Greed has become a virtue--and thereby hangs the tale Up until the early 1980s, when Ronald Reagan became president, greed, while common to the human condition, was universally regarded as a vice and even a sin. One of the major impacts of the Reagan Revolution was to change the status of greed from a vice to a virtue. People no longer pretended not to be greedy. They began to flaunt their greed and the results it produced in their lives. Julian Edney recently published a very significant article on greed.that states our contemporary reality as clearly as possible. Edney discusses the growing gap between the "haves" and the "have-nots" both in philosophical as well as economic terms. He clearly exposes how our society has affirmed the inevitability of this gap in order to justify the fact that we, in the United States, are the predominant "haves" in the world. He makes it very clear that hunger and poverty are the result of political and economic decisions made by the "haves" and that it is not necessary. The recent cover story of Time magazine which proclaimed Bono and Bill and Melinda Gates as the Persons of the Year because of their significant efforts to deal with the issues of poverty and hunger points out as well that hunger and poverty are not inevitable. We invite you to read Edney's article on greed. Lula's government mired in corruption charges Over the past two months, Brazilian President's Lula has been mired in accusation that his Workers' Party (PT), which he founded nearly 30 years ago, has been bribing opposition members of Congress with massive bribes since taking office. Though Lula has so far managed not to be shown to have participated in this, his government is nearly paralyzed in the aftermath of the accusations. Even Lula's closest friends and supporters, both within and without Brazil, have been dismayed by the accusations, too many of which apprear to be well-founded. Some comments from Faith Partners: For more than 500 years, it has been "normal" in Brazil for those who gain power to abuse it for personal gain. Every government in the country's history has been characterized by this kind of corruption. The problem that Lula is facing is that since his government came to power under his personal banner of anti-corruption and pro-people, there was a sort of unconscious assumption that this time it would be differente. But from the beginning, Lula, with only 20% of the Congress in his party (PT), was forced to govern by establishing coalitions with the other parties (more than 20 of them at last count). In his Cabinet, he included an alarming mixture of "old guard" types in order not to frighten off foreign investors, who had been totally alarmed by Lula's political positions over the past 30 years. And, as most of those parties are weak on any real political ideology and strong on seeking and manipulating power, it should not be surprising that they put a price on their cooperation with the PT. The most damning thing facing Lula in all this is that he didn't take stronger measures to fiscalize his party's leaders to avoid the level of corruption that seems to have developed. He was either very naive or simply turned a blind eye on the situation, feeling that there was not other way open to him. Added to this is the rather widespread disappointment among the Brazilian masses who supported him so enthusiastically in his electoral efforts that his government has not come through with the promised reforms (land reform, fiscal reform, etc.). From the accusations made public so far, it would appear that at least 20% of the entire Congress was "on the take" from PT leadership, many to the tune of US$12,000/month in order to vote with the PT. To make it worse, these funds appear to have come from some fairly unsavory sources, or from blatant corruption from government funds. Lula will probably survive, but his efforts to govern may not. In any event, once more the old Brazilian saying that "Brazil is the country of the future--and always will be" seems, sadly, to still ring true. For a more complete anaylsis of Brazil's situation see COHA. Chavez continues to be "New Star" in Latin America On August 7, Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez formally suspended cooperation with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency, accusing its agents of espionage. This brash move represents the latest in a series of demonstrations of Latin American discontent, both on the left and on the right, with Washington’s often clumsy intrusion into the region’s affairs. Even the Washington based Inter-American Dialogue, an NGO which is overtly critical of the Chávez presidency, recognizes that the Bush administration has dug itself into a hole in its own backyard. In its July 2005 Latin America and Caribbean Report , the Dialogue concedes that, “Overwhelmingly, Latin Americans are critical of U.S. foreign policy directions and unhappy that Washington has not done more to aid the region’s development.” As the White House’s misguided policies have drawn its capacity for effective hemispheric leadership into question, Latin Americans have begun to boldly rally around one of their own—even though he is a figure of sometimes great controversy. For an excellent story on these events, see COHA Report.
Growing Chinese Influence in Latin America Since the days of President McKinley (1898--) the US has been dominant in Latin America and has regarded the "Chinese market as rightfully belonging to us" to quote an influential New York Republican of the era. Today, however, things have changed. Saul Laundau of the Institute for Policy Studies has written an excellent commentary of those changes and their implications for Latin America. Read his article at China.
Can we be Good Neighbors Again? Tom Barry and his colleagues at the International Relations Center have written a great article about the US' Good Neighbor policy of the Roosevelt era that deserves your time and consideration. The article points toward some solutions to the current US morass in the Middle East and possible ways out.
Aid and Evangelism: The recent Sojourners Magazine has a stimulating discussion of the risks of mixing evangelism with aid in the after-Tsunami efforts. See the Poisonwood Problem. Project 2020 "On January 13, the United States National Intelligence Council (N.I.C.) released the report of its '2020 Project,' which is aimed at describing the possible configurations of world politics fifteen years from now." So begins an analysis of Project 2020 recently published by the Power and Interest News Report [PINR]. This report has significant implications for Latin America and deserves your attention. We recommend that you read it. We will make every effort to keep this section updated every week and hope you will find it worth returning to regularly. The news items will be taken down after 7-10 days, though some op-ed items may stay longer. We will appreciate suggestions for links to places that support solidarity in the Americas. |