political moment of the day
Tuesday the 19th came and went. The U.N. showdown that was supposed to occur between Iran and the United States has not received that much coverage ( I listened to NPR for about 3 hours yesterday, and was on NY Times and Salon.com) and what seems to be the highlight of the U.N. meeting that day? Hugo Chavez.
It is my firm contention that the issue the United States government mishandled the most was not their relations with the Middle East, nor was it Asiatic relations, nor even European relations, it was that unexpected continent, Latin America. It is true that of all the Latin American countries and their elections the failure of Lopez-Obrador (hereafter, AMLO) to win in Latin America was not a triumph for the Left, but the Mexican election was pretty noticeable, at least in California. I do not like Calederón, and while I prefer AMLO, the fact of the matter is no matter how flawed their government is, he lost. True, there was most likely electoral fraud (when and where isn't there?), but the fact remains that it has been confirmed. AMLO needs to not necessarily accept that fact, but realise that attempting to completely disrupt the government is not helpful.
I believe in reform. However, reform has to come from within, not from without; this applies more so to people, but also goverments. People can't accept radical change in one day, and AMLO is going to garner a lot of bitterness if he continues this. I wish he had one. His policies do seem more conducive to improving the state of Mexican democracy (of actually making it democratic) but that's another story.
But once more, we must turn to Latin America. Chavez in Venezuela. Morales in Bolivia. Lula de Silva in Brazil. Bachelet in Chile (a Socialist woman). Uribe in Colombia. These are the Leftist/left-leaning governments currently in power I can think of. The fact of the matter is, with the Mexican election being noticable, with a Socialist woman in one country, and Chavez the loudmouth in another, Latin America is not what Bush thought it would be. It's not what I thought it would be, either. It is one of the most neglected regions of the world, and if we continue mishandling it this way, we're going to have more than a few, disorganized angry neighbours, but a mob of angry nations that not only are ready to, but are able to challenge us.
The unipolar world that was created in 1992 can no longer exist, and the challenges from Iran and to a far lesser extent of Venezuela are proof of that. Like Chavez, I believe in a multipolar world. I was especially excited to hear the reference to Cold War non-Alignment on the radio today. It was lovely, and accurate. The world is changing, and I hope in 2006 and in 2008 we start electing leaders in this country (locally, state-wide, and nationally) that can help us function and thrive in this world. I think there is a place in this world for America the great, not America the arrogant.
Ugh, I need to translate this optimism into action.
all right, I gotta shower and eat brehfast.
It is my firm contention that the issue the United States government mishandled the most was not their relations with the Middle East, nor was it Asiatic relations, nor even European relations, it was that unexpected continent, Latin America. It is true that of all the Latin American countries and their elections the failure of Lopez-Obrador (hereafter, AMLO) to win in Latin America was not a triumph for the Left, but the Mexican election was pretty noticeable, at least in California. I do not like Calederón, and while I prefer AMLO, the fact of the matter is no matter how flawed their government is, he lost. True, there was most likely electoral fraud (when and where isn't there?), but the fact remains that it has been confirmed. AMLO needs to not necessarily accept that fact, but realise that attempting to completely disrupt the government is not helpful.
I believe in reform. However, reform has to come from within, not from without; this applies more so to people, but also goverments. People can't accept radical change in one day, and AMLO is going to garner a lot of bitterness if he continues this. I wish he had one. His policies do seem more conducive to improving the state of Mexican democracy (of actually making it democratic) but that's another story.
But once more, we must turn to Latin America. Chavez in Venezuela. Morales in Bolivia. Lula de Silva in Brazil. Bachelet in Chile (a Socialist woman). Uribe in Colombia. These are the Leftist/left-leaning governments currently in power I can think of. The fact of the matter is, with the Mexican election being noticable, with a Socialist woman in one country, and Chavez the loudmouth in another, Latin America is not what Bush thought it would be. It's not what I thought it would be, either. It is one of the most neglected regions of the world, and if we continue mishandling it this way, we're going to have more than a few, disorganized angry neighbours, but a mob of angry nations that not only are ready to, but are able to challenge us.
The unipolar world that was created in 1992 can no longer exist, and the challenges from Iran and to a far lesser extent of Venezuela are proof of that. Like Chavez, I believe in a multipolar world. I was especially excited to hear the reference to Cold War non-Alignment on the radio today. It was lovely, and accurate. The world is changing, and I hope in 2006 and in 2008 we start electing leaders in this country (locally, state-wide, and nationally) that can help us function and thrive in this world. I think there is a place in this world for America the great, not America the arrogant.
Ugh, I need to translate this optimism into action.
all right, I gotta shower and eat brehfast.