The Bolivian President has enlightened us:

Bolivia’s left-wing president said unbridled industrial development was responsible for the pillaging of natural resources.

Speaking through an interpreter at the UN headquarters in New York, he had this uncompromising message: “If we want to save our planet earth, to save life, to save mankind, we have a duty to put an end to the capitalist system.”

What an absolutely ridiculous and unproductive statement. Has anyone informed President Morales what the end result is in every country on the planet where capitalism DOESN’T exist? Let’s just ignore the fact that the only path OUT of poverty for indigenous civilizations on the planet has always been capitalism. Are we going to pretend that capitalism “doesn’t work” because of industrialists who pillage the environment? At what point is someone going to point out two very critical facts:

1) Capitalism is not–by its definition–synonymous with raping and pillaging of the environment.
2) Bio-fuels are a bad idea NOT because they are “putting cars ahead of people” but because they are inefficient.

Posted at 09:13 pm by Johnny B

The BBC is so enamored with the new Bolivian president. Every time he visits a new country, it is on their website. Apparently, in order to travel from Bolivia you first need to win the presidency. Mainly I think they do so to write sentences like:

Posted at 09:36 pm by Johnny B

	Posted by BP @ 01/11/2006 07:31 PM PST
	Yeah…free market…baahh! That never works. Here’s my favorite quote: “Mr Morales has vowed not to forget the people who put him in power, and has said he will take a pay cut of 50% when he takes office which he says will help pay the salaries of new teachers.” LOL

	Posted by John Cook @ 01/12/2006 09:38 PM PST
	One thinks you must be a tad bit alarmed at what appears to be a left wing revolution in South America. Bolivia’s leader is only one you mention. Do not forget Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay and now Chile. While our President acts the world’s A number one terroist fighter, his own back yard is rapidly heading left.

	Posted by BP @ 01/13/2006 04:16 PM PST
	One could make a good argument for the return of the old Monroe Doctrine. One doesn’t need to cross the world to fight despotism…that’s for certain. Unfortunately, there are plenty of representatives in our own legislature who are fans of “increas[ing] social spending and turn[ing] away from free-market policies.” Our own president is responsible for one of the largest increases in social spending in the last 40 years. In and of itself it all sounds so innocent…but as mr cook stated, it SHOULD be a little unsettling.

	Posted by John Broussard @ 01/13/2006 09:36 PM PST
	“What appears to be” is a good qualifier here. Take da Silva (of Brazil). This guy ran as a hard-liner lefty threatening not to repay foreign debts, etc. He was a union leader who rose to political power. I can’t recall specifics off the top of my head, but I heard on NPR how da Silva changed his tune about nationalizing the banks etc. once elected, and in fact passed some market-based reforms. I paraphrase, but I remember him saying that poor Brazilians need jobs. So his campaign rhetoric didn’t match his real world policies. Da Silva is more like Dominique Villepin than Castro. As for Chile, they’ve been right wing for a long time…I doubt this socialist single mom is going to make a lot of lefty reforms there. Lastly, however much I disagree with their politics, these people were elected, and left wing does not always equate to terrorism. However, Chavez has concentrated his power too much over the last few years, and I feel there will be many more “landslides” he will win. For some reason, I don’t see that happening with Evo.