Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
That is a good way of looking at it. The form has changed but the underlying values not. There certainly is enough reason to my mind for the populace to literally take to the streets but instead, there is the odd huelga about a specific issue so now and again. People do not seem to want to act politically.
|
Which has ALWAYS been my point. Whether the firebrands think so or not, there is no political will within the voting populace. And the actual voting results confirm this over and over.
Thank you for confirming my point.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Chris
This is such a strange thing. In my country I fully believe that I saw the only miracle that I will ever see in my life, and that is that the place did not erupt into bloody revolution. Yet, 20 years on, things are really still the same, only now a majority has the ruling power. But things have not really changed for the majority of the body politic. It looks the same to me in the DR in terms of change ... people do not really believe that they are empowered to speak out and to act. The peaceful and evolutionary political change process is painfully slow for people that existed under a dictatorship. We need a good revolution!  |
Chris, comparing institutional racism under apartheid and the current situation in the DR is absurd. I have no doubt it was painful for thinking white South Africans to live through it. The vicarious guilt must be painful. And I'm equally sure watching the violent aftermath, the fiery collaring and street death, was equally disturbing. It was for the rest of the world watching the events unfold. It had to be much worse for those who have a dog in the hunt.
But it begs the question of the future of the DR.
For some reason you seem to feel that economic solvency and social issues are in independent universes, that one who advocates economic growth must not also advocate social issues. In fact, that one who advocates economic growth actually advocates keeping "average people" down. The assumption is that a given economy is a "zero sum game"; that the "economic pie" is inflexible, and the allocation within that "pie" just needs to be redistributed, slivers re-allocated, in order to accomplish "social and economic justice". Nothing could be further from the truth.
FACT is, every program you advocate, better schools, emphasis on farming/agriculture, socialised healthcare, etc., come at a specific real cost. NOTHING comes for free. Nothing. And, once again, there are not enough economic resources to do these things without considerable damage to the economy as a whole. If you damage the productive segments of the economy, i.e. tourism, Free Zones, etc., then the financial deficit in the future gets even worse.
Once again, the root problem of the DR...and MANY poorer nations...is that they have more population that the internal resources can support.
Our difference of opinion boils down to your view of an economy. Mine happens to be borne from two advanced degrees, one in business, and one in economics, both from a prominent US university. I don't know where yours, or Ginnie & BB's, comes from.
There are really only two choices: set the economy back decades in an effort to accomplish the many social needs of today, or grow the economy to the point that it can pay for the social services into perpetuity. The former is a recipe for long-term disaster. The latter is a precarious balancing act.
One need to look no further than your native country to see the horrors of poor centralized socialist/Communist-style economic planning. Look at the former Rhodesia, once the garden of Africa. And close by, look at the fiasco of Cuba post Soviet Union collapse, and look at Hugo Chavez's recent begging for business investment to come back. ALL were well intended. ALL failures (and heck, Chavez has a supertanker full of oil cash)...
It's not a matter of saying "grow the GNP" really fast a hundred times for someone to believe it. It's a matter of reality. One can choose to accept facts as they are, or not.
IMO, if you want a really effective common-sense political/economic solution, one that could be both effective and progressive for your and Ginnie's social consciousness, would be a drive to insure that increases in social spending be tied to IMF analysis of increases in GNP. Currently I understand that figure is in the 6-6.5% range. Of course, I understand there is currently a mandated level of required spending for education that is being ignored; I would financially support any candidate who guarantees that law be adhered to, and do so strongly.
But there ARE actions with positive demonstrable results that private citizens CAN do, outside the pervue of gubmint, that can achieve great, sustainable results. I wrote a first-hand account of one such organization, Fundacion Balarminio Ramirez from Jarabacoa, and the excellent, off-the-radar, carrot/stick/play it forward strategy they have been employing in the small farming community of Los Dajaous. A true success story in organizational charity, community education, and sustainable organic agriculture. But you deleted the entire post. Didn't move it to an area not "Environmental", but deleted it.
We've been invited to participate in this organizations work with the local school. I'm hesitant to make a lengthy first-hand report on that, for fear you'll delete it, too.