Viva la Revolucion!

At home and abroad many champion the "revolutions" in Bolivia and Venezuela. The election of social progressives in both countries offer hope to the leftists of the world. "Creating a new beacon on a hill" for the world's poor, so it is said.

Having some personal experience in Latin American politics I've tried to see where this latest round of "radical" leaders south of the border are headed. Some one near and dear to me was shot in the 1970s during a coup attempt in Bolivia; he escaped and has never returned to his hometown of Cochabamba. He now lives in Central America, still politically active. I listen carefully to his counsel on Latin politics; he maintains hope for a revolution of the poor and I find that inspiring. We lived through and watched the US systematically grind down the resolve and unity of Nicaraguans, until Nicaraguans surrendered hope and idealism to DC by electing the White House approved, considered somewhat "liberal," Violeta Chamorro.

Nicaraguans knew that turning away from the Sandinista movement would end the long deadly US financed war; end the embargo that nearly starved them out. Today Nicaragua, just as other nations in the area, has become a tourist trapista; an excellent gringo investment opportunity, where little brown folks will serve you, especially since el gringo (or his facsimile) now owns the land, builds the hotel, and passes out the pesos (or cordoba). Violeta is comfortably back on her estate overlooking the gorgeous bay of San Juan del Sur; per Washington, mission accomplished. Apparently, even Danny Ortega now knows the road to the Nicaraguan presidency is through the White House.

Chileans attempted a "movement" in 1970 with the election of Salvador Allende. He nationalized the Chilean copper mines, ITT, etc. Allende was eventually assassinated (thanks to Henry Kissinger and Nixon), after cutoff of aid and economic sanctions were placed on Chile with US ambassador Ed Korry stating "We will do all in our power to condemn Chileans to utmost poverty." The method and thinking haven't changed. (Though the poverty chickens are coming home to roost.) Every socialist movement in Latin America has been short-lived and replaced with Anglo controlled tyranny. There is not one Spanish speaking nation south of the US border that hasn't been condemned to poverty by Anglo policies and politicians.

So I'm not holding out a lot of hope for Hugo Chavez, or the recently elected Bolivian president Evo Morales, to jumpstart a worldwide movement of and for the poor. The ruling elite have never allowed such movements to go unmolested in the past. Imagine the loss to their portfolios. As long as the powerful can keep the white "middle-class" dumb, doped, and in check(s) the elite win out over social movements by the poor, the brown, the revolutionary. The poor are kept too busy grubbing for survival. Famine is a tool of the ruling elite, all the while they claim to fight against hunger. It's odd, they can't seem to win against the evils that afflict the poorest, i.e. war, poverty, drugs, hunger, etc. but let one little "leftist" nationalize a national resource and the elite can (at their discretion) within weeks proclaim victory over his deposed (or decomposing) body.

If we go even further back there was the same hope for the poor with Bolivar, Fidel, Che, etc. Their ideals of a socially fair and just world are dusted off by every generation. Hugo and Evo are the newest faces in the revolution. Promising to take back their country's wealth from ruling Anglo oligarchies and foreign corporate interests. I wish them good luck and speed.

Socialism should put people before profit, however, that cliché is practiced nowhere on earth. But the ruling elite's twisted sense of humor (or sadism) does allow the poor to hope of such a practice (as they squeeze harder on the economic thumbscrews). Hope dished to the poor cost the elite little to nothing.

But wait, do not the dumb, doped, and fatted claim France, Spain, England, are socialist? Yes, especially when on topics of medicine/health care, but Europe is capitalist. Aren't countries such as the Netherlands, Denmark, etc. socialist? No, they are gated white communities with growing racial/immigration problems.

So what if anything has changed this time around for the left? Not much that I can see. Some may think that because Russia, Asia, and Europe are doing more and bigger business in Latin America this will limit US tampering with Latin nations and/or leaders. But it's never really been solely about US tampering – it's corporate interests, and multinational interference knows no border, has no loyalty to any particular "nation" and even less so today in the world of conglomeratus. You don't really believe do you that a Japanese corporation is totally owned by the Japanese, a Russian or Chinese company held only by local nationals? There isn't a nation on the planet which isn't owned and operated by big business. And most of the hands collecting the biggest profits at day's end are Anglo (with a few non-Anglo toads as fronts). Being a toad can be lucrative and cushy.

Hugo and Evo are our Sandinistas and Zapatistas, our Bolivar and Che of the new millenium. Hugo and Evo will likely be bought or eliminated by what's best for the globocoporate elite. Kind of makes you wonder how Fidel stayed in power all these years doesn't it? Maybe he's just been useful. A "beacon" to the left.

Maybe revolution is 1 percent inspiration and 99 percent perspiration, or something like that. Maybe all we need do is sweat a little more.