did not overturn the sacred truths of the Washington Consensus but reinforced them, calling for more, not less, free trade, and an emergency agreement in the Doha round of the World Trade Organisation.
It would be foolish for the emerging economies to attempt to overturn the economic system that has seen them become global economic players in the last two decades. No, they will do anything to return to the situation we were in before the ugly sub-prime monster reared its head, in part because, as is the case with China, its economy is joined at the hip with that of the US. One produces what the other consumes so the current financial crisis affects everybody.
But on the other hand, it seems obvious that the global power centre of gravity is rapidly changing to the East on the one hand, and towards the South on the other. A case in point is Latin America, where a newly found assertiveness and unity of voice might well be the direct result of US weakness.
This week, a similar attempt on the dignity of the US as that perpetrated by the infamous shoe attack has taken place in the city of Bahia, Brazil, where, led by world statesman and President of Brazil Lula, a mega summit brought together the meetings of the organisation of Latin American and Caribbean countries, MERCOSUR and UNASUR. As president Correa from Ecuador argued, the gathering was symbolically important as it was the first time in history that all Latin American countries met by themselves in a meeting agreed by themselves without the presence of the US.
Three key resolutions at these various meetings can be seen to challenge US power in the region. The first is the decision to accept Cuba as member of the Rio group. Coming on the eve of the fiftieth anniversary of the Cuban Revolution and after 46 years as a political pariah in the continent when, following US demands, Cuba was expelled from OAS in 1962, the tide is finally turning, thus beginning the political rehabilitation of the country at Latin American level.
It could have gone further as President Morales of Bolivia demanded that the US either accepts Cuba back to the OAS or leaves the organisation. Lula disassociated himself from that position arguing that the new president of the US needs time to outline his policies towards Latin America before Latin America either welcomes or condemns these views. He did, however, condemn the US embargo on Cuba and joined a chorus of support for the island and expectation that the new US administration will review this policy.
Secondly, the presidents of UNASUR officially received the report by the investigative commission they themselves set up in September to look into the murder of 20 peasants in the northern region of Pando, Bolivia. They unanimously confirmed that what took place in Pando was a massacre and a serious breach in human rights and were united in supporting the democratic process of change in Bolivia and in declaring impunity a thing of the past. The declaration is a clear affront to extreme right wing groups in Bolivia and to their supporters in the US who, through the expelled US ambassador in the country, were fomenting civil strife and violence in August and early September. The United States has been conspicuously quiet about these events.
Thirdly, the meeting in Bahia creates a Latin American Security Council and common defence programme. Does this mark the last rites for a US Monroe Doctrine that, since 1823, has given itself the right to intervene in any number of Latin American countries, both directly and indirectly, supporting every dictatorship as long as it defended American interests? Is this a salvo to the IV fleet re-established this year to patrol Caribbean and Latin American waters?
Clearly, the events this week in Bahia mark a new departure for a region that is proceeding towards an accelerated process of political, economic and military integration. In the process, Latin America also aims to be more independent from the US. And so the proposals first discussed barely a month ago at the ALBA meeting in Caracas of creating a single Latin American currency are reinforced by the creation of a development Banco del Sur that replaces dependency of countries in the region on the World Bank and the IMF.
Clearly there is a new correlation of forces in the world and some of the more assertive and self-assured – even hostile and rancorous – views expressed in Bahia are an indicator that the countries of Latin America are starting to question every bastion of US power, from its self-appointed role as the world’s policeman, to that of defender of the international financial institutions that countries like Ecuador claim have inflicted on them illegitimate, immoral and illegal debts.
They say that former Mexican President Porfirio Diaz once lamented that his country was ‘so far from God and so close to the United States’. This week, that distance to the United States seems to have increased just a little bit.
Tuesday 16 December 2008
Yo si puedo (Yes I can): Bolivia pais libre de analfabetismo or the end of illiteracy for Bolivia
20 December is the date when Bolivia will be declared free of illiteracy, something not many countries in the world can boast about. After three years of work with close to a million people, almost one in every nine Bolivians currently in the country, Bolivia is prepared to receive the best possible Christmas present for 2008.
Illiteracy figures in Bolivia, just like all other human development indicators are (or were) rather terrible, only surpassed in Latin America by those found in Haiti. This realisation was acted upon by president Evo Morales within days of being elected in December 2005 who asked Cuban officials for help in the implementation of a literacy campaign similar to that conducted in Cuba in the early 1960s.
The campaign benefitted from the collaboration of Cuban and Venezuelan specialists who managed the programme called ‘Yo si puedo’ (Yes, I can). But it was the consistent effort of about 60,000 people that permitted the programme to advance and reach this critical stage.
In the process, the Bolivian state had to bring solar panels to thousands of isolated communities so that people could follow their literacy lessons in the evenings. The Bolivian government also had to issue hundreds of thousands of glasses for those people who could not see or afford the glasses that would allow them to join the campaign.
The declaration of Bolivia as only the third country in the Americas free of illiteracy just in time for the approval of the new constitutional document by national referendum next January is certainly a propaganda coup for the MAS government. But it is the human dignity of those hundreds of thousands of people who can now sign their own names that we should remember. Just like in Cuba 57 years ago, their ‘veil of ignorance and darkness’ was lifted to join a sunnier future.
Illiteracy figures in Bolivia, just like all other human development indicators are (or were) rather terrible, only surpassed in Latin America by those found in Haiti. This realisation was acted upon by president Evo Morales within days of being elected in December 2005 who asked Cuban officials for help in the implementation of a literacy campaign similar to that conducted in Cuba in the early 1960s.
The campaign benefitted from the collaboration of Cuban and Venezuelan specialists who managed the programme called ‘Yo si puedo’ (Yes, I can). But it was the consistent effort of about 60,000 people that permitted the programme to advance and reach this critical stage.
In the process, the Bolivian state had to bring solar panels to thousands of isolated communities so that people could follow their literacy lessons in the evenings. The Bolivian government also had to issue hundreds of thousands of glasses for those people who could not see or afford the glasses that would allow them to join the campaign.
The declaration of Bolivia as only the third country in the Americas free of illiteracy just in time for the approval of the new constitutional document by national referendum next January is certainly a propaganda coup for the MAS government. But it is the human dignity of those hundreds of thousands of people who can now sign their own names that we should remember. Just like in Cuba 57 years ago, their ‘veil of ignorance and darkness’ was lifted to join a sunnier future.
Friday 12 December 2008
After Poznan and the EU climate change summit, has anything changed?
It seems not, unfortunately. At the time the biggest economies are spending trillions of dollars trying to keep business as usual (in every sense) it appears that climate change summits continue to be talking shops for defending short-term narrow economic self-interests.
And so after Poznan, European leaders were arguing late last night about whether to agree on cutting CO2 emissions by 20% by 2020 or not, with Poland and Germany dragging their feet because of their reliance on coal generators in the case of the former, and massive manufacturing output, in the case of the later.
Nobody seemed to remember that the Kyoto agreement signed all those years ago committed them to cut emissions by 5% by 2012. So far, those emissions have increased by 9% (on 1990 levels), not decreased, so it seems highly unlikely that meagre target will be reached on time.
The obvious problem with high-level political ‘efforts’ to save the world from cooking itself is that they pretend to be able to do so whilst challenging none of the premises on which our current predicament is based. They pretend that CO2 emissions are the only culprit to our current situation and that somehow, we can reduce those without affecting our current consumption levels and promise of endless economic growth. This really is a case of having your cake and eating it.
Like with the global economic crisis, Bolivia is one of those little countries that has done least to exacerbate the current global climate crisis but also one of those that is already paying a heavy price for it. According to the UK’s ambassador in Bolivia, average temperatures here are increasing 70% higher than in the rest of the world and the effects of climate change could cost 7.3% of GDP in the next 30 years.
In a recent open letter, president Evo Morales put the blame for climate change on capitalism itself, because ‘in the hands of Capitalism everything becomes a commodity: the water, the soil, the human genome, the ancestral cultures, justice, ethics, death … and life itself. Everything, absolutely everything, can be bought and sold and under Capitalism. And even “climate change” itself has become a business.’
So, as you can imagine, his proposals go a little further than those paper promises of reductions in CO2 emissions. What to do?:
a) Challenge the root causes of the problem. As he sees it, this is driven by a capitalist system in which economic growth is all, even at the expense of the planet’s survival. We need to change that before it is too late, and we need to decrease our unsustainable consumption levels.
b) We need to meet CO2 reduction targets and to do it now, not at some unspecified future date. Overall reduction by 2050 should reach 90%, instead of the UK’s current target of 80%.
c) The worst polluters need to address their ecological debt to the world, creating an international fund that transfers at least 1% of their GDP to poor countries to help them adapt to, and mitigate, the worst effects of climate change.
d) Future technological advancements expected to aid the process of adaptation need to be made available to all and not subject to a private regime of patents.
e) Politically, the planet’s survival will require more than market and carbon trading mechanisms for it to work. It will require the participation of global citizens in a way that current efforts don’t envisage. At the top of the political hierarchy, it will require a new UN for climate change to which all financial and trade global institutions are subordinated.
That’s it. It sounds easy, right?
And so after Poznan, European leaders were arguing late last night about whether to agree on cutting CO2 emissions by 20% by 2020 or not, with Poland and Germany dragging their feet because of their reliance on coal generators in the case of the former, and massive manufacturing output, in the case of the later.
Nobody seemed to remember that the Kyoto agreement signed all those years ago committed them to cut emissions by 5% by 2012. So far, those emissions have increased by 9% (on 1990 levels), not decreased, so it seems highly unlikely that meagre target will be reached on time.
The obvious problem with high-level political ‘efforts’ to save the world from cooking itself is that they pretend to be able to do so whilst challenging none of the premises on which our current predicament is based. They pretend that CO2 emissions are the only culprit to our current situation and that somehow, we can reduce those without affecting our current consumption levels and promise of endless economic growth. This really is a case of having your cake and eating it.
Like with the global economic crisis, Bolivia is one of those little countries that has done least to exacerbate the current global climate crisis but also one of those that is already paying a heavy price for it. According to the UK’s ambassador in Bolivia, average temperatures here are increasing 70% higher than in the rest of the world and the effects of climate change could cost 7.3% of GDP in the next 30 years.
In a recent open letter, president Evo Morales put the blame for climate change on capitalism itself, because ‘in the hands of Capitalism everything becomes a commodity: the water, the soil, the human genome, the ancestral cultures, justice, ethics, death … and life itself. Everything, absolutely everything, can be bought and sold and under Capitalism. And even “climate change” itself has become a business.’
So, as you can imagine, his proposals go a little further than those paper promises of reductions in CO2 emissions. What to do?:
a) Challenge the root causes of the problem. As he sees it, this is driven by a capitalist system in which economic growth is all, even at the expense of the planet’s survival. We need to change that before it is too late, and we need to decrease our unsustainable consumption levels.
b) We need to meet CO2 reduction targets and to do it now, not at some unspecified future date. Overall reduction by 2050 should reach 90%, instead of the UK’s current target of 80%.
c) The worst polluters need to address their ecological debt to the world, creating an international fund that transfers at least 1% of their GDP to poor countries to help them adapt to, and mitigate, the worst effects of climate change.
d) Future technological advancements expected to aid the process of adaptation need to be made available to all and not subject to a private regime of patents.
e) Politically, the planet’s survival will require more than market and carbon trading mechanisms for it to work. It will require the participation of global citizens in a way that current efforts don’t envisage. At the top of the political hierarchy, it will require a new UN for climate change to which all financial and trade global institutions are subordinated.
That’s it. It sounds easy, right?
Sunday 7 December 2008
‘Cómo gasto paredes recordándote’ (How I waste walls thinking about you): Graffiti and its uses in Bolivia
There is a famous book by Eduardo Galeano that contains sentences, statements and maxims painted on walls (I can’t remember the title right now, I’m sure my friend Jose would) that he has collected over the years during his trips around Latin America. The one contained in the title is precisely one of those I remember because it sounds a bit like the first verse of one of Silvio Rodriguez’s songs.
The writing of political slogans on walls is nothing new, not even of the type shown in the picture: ‘Collas, raza maldita’ (Collas, damned race). We collected this one last year in Santa Cruz. ‘Colla’ is the term generally used to refer to those from the highlands and I guess this one leaves little doubt as to the racism that festers in the country.
Another one I read recently in Sucre was ‘Abajo con la dictadura narco comunista cubano-venezolana’ (Down with the Cuban-Venezuelan narco-communist dictatorship), another beauty that comes from the same political positions as the one in display in the racist slogan above.
But the best slogans have a different characteristic, one that takes us back to the days of May 1968 when French students would write ‘Be realistic, demand the impossible’. Recently, I read on a wall in La Paz ‘Despierta ya! Es hora de empezar a soñar’ (Wake up! It’s time to start dreaming) and ‘Si no dices lo que piensas, para qué piensas?’ (If you don’t say what you think, why bother thinking?).
Like with a poem, these one-liners leave us pondering about the many-layered truths contained in them and always make me smile. I wonder what it is about Bolivia that has brought these back into fashion. Revolutionary times may be?
I leave you with another beauty written by a local feminist group Karen told me about: ‘Despues de limpiarte la casa, lavarte la ropa y hacerte la comida, se me quitaron las ganas de hacerte el amor’ (After clearing the house, washing your clothes and cooking for you, I don’t feel like making love to you). Ouch!
Thursday 4 December 2008
Some of the latest news about Bolivia
News in and about Bolivia continue to be dominated by the Pando massacre that took place in Porvenir on 11 September as leader of the special commission created by UNASUR, Rodolfo Mattarollo, finally handed over to President Evo Morales, the investigative report on the events, declaring the killings a massacre that was planned by the prefecture and made use of the prefecture’s resources, including its staff, to conduct the killings. The Bolivian opposition have tried to dismiss the UNASUR commission’s report declaring it partial and biased because, among other things, ‘it does not give credibility to reports that claim that indigenous peoples in Pando killed each other’.
More on this can be found on:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/spanish/latin_america/newsid_7763000/7763930.stm
The other main issue dominating the news headlines in Bolivia is that judicial processes are finally being pursued against some of those who instigated and participated in the acts of violence that preceded the Pando massacre and which we reported here as ‘el golpe civico prefectural’
http://boliviandiaries.blogspot.com/2008/10/golpe-cvico-prefectural-attempted-coup.html
At the time, (in October) I could not personally believe that the government appeared to be rewarding the violent tactics of the opposition led by the prefects of the ‘media luna’ with talks geared to reaching a consensus on the new constitutional text that will be put to referendum on 25th January. With the benefit of hindsight, it now seems that was a ploy to pacify the country and reach the consensus necessary to ensure that this referendum goes ahead next month. However, those who participated in the siege of public buildings, the explosive attack against a gas pipe in Tarija and the killings of indigenous people, are now starting to be caught and brought to justice. This, of course, is seen as a witch hunt and political persecution by the opposition who seem more interested in defending murderers than the victims of murder. Here is an example with these accusations coming from Branko Marinkovic, president of the ‘civic committee’ of Santa Cruz and one of the main instigators of violence in September as well as defender of the corporativist interests of the soya barons:
http://senderodelpeje.com/sdp/contenido/2008/10/14/55702
This is an interesting debate. Clearly dividing those on the side of justice from those on the side of perpetuating impunity, it defines the lines of support and opposition to the government. In that process, the cardinal of Bolivia, Julio Terrazas, has been found wanting after openly criticism the government and offering protection to violent thugs in his church. I wonder if the man really believes in hell…And Spanish newspaper ‘El Pais’? They have just nominated him as man of the year!
http://abnoticias.info/2008/12/01/%e2%80%9cbolivia-pais-sin-dios-ni-ley%e2%80%9d-el-narcotrafico-inquieta-al-cardenal/
More on this can be found on:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/spanish/latin_america/newsid_7763000/7763930.stm
The other main issue dominating the news headlines in Bolivia is that judicial processes are finally being pursued against some of those who instigated and participated in the acts of violence that preceded the Pando massacre and which we reported here as ‘el golpe civico prefectural’
http://boliviandiaries.blogspot.com/2008/10/golpe-cvico-prefectural-attempted-coup.html
At the time, (in October) I could not personally believe that the government appeared to be rewarding the violent tactics of the opposition led by the prefects of the ‘media luna’ with talks geared to reaching a consensus on the new constitutional text that will be put to referendum on 25th January. With the benefit of hindsight, it now seems that was a ploy to pacify the country and reach the consensus necessary to ensure that this referendum goes ahead next month. However, those who participated in the siege of public buildings, the explosive attack against a gas pipe in Tarija and the killings of indigenous people, are now starting to be caught and brought to justice. This, of course, is seen as a witch hunt and political persecution by the opposition who seem more interested in defending murderers than the victims of murder. Here is an example with these accusations coming from Branko Marinkovic, president of the ‘civic committee’ of Santa Cruz and one of the main instigators of violence in September as well as defender of the corporativist interests of the soya barons:
http://senderodelpeje.com/sdp/contenido/2008/10/14/55702
This is an interesting debate. Clearly dividing those on the side of justice from those on the side of perpetuating impunity, it defines the lines of support and opposition to the government. In that process, the cardinal of Bolivia, Julio Terrazas, has been found wanting after openly criticism the government and offering protection to violent thugs in his church. I wonder if the man really believes in hell…And Spanish newspaper ‘El Pais’? They have just nominated him as man of the year!
http://abnoticias.info/2008/12/01/%e2%80%9cbolivia-pais-sin-dios-ni-ley%e2%80%9d-el-narcotrafico-inquieta-al-cardenal/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
