Latin America saw a resurgence in
Centre-Left candidates in the democratic elections of 2006. In Ecuador Rafael
Correa took office, Nicaragua saw Daniel Ortega regain the presidency, in 2005
Evo Morales became the first indigenous president of his country, Hugo Chavez
was re-elected to the chagrin of the Bush administration, Chile elected
Michelle Bachelet, Peru elected Alan Garcia, in Uruguay Tabare Ramon Vazquez Rosas took office, and in
Brazil Luiz Ignacio Lula de Silva one in the second round of votes. Even though
all of the candidates are left leaning they all have somewhat varied approaches
to what they promise to bring to the table during their presidency. Chavez and
Morales being the most socialistic and radical of the group, and others such as
Bachelet, Lula de Silva, and Garcia favoring more socially democratic views
when it comes to the market place (ODI). The common threads that do hold these
Presidents and their voters together is their severe dissatisfaction with
neoliberal free market economic policies that have been implemented under the
“Washington Consensus†during the 1980’s and 90’s. People in Latin America have watched as the
divide between rich and poor has grown tremendously over the years, some statistics
labeling South America as the most unequal in the world. With trickle down
economics failing to provide better lives and more jobs it seems that the
people of the Southern Hemisphere are ready to try something new. Coupled with
the Bush administration’s priorities, or some would say distractions, in the
Middle East and the rising discontent among the marginalized, the 2006
elections became the time for change. What are some of the mechanisms for
change that the people of Latin America have used to wrestle power away from
the economic elites?
Constitutional rights are the essence of our country. Our founding fathers provided us with a document designed to uphold all the personal freedoms they believed a country should possess. As Americans, we have grown to expect that these rights will never change. This is a devastating error of our judgment. Living in the
By Jeff Shelton
The means by which a group of human beings choose to sustain their lives is a basic corner stone to the doctrines of survival. The methods or methods used play a major role and some would argue the main role in the making and passing of culture. If we look at culture as the ways and means by which a group of people survive and grow as a society we can easily see that the economic system that is used is a key block in the social structure. What happens when a society changes its economic base or when the economic model is changed for them by force or coercion?
By: Samantha Steerman
So here we are. It's 2007. The cold war has ended. There are technological advances every day. The world is connected by the Internet. Previously sheltered countries are now able to see what is going on in the rest of the world. People in India, Pakistan, Israel, Germany, etc. know what movie stars and fashions are popular in
America, Great Britain, France, and Japan.
“Capitalism
is not a success. It is not intelligent, it is not beautiful, it is not true,
it is not virtuous and it doesn’t deliver the goods. In short we dislike it and
we are beginning to despise it. But when we wonder what to put in its place we
are extremely perplexed.†John Maynard Keynes (Albert, Judging Economics)
Contemporary alternatives such as centrally planned socialism as well as market
socialism have both been attempted with the later possibly being the more
successful of the two. Even though their goals were more equitable distribution
neither provides a totally egalitarian society. In the centrally planned systems
there was clear division between the planners and the workers, which
immediately created class conflict. In the market socialist economies private
ownership of the means to production were eliminated but the force of markets
still exists as well as a division of labor between the coordinator class and
the working class. (Albert, Market Socialism) So if we decide that either of
the latter options are not the answers to overcome the capitalistic machine and
that the capitalistic system is not successful in providing equity among all
its citizens where can we turn for hope?
The answer could possibly be found in what is known as Parecon (participatory
economics), which is an economic system that is based on the democratic
participation of every citizen in both their working life and their life as a
consumer.
