I don't agree with everything Hugo Chavez believes in, but his latest proposal is the mark of brilliance, and in my opinion, a step in the right direction. At a meeting with a group of African Nations on Margarita Island, President Chavez proposed the formation of a Joint Continental corporation comprising African and South American nations which would allow them to control their resources as opposed to continually being exploited by Western based multi-national corporations. Chavez believes this is the only way for Africa and South American to move forward. You can read more about his game plan here:http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090927...zBHNlYwN5bi1yLWItbGVmdARzbGsDZXYtY2hhdmV6cHJv Why Chavez's Plan is Brilliant To those of us who are educated and well read, it isn't a big secret that the reason why Africa and South America continue to lag behind the rest of the world economically is because they have and are being exploited by "First World" nations, mostly those based in the U.S. and Europe(though Asia is getting in on the game to). Both Africa and South America are rich nations in terms of raw materials, but the reason they have so many poor people is because many African and South American nations are comprised of dictators(often backed and put in power by Western nations like the U.S.), who then take the resources of the country and turn these over to large transnational corporations based in Europe, the U.S., and Asia. This is a fact, those of you who don't believe go read the books "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" and "Secret History of the American Empire" to learn how Europe and America have raped third world nations since the days of colonialism. This has been going on for centuries. With Chavez's plan, a join alliance between Africa and South America would lead to the formation of a corporation which would work for the best interests of the people, mining the resources and using them for the benefit of the people instead of Western based corps. So far Mali, Niger, Mauritania, Sierra Leon, and other Africa nations have shown interest in plan. The future for both South America and Africa could be bright. I might be interested in investing in such a corporation. Though it would be risky, the reward would be worth it. Venezuela already has the funding to carry out mining operations in both their country as well as the African nations. The raw materials which are extracted can be used to finance the operation. I think this plan can work only if the African and South American nations can work together and block any Western(European or American corporations, or Asian corporations from getting involved).
Both Latin America and Africa, and in general all developing countries play a big role in the world economic, the G-7 realized their importance since the financial crises started to appear in late 90's, this is why it became the G-20 despite the original members of the club hated to include the rest 13, they had no other choice but to include them to save their collapsing economics, now it is time for these 13 countries, and other countries including Latin American, and African to realize their importance to the world economics, not just to the club economics, and get a share of the benefits of being producers, not just markets, I believe it is a brilliant idea indeed, but in theory, I am not sure how it will be when implemented, since you already mentioned that "many African and South American nations are comprised of dictators", and all the corruption that is there, but still, as you said, it worth the try, and the risk, for the benefits that it will hold, not only for Latin American and African countries only, but also for other countries who suffered from the stealing of their wealth either directly or indirectly. mining is a big and important step, but it should be followed by other not less important steps that cover the fields of agriculture, industry, health, education, and defense, to enable these countries to make use of their wealth to develop their countries, and not ending in giving their wealth almost for free in return of some food, medicine, or weapons.
Haven't read it all but it seems interesting, will read more when I wake up. But, dictators working together.. wouldn't bank on it. Read this at in interesting time though, I've been thinking of how investing could be applied to poor countries to raise the people up, with dictators 'n all.
I hold myself to be "educated and well read" and I do not agree with this. The exploitation constitute a non-negligible part of the lag. But saying that this lag is only due to the "evil west" and has nothing to do with the problems of their own societies, in particularly the lack of democratic tradition, is absolutely wrong. Especially in the case of south america, where the economies there are emerging, esp' in Brazil. Bolivia was a democratic country before Chavez, who obliterated its democracy and established an autocracy: nationalized the radio, the oil and all other private sector companies, has limited the freedom of speech and uses the media and the schools to idolize himself. By thus, he has taken Bolivia on the right path to become a second turkmenistan: 1 year after the Chavez coup in 2002, Bolivia had an estimated GDP of US$22.3 billion in 2004. After Chavez's irreversible damages, the GDP of Bolivia dropped to $18.94 billion in 2008. source (! you understand the disastrous meaning of these figures for the people of Venezuela, when their economy drops 20% when the world's economy grows 20% ?!) You have no idea how absurd I find that you embrace any of Chavez's ideas. But please, don't be so innocent: they have nothing to do with honest care about Africa/South america but are rather due to his personal fanatic hate of the west, and hate of you and everything that you and your country represents.
If a dictator is the one selling the country's assets to the west or Europe... that means he's the one currently getting the plunder. Somehow I don't see the guys currently getting the money setting up a cartelle designed to eliminate that outcome. Such an arrangement could have the same general effect on their bargaining power that the formation of OPEC had on oil producers. BUT... just as some (by no means all) oil rich countries have plenty of revenue on paper, very well fed rulers, plenty of soldiers on the budget but an impoversihed general populace... even if such a group is formed it seems unlikely that a despot would allow the proceeds to filter down to the people of the country. btw - Not that it affects my answer... there are some of areas of Africa poor because in the wake of colonialism the power vacuum never got filled by a stable government. Some continue to have coups and a rapidly changing list of strongmen grabbing the helm, some have civil war and/or anarchy. Somalia has anarchy that is somewhat tempered by the will of competing warlords.
What's going to happen is what is being taught at business schools in the First World. We're being taught that Americans and Europeans should take a more entrepreneurial approach to global economics while the rest of the world catches up technologically serving as the labor force. Students getting their MBA at the University of Wisconsin amongst others are literally being taught they are supposed to serve as the organizers of global capital. We're breeding a new economic system of inclusion where the poor are even more subservient to the wealthy. Africa and South America glitter with natural resources pouring out from within the earth. Any unity on the part of these continents that endangers the well being of the First World will be squashed. Conflicts will be ubiquitous as combat is the most resource intensive endeavor humans can undertake. It's all very organized and orchestrated.
Both you guys make good points, in order for such a plan to succeed, total cooperation would be necessary on the part of the nations involved. The good news for South America is that there is a growing number of leaders that are looking out for the best interests of the people instead of themselves. You have Evo Morales of Bolivia(who actually reduced his salary and is one of the first Amerindian presidents), then you have Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, and then you have Rafael Correa of Ecuador. So here you have three South American presidents who, from what I've read, actually seem to be putting the best interests of the people first. Are they perfect? Of course not, but an alliance between the three of them and some African countries would be a great step in the right direction. One way to get around the problem of corruption is to block any dictators from being involved with the organization. I think the organization could be structured somewhat like OPEC, where there are member states. Those states who are admitted to the organization who do not use their resources for constructive purposes could be removed, while perks an incentives can be offered to those states that choose to join. The Key to making this plan work is to avoid allowing countries to join who have gregarious human rights abuses and who are not using their resources for the betterment of the people. Every few months, the organization can gather for a meeting and evaluate the progress of each to determine their progress. These nations can also trade with each other and purpose form an alliance in the vein of NATO. By trading with one another, and encouraging all members to use their resources for their countries, all the nations would benefit, and perhaps more nations in the respective continents, seeing the success of their neighbors, would join. It is a tough plan, because the West has a lot of dominance in both continents. But an OPEC like organization that is designed to ensure the resources which the citizens of the member countries would be quite powerful. They could also work together to cut off supplies to Europe and the United States. For example, if the U.S. tries to use a coup to overthrow one of the member states, the rest of the member states could either provide military support within the country in which the coup has occurred, or better yet, get together and block U.S. exports from entering their respective countries while simultaneously restricting their raw materials from being sold to the U.S. Chavez could cut off oil supplies to the U.S., while the African countries could cut off oil supplies, natural gas, and other needed materials. If this organization had, say, 12 member states, the U.S. doesn't have the man power to invade all of them. Therefore, it would be forced to comply with the wishes of the state. This is what Sun Tzu referred to as "winning without fighting" in the Art of War. To beat Europe and the U.S., Africa and South America doesn't have to use military force, all they need to do is cut off the flow of raw materials, which at the least would force the Europe and U.S. to use their own supplies or look elsewhere. You seem to have your countries confused............Hugo Chavez is not even the president of Bolivia, he is the president of Venezuela........Evo Morales is the Bolivian president, and has been since 2006. Not sure where you get the idea that Chavez has all this power of other nations in South America. Has has influence, but not the type of power you are describing. I agree with this statement, we can't blame it all on Western nations, but I hold them at least 80% to 90% responsible, since they install and remove presidents of many of these nations(this is a documented fact). The best solution is for the people of the poor nations to revolt against the government, set up a republic with a constitution like the U.S., and then hold elections and put in the best person to lead. This is what Americans did, and it worked. A lot of problems in these African and Latin American nations would be solved if the people had the right to bare arms. That is how you deal with the drug cartels in Mexico, but Calderon is too corrupt to ever allow that. This moron is sending the Mexican military and police after the drug traffickers, spending a bunch of money in the process. The smart and strategic thing to do would be either to 1) legalize drugs in Mexico and or 2) purchase thousands of AK-47s and arm the Mexican public to the teeth, then sit back and watch them rape the drug cartels and destroy them once and for all. But Mexico, like most countries where people are not free, will not allow men and women to bare arms, always the mark of freedom in a free society. The same goes for Africa and South America, Machiavelli said that the people will love the prince who trusts them enough to allow them to carry weapons to protect their families. The right to carry arms is one reason why the U.S. has remained free for so long. The truth is that Africa and South America provide Europe and America with much of their raw materials, and without these raw materials, the European and American engine slows down. If these resources are used for the betterment of the people they could act to finance the construction of hospital universities, and local businesses, allowing both continents to play a larger role in the global economy. I disagree with you on Brazil, and if you read "Secret History of the American Empire" you will understand why. First off, Brazil is not "emerging." Just because a country's GDP rises doesn't mean the country is becoming wealthier. What is usually happening is that a handful of elite at the top are making more than 90% of the wealth at the expense of the rest of the country, and this shows up in the GDP numbers as "growth." Governments lie when it comes to GDP and numbers, you can't believe them. For instance, they say unemployment right now here in the U.S. is 10%(this is like the official amount), but Ron Paul said the actually number was 20.8 and that the government is lying. In countries such as the Dominican Republic, they say that GDP is $8,000, which is total BS because I know people who live there and they say many people barely make $250 per month. The GDP of countries like the DR and Brazil which are reported as "growth" are actually the growth of a handful of elites at the top of control 90+ percent of the countries income and wealth. Robert Kiyosaki, author of Rich Dad Poor Dad, just released a newsletter and he said he was sitting in Brazil near Copacabana Beach. He said on one side was the beautiful beach, while on the other side there were the slums. He actually drove through the slums, and the resident there got pissed. Kiyosaki says that "slums are growing, not just in Brazil, but around the world." If the slums are growing in Brazil how can it be an "emerging nation." It is only emerging for a small handful of elite at the top. There is an entire chapter on Brazil in the book 'Secret History of the American Empire by John Perkins." I highly recommend this book. When you say Brazil is emerging you don't realize that what you are really saying is that the gap between the rich and poor is expanding, and the majority of wealth consolidated by the rich is reported as "growth." As Mark Twain said, "there are lies, damn lies, and statistics."