Re: [Marxism] Chile's Bachelet faces thuggish or-else diplomacy as US demands she line up vs. Chavez

["Fred Feldman" <ffeldman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Prem peers through the clouded future and prophesies:

Bachelet, like Manmohan Singh and the Indian Congress Party, will
politely bend over and allow the U.S. imperialists to anal rape Chile
and India, economically and in foreign policy. We'll soon hear haughty
"concerns" about Venezuela's democracy coming from Ms. US Sock Puppet.
She might even compare Chavez to Pinochet, along the lines of "I was
there during Pinochet, and I see Venezuela going down the same road", or
some other rubbish. She'll shake her empty head at how Venezuela's
economic policies are just too "unrealistic", and how they need to be
more "pragmatic", and support the FTAA like she unconditionally does.

Fred comments:

Could happen, can't deny that, but right now that is being fought over.
In Washington's view, Ms. Sock Puppet is not repeating the words of her
Senor Wences (old Ed Sullivan reference) accurately and in the right
order. I think we should take a side in the fight over this even if the
outcome, in retrospect, ends up seeming inevitable.

IF it doesn't happen, of course, Prem will become eligible for the James
Petras award for prophesy that, far from providing guidance, has to be
lived down.

Bachelet would be a great conquest for the US campaign against Chavez,
Morales, the rural and indigenous people of Peru, and others. But the
conquest has not yet been made. But surely the local ruling classes in
these countries have to be getting more alarmed about the turn things
are taking, and the pressures on governments like Bachelet, Lula, et al
have to be on the rise -- but from more than one direction, fortunately.


Prem is sure Bachelet will condemn Chavez's economic policies as
unrealistic and join in demands that he line up with "there is no
alternative."  This would be a very sharp change in her current position
-- which doesn't make it impossible, of course -- not at all.  It just
can't be treated as a foregone conclusion.

Bachelet's stand on Chavez's economic policies is that they are a good
thing, made possible -- in her view -- by Venezuela's oil wealth (which
has certainly helped a lot -- but is not the DECISIVE factor in my view,
that being the mobilization of the oppressed and exploite).

Since Chile has no comparable resource advantage, she clearly suggests,
this is quite impossible for Chile.  Obviously, she has no intention of
taking a Venezuela or Bolivia-related road, not to mention the Cuban.
And Allende did not take that road either which didn't keep him from
being overthrown and murdered (whether or not he committed suicide to
avoid being tortured and murdered -- a perfectly reasonable act in his
position, if that's what happened) on orders from Washington.

But becoming an enemy of Venezuela and Bolivia and Cuba does not flow
automatically from not following a road comparable to their roads.

Her government is not the only one to face this.  It relates to Brazil,
Argentina, Uruguay, and probably others.

They never could get Allende to break with Cuba despite the benefits he
might have received for doing so from Washington (such as the ability to
complete his term and go on to a comfortable retirement).  I'm sure he
got offers -- and we know he got orders.

By the way, Pinochet et al weren't sock puppets either.

I think its important to see the complexity of the Latin American
situation today which cannot be reduced to Castro-Chavez-Morales vs. a
continent of US "sock puppets."  There's no sign that the US can put
together the kind of reactionary coalition similar to the one that saw
all Latin American states except Mexico break ties with Cuba, and the
expulsion of Cuba from the OAS.

US imperialism has been weakened.  Note the way the Iraqi occupation
government has evolved away from "sock puppet" control.  Under Allawi,
they seemed pretty much on board.  Now not only do sharp differences
appear on many questions, but the government apparently has trouble
deciding whose sock puppet they want to be -- Washington's or Tehran's.
Perhaps Senor Wences is having a nervous breakdown.

Certainly one shouldn't have to threaten a sock puppet to make it say
what you want -- what else can it (or Ms., as Prem bizarrely terms the
cloth plaything he visualizes).  Yet that is what is happening to
Bachelet right now.

I think it's a good thing that Bachelet decided to cut a deal with
concessions to the students, rather than yielding to pressure for a
broad crackdown on unrest.  I wish there had been enough mass unrest to
give her leeway to challenge more sharply the actions of the cops, whose
violence is very likely to turn against her if she continues carry out
un-sock-puppet activities.

But I agree the pressure on her will mount.  Hopefully it will keep
mounting from more than one direction, making predictions about the
outcome at any given moment rather too bold for my taste.

Look for instance, how often the government of Ecuador has seemed to buy
the Washington contract, only to start veering off course again.

Its really not the Latin America of 1960-61 today. And if the movement
in Ecuador can make the capture of government power its axis -- and not
simply this demand and that (the focus on government power as the goal
was the strong contribution to the revolutionary process of Chavez and
Morales, in my opinion) -- Washington's position could get significantly
worse. Fred Feldman



_________________________________

This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from
http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm


<http://promos.hotbar.com/promos/promodll.dll?RunPromo&El=&SG=&RAND=2276
1&partner=hbtools> Upgrade Your Email - Click here!

________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism