You can cut all the flowers but you
cannot keep spring from coming.--Pablo Neruda, Chilean Poet
It�s winter in the United States, and in most places
seasonably cold. Perspiration on the brow of Miss Liberty in New York City at
70 degrees last week reminds us that global warming is in our faces,
deceptively so, as Big Apple residents gleefully cavorted in Central Park,
wearing shorts and smugly quipping that the East Coast was somehow cheating Old
Man Winter out of his annual freeze-fest.
The Boy Emperor is escalating the war in Iraq in the name of
ending it, just as his predecessors of the sixties and seventies told us that
the U.S. was �winning the war in Southeast Asia� and that they �had a plan� for
victory. Consciously or not, most Americans are weary of war, and even more
exhausted economically as rosy financial page forecasts do not compute with the
moment-to-moment realities in middle-class households. Hollywood is mirroring
the despair with films like �Children Of Men,� �Blood Diamond� and �The Good
Shepherd.� The winter of our ennui is dark, cloudy, and cold.
I have often warned against the soporific of hope, with no
apologies to Barack Obama for his best-selling The Audacity Of Hope. In
my 2005 article, Killing
Hope, Enlivening Options, I invited readers to abandon the notion of
hope which fosters denial and connotes unwarranted optimism, and create
instead, myriad options for navigating the daunting challenges of climate
chaos, energy depletion, and global economic meltdown. �Hope� tends to
infantilize us, pointing to somewhere down the road in a feel-good, never-never
land of possibility contingent on someone or something besides one�s own
efforts, whereas �options� are the adult stuff of the here and now, demanding
that we cease relying primarily on the other and attend contemplatively to
authentic choices in the moment and beyond.
That being said, I look around in the midst of this
particularly gray January and continue to notice the vibrant, intelligent,
humane, courageous, and indeed revolutionary choices being made by people in
warmer climates to the south. The most colorful and iconoclastic, a guy named
Hugo, not only proclaims that the government of the United States is being run
by a falling-down drunk named �The Devil,� but, at home, has all but silenced
what little opposition remains toward his particular version of the Bolivarian
Revolution, and is indefatigably
transforming his country one neighborhood at a time.
But not all Latin American leaders share Hugo�s flare for
the dramatic. Much less is heard of Morales, Lula, Correa, Bachelet, or Ortega.
In the first place, most Americans can scarcely locate Venezuela on a map let
alone the other nations allying with its president in remaking Central and
South America. Furthermore, little attention is paid to the complexity and
profundity of their policies. �The Pink Tide,� as mainstream media obtusely
names it, implying bandwagon socialist group-think, is unequivocally momentous
-- historically, politically, economically, and morally. Unlike Venezuela,
Bolivia, Brazil, Ecuador, Chile, Argentina, and Nicaragua are not transforming
their societies with petrodollars, but through wealth redistribution and by
breaking the economic stranglehold that the United States has held on their
nations through the �credit cartels� of the International Monetary Fund and the
World Bank.
Are their policies impeccable? Of course not. Nor have they
rid their nations of the last vestiges of corporate capitalism and its piratization
of resources. As Mark Weisbrot notes in his article, Latin
America: The End Of An Era, "Of course, all of these governments
are still a long way from coming up with a sustainable, long-term development
strategy. This is not necessarily because they don�t want one, but mainly
because -- after decades of corrupt rule, as well as the deliberate shrinking
of the state�s capacity for economic regulation and decision-making -- they
simply don�t have the administrative capacity to even make such plans, much
less implement them."
The author also
notes that it is not only conservatives but the liberal middle as well that
is pessimistic about what is happening in Latin America. "Foreign Affairs
[the journal of the Council on Foreign Relations] has run three articles since
the beginning of the year warning of the dangers of Latin America�s left-populist
drift, as well as sorry state of U.S.-Latin American relations. The news
reports, editorials, and op-ed pages of America�s major newspapers mostly carry
the same themes."
If one hears at all about events in Latin America, they will
most likely be framed by mainstream media in terms of the �good left� and �bad
left,� depending on how vocal leftist movements in those countries have been in
their opposition to the United States, how �market-friendly� they are, or how
socialist their orientation is. In any event, we know that the Bush
administration is very worried about the remaking of Latin America. And
rightfully so -- not only will the crumbling of the credit cartel exacerbate,
but also the glaring contrast between electoral democracy as it is taking form
in Latin America and the extinction of privacy, civil liberties, and clean
elections in the U.S. Indeed, the Imperial Bully has much to fear from nations
whose past enslavement it engineered, whose torture mechanisms it blessed then
turned a blind eye to, whose painstaking grassroots transformation of
neighborhoods and communities the Bully capriciously labels �socialist� or
�leftist� as its peoples demonstrate with their lives and love that cooperation
and relocalization are more powerful than corporate capitalism ever has been or
will be.
Laura Carlsen, Director Of the International Relations
Center notes in her article, Latin America�s Pink
Tide: "The great hope of Latin America -- and what it has to offer
to the world -- is a vast collection of vibrant social movements that dare to
question everything from their own governments to the way corporations pollute
their lands. Sometimes they express themselves in the polls, sometimes they
don't. Sometimes they call themselves the 'left,' and sometimes they call
themselves the people or nothing at all. Labels don't matter. What matters is
the search for new ways of governing that reduce the inequality, increase real
democracy, and end the hunger and poverty.
"Call it pink, red, blue, purple, or chartreuse: to get
anywhere, social movements will have to display all these colors and more.
Whatever its hue though, the tide in Latin America seems to be rising."
I know little of what the world will actually be like in 10
years. Miss Liberty will probably be sweating year-round; the American middle
class is likely to be twice as squeezed as it is today, and the blood spilled
for oil may have filled the oceans. Geopolitics is a crap shoot played by
madmen. Climate chaos, wars for resources, the status of the dollar, global
pandemics, all are terrifying realities of the not-so distant future. Yet on
this bleak January day, I feel the warm breezes of the south blowing across the
Empire, and while they may not save the world from itself, a glow of glee fills
my chest when I remember that they are a force with which the Bully must
reckon.
Carolyn
Baker, Ph.D. is author of "U.S.
History Uncensored: What Your High School Textbook Didn't Tell You." Her website is www.carolynbaker.org where she may be
contacted