Could Latin America go wrong?

[drain.you]

I have been watching the politics of Latin America fairly closely for the past year or so and I'm sure its clear to everyone here that the continent seems to be leaning further left all the time.
We have Venezuela, Bolivia, Cuba and several others that now have left-leaning governments but I am starting to worry that it could all go wrong.

Chavez has been backing the more nationalist of the two main candidates for Peru's next president which I find worrying, although I think he may have narrowly lost the election from early estimates.
Also Morales in Bolivia, the first indigenous president of the country, has began handing out land back to HIS people, ie; the indigenous. Yeah sure, the land was stolen from them but it seems that he is favouring them over the rest of the population even though they are a minority as I understand it, which doesn't sound too good to me.

I support Chavez but I am starting to wonder what he is going to do once he gets Venezuela's army fully running. He has been trying to build up the army for a while now and has recently recieved arms from Russia and boats from Spain and such. What is he going to do with this? He says its to defend against the US but I starting to have my doubts.

I feel that Latin America could either become the next united soviet states or something similar or a very nasty reigme. Anyone else share this opinion? I know theres nothing we can do but wait and see but give me your theories on Latin America's political future.

[Karl Marx's Camel]

We have Venezuela, Bolivia, Cuba

Putting Cuba on that list is no point as long as the people do not feel they hold power. A system like that will be destined to fall.



I support Chavez but I am starting to wonder what he is going to do once he gets Venezuela's army fully running. He has been trying to build up the army for a while now and has recently recieved arms from Russia and boats from Spain and such. What is he going to do with this? He says its to defend against the US but I starting to have my doubts.
I doubt Venezuela is strong enough to fight a war. They will have to build up like Hitler did, if they are gonna wage a war. Because the U.S. will stand in their way.

[drain.you]

Perhaps Venezuela would be strong enough to wage war on some of the weaker Latin American states, especially if allied with Cuba, China and Bolivia. I really dont want to see that happen.

[piet11111]

well perhaps its the marxist in me but i do expect this south american socialism to turn into modern capitalism within 1 generation.
possibly along with violence between nations but i doubt this myself.

it depends on how much south america works together during this socialist period.
if they work together well then things should be peacefull when the socialism disapears.
but if they did not that wont be forgotten either.

[R_P_A_S]

this is what they want. capitalist and any conformist out there. they want that all the left leaning countries now and that are on their way. they want it all to fail. so that it looks wrong, like it was a mistake. a mistake that "they" had been warning us about. by saying that such goverments are a threat to democracy and freedom. I hope that Chavez, Morales, and any other president that is headed that way. I hope they can handle the situation for the benefit of all their citizens

[BobKKKindle$]

Things will only 'go wrong' if the democratic system is trampled under foot in the name of anti-imperialism and dogmatic populism - in that case there is every possibility that these leaders will try and establish an alliance against the United States, which would have devestating reprecussions, both economically, and politically. I say economically, because despite the economic nationalism that these leaders have displayed, the US still has a great deal of economic strength is S AMerican, and indeed, the world (Although i do hear the PRC is beginning to play a leading role in Latin America..hm) And Politically, because I am sure you all know in 1973 when Allende Came to power democratically :D

However, there is of course every chance that things could turn out very well. I was very impressed by the recent trade deal signed between Venezuela, Cuba, and Bolivia. For those of you that dont know, it put great emphasis upon shared healthcare and doctors between these countries. United We stand! An International economic confederation of Demo or Revo Socialist States (with no puppets of course, a la Comecon) could have vast potential.

[bayano]

you are basing your thoughts on some false notions. firstly, the indigenous in bolivia are the majority! whats wrong with a peruvian nationalist (tho im not necessarily a fan of humala)? and venezuela still has a medium-level military for south america. the only reason venezuela's buying of military supplies from spain and russia is bcuz the capitalist news media is fear mongering, and he is buying from them more than in the past bcuz the US has increasingly cut all military sales to his country. maybe these facts will help you rethink your conclusions?

[Hefer]

Maybe they have WMD, we all know how reliable the cappies media and government is on giving us the facts :P

Viva America Latina!!!

[Global_Justice]

i think he's building an army because of what happened to the left regimes in the 60's. he wants to defend against a US invasion

[bolshevik butcher]

Better than that he's creating popular militias and arming the people. An ared working class is vital to any revolution. The maint threats that I see is greater impeiralist intervention, or maybe a collapse on class consciousness or the latin american labour movment due to an economic down turn or something.

[drain.you]

you are basing your thoughts on some false notions. firstly, the indigenous in bolivia are the majority
My apologies to everyone regarding my misinformation. I was under the impression that the indigenous population was a minority, much like in North America.

[IronColumn]

It could go completely wrong by channeling poor resentment into welfare state capitalism with a mix of authoritarianism speaking in the name of the workers it oppresses, which is what is happening now, instead of having a legitimate communist revolution.

[Brekisonphilous]

south america will turn into the only successful communist paradise and everyone from this board will move there and live happily ever after.

[WorkerBolshevik]

Will South America go wrong? It already has. It is crucial not to be confused by what has happened in Latin American politics, either with Castro, Allende, Chavez, Morales, Obrador, etc. Outside of Castro, who champions his own Latin American version of Stalinism, the politics of the recent Leftist leaders is not socialist even in the most contorted sense. Those who believe that these leaders do represent socialism are confusing socialism with anti-Americanism. Though there is nothing wrong with anti-Americanism in itself, it alone does not offer any hope for the workers or peasants (indigenous or ortherwise). What is important is to remove the bourgeois class as a whole (or in the case of Cuba the bureaucratic class), not just from the American bourgeois. These leftist leaders merely represent left-populist elements of the local bourgeois; by chaining the workers to them you are instilling the illusionary idea that these capitalists are somehow not opressive, and will someone willingly represent the rights of workers and peasants. We have already seen time and time again how even Castro and Morales don't hesitate to use the police and army to force striking workers back to work; the Bolivian working class has already called for the overthrow of Morales. What is worst, these Latin American populists arn't even against Imperialism as a whole, as they have demonstrated consistently their willingness to submit to French, German, English, and Japanese Imperialism. Any progress that toilers have made under any of these regeims is not a reflection on the corrupt capitalist leaders, but on the workers. Chavez must improve healthcare and housing for his people, for they have already in the past overthrown other leaders who have not done so. And all gains made in Bolivia up to this point have been as a direct result of working class and peasant mobilizations. So please, do not give these capitalists the credit for what the workers fought for years to gain. Praise their anti-Americanism as a small step forward if you must, but what is important is to fight for working class revolutions, not political support for capitalists.

[poetofrageX]

double post my bad

[poetofrageX]

the best position to take on this move to the left in L. America is in my opinon, one of critical support. We cant expect a wave of proletarian guerilla revolutions tomorrow, and most of these leaders are certainly far from socialist, but you cant deny the huge amount of improvement the working class is seeing in their living conditions. chavez has vastly improved the education and healthcare systems, and as long as the people are lving better lives, then we should support these leaders until they start undoing what they've done for the poor.

[IronColumn]

That's true we should be glad that the working classes have improved their conditions, but we also shouldn't treat these politically deft authoritarians as the next Durruti.

[WorkerBolshevik]

the best position to take on this move to the left in L. America is in my opinon, one of critical support. We cant expect a wave of proletarian guerilla revolutions tomorrow, and most of these leaders are certainly far from socialist, but you cant deny the huge amount of improvement the working class is seeing in their living conditions. chavez has vastly improved the education and healthcare systems, and as long as the people are lving better lives, then we should support these leaders until they start undoing what they've done for the poor.

It would certainly be inpermissable to give ANY political support to the bourgeoisie of any Latin American nation, be it critical support or otherwise. When you do so, you are giving legitimacy to class society and the capitalist state. We must free ourselves from all of our petty bourgeois illussions and not support these regiems, which would be perfectly willing to and will rollback the gains the workrs have won. It is unacceptable for anyone calling themselves socialist to have the illusion that any future gains will be handed to the workers by the capitalists. Instead, we must fight to protect the institutional victories the workers have made: nationalized healthcare, imporved education, improved infrastructure, and statified property. More so, we must fight for complete victory, which can only be achieved with the overthrow of class society through socialist revolution.

Side note, there is no such thing as a "proletarian guerilla revolution". The proletarian revolution, as has been seen historically and remains true today, takes place in the cities, where the means of production is located. Guerilla revolutions are peasant and petty bourgeois methods of revolution, such as in Cuba, where instead of a workers revolution there was a political revolution by petty bourgeois Stalinist guerillas.

[Comrade-Z]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2006, 06:04 AM
Will South America go wrong? It already has. It is crucial not to be confused by what has happened in Latin American politics, either with Castro, Allende, Chavez, Morales, Obrador, etc. Outside of Castro, who champions his own Latin American version of Stalinism, the politics of the recent Leftist leaders is not socialist even in the most contorted sense. Those who believe that these leaders do represent socialism are confusing socialism with anti-Americanism. Though there is nothing wrong with anti-Americanism in itself, it alone does not offer any hope for the workers or peasants (indigenous or ortherwise). What is important is to remove the bourgeois class as a whole (or in the case of Cuba the bureaucratic class), not just from the American bourgeois. These leftist leaders merely represent left-populist elements of the local bourgeois; by chaining the workers to them you are instilling the illusionary idea that these capitalists are somehow not opressive, and will someone willingly represent the rights of workers and peasants. We have already seen time and time again how even Castro and Morales don't hesitate to use the police and army to force striking workers back to work; the Bolivian working class has already called for the overthrow of Morales. What is worst, these Latin American populists arn't even against Imperialism as a whole, as they have demonstrated consistently their willingness to submit to French, German, English, and Japanese Imperialism. Any progress that toilers have made under any of these regeims is not a reflection on the corrupt capitalist leaders, but on the workers. Chavez must improve healthcare and housing for his people, for they have already in the past overthrown other leaders who have not done so. And all gains made in Bolivia up to this point have been as a direct result of working class and peasant mobilizations. So please, do not give these capitalists the credit for what the workers fought for years to gain. Praise their anti-Americanism as a small step forward if you must, but what is important is to fight for working class revolutions, not political support for capitalists.
I very much agree.

And even the rhetorical anti-Americanism of these capitalist politicians is often just that--rhetoric. Chavez rails against the U.S. during his weekly shows, then cuts deals with American oil companies giving away significant chunks of Venezuela's natural resources to U.S. companies.

Whatever genuine anti-Americanism these politicians bring to the table is due to pressure from their rank-and-file populations for anti-Americanism.

[RevSouth]

Originally posted by [email protected] 8 2006, 12:22 AM

Side note, there is no such thing as a "proletarian guerilla revolution". The proletarian revolution, as has been seen historically and remains true today, takes place in the cities, where the means of production is located. Guerilla revolutions are peasant and petty bourgeois methods of revolution, such as in Cuba, where instead of a workers revolution there was a political revolution by petty bourgeois Stalinist guerillas.
Comeon, Bolshevik! Urban guerillas? Guerilla warfare doesn't have to be rural. Secondly guerillism is a type of warfare, not a type of revolution (specifically). And a perfectly legitimate form of warfare at that. One used throughout history by small groups backed by the populace, to fight a more advanced, but less local power. Anyone can be a guerilla, and as for grassroots revolutionary leftists, I personally feel if we were to back any kind of warfare in the next ten years, guerillism would be the way to go.

[rebelworker]

Latin america now looks alot like Europe at many different times during the last century.

Nothing to get too worked up about in terms of electoral victories(though venezuela is a little different. Remember for much of the last 50 years europe elected "communists" and "socialists" all over the continent. They stayed within the electoral capitslist system and, well now look at europe, you have the "labour"party supporting the war on Iraq, "communists" crushing strikes in Spain and all sorts of other bullshit.

Look at the grassroots not to elected powers. Its gonna take less than a generation for this little wave of populism/nationalism/quasi-socialism to die down and return things to buisness as usual(if it largely already hasnt), but now mabey the bosses and rulers will wearr a red hat.

[rebelworker]

Latin america now looks alot like Europe at many different times during the last century.

Nothing to get too worked up about in terms of electoral victories(though venezuela is a little different. Remember for much of the last 50 years europe elected "communists" and "socialists" all over the continent. They stayed within the electoral capitslist system and, well now look at europe, you have the "labour"party supporting the war on Iraq, "communists" crushing strikes in Spain and all sorts of other bullshit.

Look at the grassroots not to elected powers. Its gonna take less than a generation for this little wave of populism/nationalism/quasi-socialism to die down and return things to buisness as usual(if it largely already hasnt), but now mabey the bosses and rulers will wearr a red hat.

[violencia.Proletariat]

It's not socialism but as long as is anti-imperialism then it's fine by me. That way the Latin American countries can develope their own economies and the workers can focus on fighting their own bourgeoisie, not the Americans.

[Cercet_LatinoLeader]

I'll just tell you guys 1 thing "IF" Latin America does lean left, it would be a major threat to the US, no question about it!, But know on the other hand the US won't allow it, due to the fact that they stick their nose in other peoples business all the time, plus it's too close to home! You know how it works, a couple of moves mad under the table & thats that!

Also if Che were still alive & he would be pulling this movement uniting all of Latin America&#33;&#33; I&#39;d be the first 1 backing him&#33;&#33; but w/ Castro i don&#39;t know, I&#39;m still thinking about it... <_<

[WorkerBolshevik]

Guerilla warfare doesn&#39;t have to be rural. Secondly guerillism is a type of warfare, not a type of revolution (specifically). And a perfectly legitimate form of warfare at that. One used throughout history by small groups backed by the populace, to fight a more advanced, but less local power. Anyone can be a guerilla, and as for grassroots revolutionary leftists, I personally feel if we were to back any kind of warfare in the next ten years, guerillism would be the way to go.

Any revolution worthy of the name, to be sure, will not be fought by any "small groups". A real social revolution, not the middle-clas political revolutions of the likes of Cuba, will be brought about through the overwhelming power of the industrial workers. It will be through general strikes, the formation of workers, peasants, and soldiers councils, and the take over of state power by those councils that the socialist revolution will occur; it is not something which any small group of intellectuals can accomplish for them.

[emma_goldman]

Speaking of Venezuela, I think things can go wrong if the people do not decide to take full power for themselves. Chavez has done some great things but he is a ruler all the same. The people should take full power into their hands. :D