Sentimental Fool

I've had some really interesting conversations over the years with people about the past, whether it has ever really been better than the present, why so many people remember what happened fifty years ago but not what happened yesterday. Why your first 18 years drag on like centuries, then suddenly you are in your 50s and wondering where the time went.

Half of my family are sloppy sentimentalists who can sit around, usually after a few drinks, and start getting all maudling about the past and people long gone who they probably never actually liked. Or about places they visited or lived that, at the time, they loathed.

I remember Billy Connolly once talking about longing for the Gorbals. So he went back after years of pining for the place only to realise it was that time of his life he pined for, his childhood and youth, not the physical place. It was actually a real dump.

Some time ago I wrote a story about 'crossing the great divide' and below is how I wrote one of the last paragraphs:

They finished the last dregs of their tea before granddad asked whether Sam wanted to go out through the back door or the front door. It was something Sam had often wondered about and now the time had come, he had no problem making his choice. It was definitely the back door, the very same door granddad had stepped through that first day at work. There was no real choice for Sam, the past reassured him but the future was full of terror and uncertainty, you never knew what lay ahead. But the past was there, it was certain, it comforted and reassured. It had to be the back door, he had made that decision weeks ago when the doctors told him.

But then again, you can't beat a bit of classic Roxy Music. From their album Siren I give you, Sentimental Fool



So occasionally I now pine for Gorton, Glossop, Edmonton, Plumstead and Zamora. But never Nicaragua!

Ecuador

Latin America has held a fascination for me as far back as I can remember. At a tender age I could identify the flags of all the Latin American countries and name their capitals, populations, biggest industries and all the bunk you can absorb, if you're so inclined, from encyclopaedias and the Pear's Cyclopaedia (1968 Edition).

Then in 1990 we decided to sell up and spend some time travelling in Latin America, a bit of a delayed gap year. We ended up teaching English in Mexico. As we arrived in the town in the Sierra Madre mountains where we were to begin work, our bus from Mexico City was buzzed by helicopters and the streets were crammed full of soldiers. First thoughts were that we had arrived in the middle of a coup. But no, the President, Carlos Salinas de Gortari, was speaking at an open air rally in the town. He was hugely popular at the time, but now lives in almost voluntary exile after leaving office in disgrace.

We were in Guatemala when Mrs Thatcher was deposed. It took some effort to convince our friends in Guatemala City that Britain hadn't actually had a coup. They found it hypocritical that they had been lectured on democracy by Europeans only to see the democratically elected leader of the UK ousted by a cabal. We eventually explained how our quaint form of democracy works, but it came to look even more absurd as we explained it. Mrs T was so admired they offered to drop their claim to Belize if we could arrange for her to take charge of Guatemala.

We also briefly knew the nephew of one of Guatemala's presidential candidates. The uncle seemed to be a decent, honest man and we were given the opprtunity to return for the election and follow his campaign. Foolishly we had so much of the continent to see, the Amazon, the Andes and so much more that we declined. He was elected but the last we heard, a couple of years later, he had been put under virtual house arrest by the military then sent into exile in El Salvador.

The early days of Violeta Chamorro's presidency of Nicaragua saw us surveying the shambolic state of anarchy that the Sandinistas had left behind in Nicaragua. Glad to be out of the hell that was Nicaragua we fled to Costa Rica, arriving as an earthquake struck.

But enough of my ramblings. It was the sight of Ecuador's President Rafael Correa standing in a hospital window shouting to the crowd of police and other demonstrators gathered below, that if they wanted to kill a president, there he was and they were welcome to take a pot shot. It could only happen in Latin America. He wasn't shot and, yet again, a Latino president was saved by the military after a gun battle between them and the police.

I can't help thinking that here in Britain Cameron would stand in a window, probably behind bullet proof glass, shouting: "Come on then, you want to heckle a Prime Minister? Then jolly well do it!".

The crowd would look up at the window, look at each other and mumble: "Stuff this, let's go for a curry. Who is that pillock?".

I still do miss Latin America.

Honduras-Restoring Democracy

I spent some time in Honduras in 1990, mainly in San Pedro Sula, Tegucigalpa and a little town on the Gulf of Fonseca called Cedeno (pictured). On the beach at Cedeno there was a constant passing above of UN helicopters flying between listening posts in Nicaragua on one side and El Salvador on the other. But Honduras was stable.

Last week there was a coup after their right of centre president decided to go loopy and declare himself socialist. He then allied himself with Chavez in Venezuela and Morales in Bolivia. Just like these anti-democratic socialists Zelaya then started to dismantle Honduras's democratic constitution. Last week he was overthrown, an interim government is in place and democracy will imminently be restored.

It is always sad when the military intervene but in Latin America they are essential. The Honduran military were left with no option. There is a history in Latin America of leftist despots blighting and impoverishing the country with the military eventually intervening to restore democracy. Alvaro Vargas Losa, of the Independent Institute takes a slightly less positive view in this article, which is well worth a read. He believes upcoming constitutional votes would have rejected Zelaya's march to dictatorship. I disagree, I believe Zelaya would have made sure he won, one way or the other. Or, like the EU he would have just come back from a slightly different angle, with the result he wanted.

When faced with socialism I'm all for military intervention, with a swift return to democracy.

Venezula's Chavez Dictatorship

Latin America has a special interest for me, so the following article particularly drew my attention. Alvaro Vargas Llosa is always worth a read and the Independent Institute always worth a visit:

Showdown In Caracas
June 3, 2009
Alvaro Vargas Llosa



CARACAS, Venezuela—A group of foreign writers, academics and politicians was invited here to celebrate the 25th anniversary of Cedice, a Venezuelan think tank that promotes liberal democracy and the market economy, both of which President Hugo Chavez wants to destroy. The government’s thuggish reaction turned the visit into a public showdown that helped expose what Venezuelans are going through these days.

Although there were visitors from three continents, the authorities took aim particularly at those from Latin America. Four of us were detained at the airport, in my case for three hours, and told to refrain from making political comments. We were followed by the secret police—known as DISIP—in cars with no license plates, and a hostile mob was sent to the main venue. Agents masquerading as journalists were instructed to provoke us. The president and his ministers took turns insulting us on TV from dawn to dusk.

Once the official welcoming became an international media embarrassment, Chavez changed tactics and invited us to debate him and a group of “revolutionary intellectuals” none of us had ever heard of. The president did not really intend to debate, but we decided to put the ball back in his court. I suggested that novelist Mario Vargas Llosa, my father and the senior figure in our group, debate Chavez one on one. A few of us would accompany him to witness that basic conditions be met: no government mobs in the room, and live coverage on the government-controlled networks. Former Mexican Foreign Minister Jorge Castaneda, Mexican historian Enrique Krauze, Colombian writer Plinio Apuleyo Mendoza, our hosts Rocio Guijarro and Rafael Alfonzo, and others backed the suggestion. We put it to Chavez; as expected, he backed down.

The Cedice event and the government’s response helped to convey a simple truth about Chavez—that the emperor has no clothes. Venezuelans had been told that we were imperialists bent on destroying the revolution. But Chavez needs no such help; he is doing a fine job of it himself.

Two years after blocking the ability of Radio Caracas Television, the oldest network in the country, to broadcast over open airwaves, the government is going after Globovision, an independent network. Chavez has levelled trumped-up charges against the owner, Guillermo Zuloaga, who also has several Toyota dealerships and has been indicted for “hoarding” vehicles in order to resell them through “usury.” Globovision itself is officially accused of spreading fear for criticizing the authorities’ slow response to an earthquake and disrespecting the president. Chavez has promised to close down the network.

Opposition mayors and governors have been stripped of their powers and are being viciously persecuted. Manuel Rosales, mayor of Maracaibo and a former presidential candidate, has received political asylum in Peru. The mayor of Caracas, Antonio Ledezma, who gave our group a welcoming speech, dramatically told us that his country is now “a dictatorship.” Retired Gen. Raul Baduel, a former Chavez loyalist who broke with the president during his first attempt to change the constitution in pursuit of “indefinite re-election,” is now in prison.

The Official Gazette, where government decrees are published, has become an ode to theft. On a daily basis, it announces the takeover of local and foreign businesses—rarely with compensation. The nationalizations, often executed through violence, affect all areas of the economy: telecommunications, electricity, oil fields in the Orinoco Basin and oil field services, steel and cement production, banks, metallurgical firms, the food industry and agricultural land. The victims include Venezuelan, American, Mexican, French, Spanish, Swiss, Japanese and Australian investors.

Only a few foreigners have been spared—notably Brazilian companies, because Chavez is begging Brazil’s government for money. The corrupt mismanagement of the state-owned oil company PDVSA has seen production drop by one-third. Given the commitments made by Chavez on behalf of the Bolivarian revolution when the price of oil was much higher, the government is seriously short of cash. Chavez knows that his political machinery, based on expensive patronage and intimidation, is in jeopardy.

Thanks to Chavez’s overreaction, which gave the Cedice event a wider audience than expected, millions of Venezuelans were able to hear about our different experiences with authoritarian populism. They should take heart in the message that it can be reversed and that they are not alone in trying to prevent a second Cuba in the Western Hemisphere.

Paraguay-The Heart of Latin America

Lugo (left) embraces the Governor of the Central Department

In 1991 I was fortunate enough to spend a few weeks in Paraguay. It was in the transitional period, following the overthrow in a coup of General Alfredo Stroessner, to democracy and General Rodriguez was interim president pending elections.

At the time there were positives in Paraguay, but the move to democracy was vital. Sadly, as seems to be the case in Latin America, there is a brief flirtation with democracy then some lefty lunatic, in the mode of Che 'Ernie' Guevara, decides a few people are poor therefore the state must be overthrown, slaughtering a few thousand poor 'peasants' in the process. The left then proceed to bleed the country dry before the military step in. There then follows swift retribution, followed by liberalisation and a gradual return to something like democracy. Then the cycle begins again.

The following warning, ahead of elections in Paraguay, is from the Independent Institute website: http://www.independent.org/

Latin America Doesn’t Need Another Radical Like Chávez Paraguay Must not Elect a Populist Who Belittles the Rule of Law October 10, 2007Carlos SabinoChristian Science Monitor

ASUNCIÓN, PARAGUAY—“Change or death.” That’s the stark campaign slogan of Fernando Lugo in his bid to become Paraguay’s next president.
The outspoken populist appeals to the poor—but he also increasingly resembles Latin America’s leading anti-democratic firebrand, Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez.
His candidacy is cause for concern that Paraguay’s gradual 18-year move toward democracy may be reversed. The last thing Latin America needs is another populist troublemaker.
Already, Paraguay’s democratic progress has taken a few hits under the current government. President Nicanor Duarte Frutos, whose term ends next August, has tried—unsuccessfully so far—to amend the Constitution so he can run for reelection. As his campaign to remain in control becomes more desperate, so have his methods. They have grown increasingly strident and confrontational—common in a region long known for populist politics.
His party, the traditional National Republican Association, or Colorado Party as it is known, has split into three factions, with little likelihood of reconciliation.
That means the opposition is now poised to assume power. As bad as Mr. Duarte may seem, the opposition is worse; as is its leading candidate, Mr. Lugo.
A former priest who became bishop of San Pedro, Lugo has long been involved in politics and is known as an outspoken advocate of a controversial ideology popular in the 1970s and 1980s known as liberation theology. This earned Lugo the title of Paraguay’s “Red Bishop.”
The Catholic Church hierarchy dismissed Lugo from his clerical duties when he announced his candidacy for president, but that didn’t stop him. On the contrary, his removal from the clergy appears to have intensified his anti-democratic stances, which increasingly allies Lugo with Venezuela’s Mr. Chávez and Bolivia’s Evo Morales. On a billboard that rises over Asunción’s main boulevard, for example, the Lugo campaign advertises the slogan, “Change or death,” and brags that their candidate doesn’t consider himself “a slave of the law.” So much for the rule of law.
The opposition faces a dilemma. If it continues to support Lugo, it could win—maybe—but will have to deal with a demagogue who thumbs his nose at the law and could plunge the country into chaos. If it enters the elections divided—already, three parties have split off from the original coalition of 10—and offers several candidates, it is almost sure to lose. Worse, Lugo could go all the way and become a dictatorial strongman like Chávez.
Though the political class is wary of him, Lugo has broad support among the country’s poor, who are drawn to his populist rhetoric about the evil rich and the need to redistribute wealth to those less fortunate.
Ranting about the rich has broad appeal because Paraguay is a poor country with a high unemployment rate—nearly half the labor force works in agriculture, more than 16 percent of the population is unemployed, and 36 percent of all Paraguayans live below the official poverty line. And while not totally in shambles, its economy is languid, growing at a compounded annual rate of just 1.3 percent per year over the past five years, according to The Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal’s 2007 Index of Economic Freedom, which ranks the economy well down the list in terms of openness—99th out of 157 globally, and 22nd out of 29 in the Americas.
With a weak economy; high levels of government corruption; and a restrictive, highly regulated, labor market—one of the worst in the world—Paraguayan society is ripe for the kind of politics-of-envy message being peddled by Lugo. This is all music to Chávez’s ears.
For now, the likely outcome is far from clear. Lugo’s words and actions have created considerable unease among many even within his own coalition. The ruling party is torn by divisions. There are even proposals afoot to legally block Lugo’s candidacy.
The unease is also spreading to neighboring countries, especially Brazil, which are understandably concerned about having another radical populist in the neighborhood.
Meanwhile, the clock is ticking—not only for Paraguay, but for all of Latin America, which hardly needs another populist strongman to add to the region’s problems.

Carlos Sabino is an adjunct fellow with The Independent Institute, and a visiting professor and researcher at the Universidad Francisco Marroquín Foundation in Guatemala.