Could you explain to us, ignorant-incompetent americans, the significance of a left-wing politician being elected in Ecuador, or of South America moving towards the left for that matter? How far left are you suggesting? Communism? Are you warning us of a future cold-war? Are you also visiting Canadian, British, French, Hong-Kong, Japanese websites and chastising them for not giving a shit about what happens in Ecuadorian elections? By the way, did you fail to notice that america just put a Left-Wing politican in the Speaker of the House's seat, or are you too "disconnected from reality". Here's a somewhat unslanted view on the ground-rattling Ecuadorian election... http://www.topix.net/content/ap/2503783343260183402222084687290449137561?threadid=FJKT3L6ULMHG9D41 ET should implement voting on posts. 1 ... 50, 50 being the least inane.
. neophyte321: Could you explain to us, ignorant-incompetent Americans, the significance of a left-wing politician being elected in Ecuador, or of South America moving towards the left for that matter? How far left are you suggesting? Communism? Are you warning us of a future cold-war? ****** November 30, 2006 SouthAmerica: No, South America is not going to become a block of communist countries. No, we are not going to have a cold-war against South America. I wrote an article published on June 2, 2005 - âWhile China Rises the US Falls in Brazil and Latin Americaâ â In that article I mentioned a few trends that have been under way for a number of years. In the bottom listed the location of the article if you decide to read the entire article - since that article was published in June 2005 at least 8,000 people did read that article online. Here I am quoting from that article as follows: âUS Influence Declining in South America The Arab-South America Summit offered to the Arabs commercial alternatives not available before, which will reduce the European and American hegemony in the Arab world. The Arab Summit laid the foundations to further reduce the gap between the Arab world and South America, an area of the world that is becoming one of the major industrial and commercial trading blocs in the world. On January 26, 2005 The Financial Times of London had an interesting editorial - "How America became the world's dispensable nation." That Financial Times article started by saying: "In a second inaugural address tinged with evangelical zeal, George W. Bush declared: "Today, America speaks anew to the peoples of the world." The peoples of the world, however, do not seem to be listening. A new world order is indeed emerging - but its architecture is being drafted in Asia and Europe, at meetings to which Americans have not been invited. ....The US, it turns out, is a dispensable nation. Europe, China, Russia, Latin America and other regions and nations are quietly taking measures whose effect, if not sole purpose, will be to cut America down to size. Ironically, the US, having won the cold war, is adopting the strategy that led the Soviet Union to lose it." To further illustrate the United States loss of clout and influence in South America, we just have to look at the results of the latest election of the head of the OAS. One of US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's goals in her trip to Brazil in late April 2005 was to convince President Lula to change his mind and have Brazil vote for the US candidate that would head the Organization of American States (OAS) for the next 5 years. One week later, the candidate that Brazil was supporting all along, in opposition to the United States, Mr. Insulza from Chile was the winner. It was the first time in the organizations 60-year history that the candidate supported by Washington did not win. This particular election sends a clear signal to the world of how fast the United States is losing its influence in South America. At the same time that the US is losing its influence, China is quickly replacing the United States influence in the Area. China's Rising Influence In a very short period of time China is becoming the most important business partner of Brazil. China has been quickly replacing the United States' influence in Brazil - and that is also happening in other South American countries On May 17, 2005 - The Financial Times of London had another article trying to explain why US influence was declining in South America: "Latin lessons the US faces a loss of leadership." The article said: "Why have relations turned so sour? Economics is part of the reason. During the late 1980s and 1990s Latin America embraced free market policies and moved enthusiastically into the US orbit. But when reform often failed to produce growth that began to change, with many Latin Americans blaming the US for their problems. "The failure of the Bush administration to help Argentina when it ran into a disastrous debt crisis at the end of 2001 was particularly damaging to its image in the region. "Whether or not Washington or Wall Street really bear the blame, many Latin Americans believe the US led them down the primrose path but then were simply not interested when times got tough," says Julia Sweig, a Latin America specialist at the New York-based Council on Foreign Relations. "After a number of South American countries embraced democracy, and many of the economic policies prescribed by Washington including all kinds of privatizations, the result of these changes did not benefit the South American population as expected. "And South America's less than impressive economic performance over the past 15 years has led to a fresh bout of soul-searching about what kind of economic model is right for the region. "... In particular, the role of the state - which policymakers were trying to cut back for most of the 1990s - is undergoing a rethink, in part reflecting South America's growing economic relationship with parts of Asia that have achieved much higher rates of growth." There is another factor that contributed to the current state of affairs in South America. After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the United States lost its interest regarding South America. Some South American countries including Brazil, instead of whining or crying over spilled milk, did something about it, as a capitalist country they started searching around the world for new partners to establish new ties to replace their lost business. The US decline of influence with Brazil did not happen overnight or because of political reasons; it was as a result of economic reasons as Brazil found new partners. The Brazilian need to find new markets for its products coincided with the economic explosion that has been happening in the Chinese economy in the last few years. Today, China has an insatiable need for commodities of all kinds to feed its amazing production machine.â ********* If you want to read the entire article then go to: âWhile China Rises the US Falls in Brazil and Latin Americaâ Published on June 2, 2005 http://www.brazzil.com/content/view/9296/76/ .
It is interesting that these countries would move towards China when it is China who blocked the success of their move into the orbit of the U.S.. Had China not undercut them perhaps they would be exporting to the states more successfully. Since in the end poliics is economics unless it is war, you can blame the whole move to the left on China.
. Jem: It is interesting that these countries would move towards China when it is China who blocked the success of their move into the orbit of the U.S.. Had China not undercut them perhaps they would be exporting to the states more successfully. Since in the end politics is economics unless it is war, you can blame the whole move to the left on China. *********** December 1, 2006 SouthAmerica: I donât know why you arrived to the following conclusion: âIt is interesting that these countries would move towards China when it is China who blocked the success of their move into the orbit of the U.S.. - Had China not undercut them perhaps they would be exporting to the states more successfully.â China did not block trade from South America to the US. - The United States tariffs, quotas, and other forms of protection that kept the products from many South American countries out of the US market. For many years I was the controller for a large international trading company from Brazil, and we could not sell a lot of products to the US that we were selling in other countries around the world including tomato paste and sugar, and many other commodities. For example: at that time our company was selling among other things sugar to Angola and each shipment of sugar used to be around $ 5 million dollars. By the way, I am not blaming the move to the left on China. What I am saying is that South American countries are getting smarter and they are moving away from simplistic American formulas such as: âDemocracy + market economy + privatization = economic growth and prosperity.â South American countries including Brazil are looking in the direction of Asia because these countries have the economic formula that works including in Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, South Korea, Japan, the latest success story is China, and so onâ¦.. The American model is an illusion and if your country follows the American model as Argentina did in the 1990âs then your country is in trouble and it will end up in the poor house and bankrupted. I have a friend from Slovakia, and he still keep in touch with friends and relatives in that European country â He tells me that since the Check Republic became free from communism around 1990, and eventually split into two countries, today the population are much poorer than ever before. He told me that most of the government companies were privatized after the split, and a hand full of people became very wealth overnight - and today the government it does not own much and the price of all utilities are sky high, a large number of people lost their jobs after privatization, and most of the population is worse of than ever before. My friend believes that "privatization" is the latest way that politicians and their close friends found out for "stealing the assets and the money" from the people. .
Sorry I did not see this sooner. I am surprised you evaded the point. How can you deny that China took over our market and crowded your homeland out. You live here. To be specific Brazil was exporting a bunch of shoes to the U.S. then china put that export industry out of business. That has been documented in international publications. I know people who were developing trade companies for India and central america who lost years of work. Anecdotally, I noticed that for a while I was starting to see more and more made in brazil, chile and argentina, just before China knocked their stuff off the shelves.
This is very interesting about China and their selling goods in Latin America... Having the liberty of living in some of these countries...China is at this moment building large stores like WalMart and instead of bullying the local population...it is sharing the wealth by enjoining co ownership of the real estate and the stores... Why give the vig away to the likes of WalMart when you can be WalMart....and this is exactly what is happening... ........................................................................................... This makes so much sense in that the income distribution and the way the population lives in China is much more like that of those in Latin America than that of the US , Britain, and Japan.... ............................................................................................. China has so many comparative advantages with respect to its Latin peers that it is difficult to believe that this Latin integration will slow down anytime soon... What will and is happening is that more people can afford more goods and services....however school is out on the local industries positions...However I think there will be an overall increase in economic growth in these countries because of Chinese relationships...
. âBrazil Isn't Amused by 'Congo' Jokeâ The Washington Post Sunday, July 8, 2007; Page E02 In a joke that made Brazilians cringe and forced the U.S. Olympic Committee to apologize, a USOC worker scrawled "Welcome to the Congo!" on a board in the organization's Rio de Janeiro media center for the Pan American Games. Rio's "O Globo" newspaper published a photo of the message on its front page yesterday, and ran a headline saying the joke was "full of prejudice." The message was condemned in a nation extremely sensitive about being compared to less-developed countries, especially by Americans -- often perceived as arrogant by Brazilians. .
. Version77: My Gawd... How many stupid threads can SA start... ********** July 9, 2007 SouthAmerica: Reply to Version77 It is a âstupidâ thread for you because you canât grasp the reasons behind the reality of the ongoing disconnection between the United States and South America. It is not one thing - it is a bunch of similar events that turn a little snowflake into a very large snowball. .
. July 2, 2008 SouthAmerica: The enclosed article is from the current front page of Folha de Sao Paulo, a major newspaper in Brazil. The article says that the president of Peru gave a hard time to Evo Morales the president of Bolivia and asked him to mind his own business. Evo Morales had complained that the United States is going to move its military base from Ecuador to Peru in 2009, since the people in Ecuador did not want Americans to have a military base on their country anymore. I would not worry too much because eventually even the Americans are going to realize that Che Guevara is not around anymore, and that the Russians are not coming. Americans have been brainwashed to fear a lot of things including Fidel Castro and communism â communism has been dead for about 2 decades but in the American mindset the Russians are going to land at any time in US soil. â But I have noticed that lately they have been transferring their neurotic fears of the Russians to the Chinese. I see Lou Dobbs on CNN going nuts very often and he almost shit on his pants every time he talks about the new Chinese military threat. Give them time since usually Americans are a slow bunch, but eventually they catch on regarding the new realities in South America - besides I donât think China is going to keep financing the United States military adventures around the world for much longer. I understand the United States still scared to death of the influence that Fidel Castro still have in many countries of Latin America. And Fidel Castro still is on top of the list of Americans list of boogieman. PS: Che Guevara has been dead since October 9, 1967 â and when he died he was only 39 years old. He became a legend and if he still alive today he would be 80 years old. I see many people walking around here in the United States with T-shirts with a print of Che Guevara's face on it, but I am sure that most Americans would not know the difference and would not be able to identify if that guy was a revolutionary, a rock star, or a famous soccer player. I would not be surprised if people such as George W. Bush would not recognize the name of Che Guevara. ****** âRelação entre Peru e BolÃvia piora após crÃticas de GarcÃa a Moralesâ Folha de Sao Paulo â July 1, 2008 O presidente do Peru, Alan GarcÃa, exigiu nesta terça-feira que seu homólogo boliviano, Evo Morales, não interfira nos assuntos internos de seu paÃs e declarou que os EUA não têm bases militares em território peruano. "Seria preciso dizer como (o rei) Juan Carlos da Espanha. Por que não se cala? Meta-se em seu paÃs e não se meta no meu (...), tenha cuidado com as conseqüências do que está fazendo", disse um irado GarcÃa a jornalistas, ao falar do presidente boliviano. O mal-estar do lÃder responde a declarações de Morales, nas quais afirmou que Washington "está levando suas bases militares ao Peru" e convocou os peruanos a "expulsá-los" de seu território, após parabenizar a decisão do Equador de não permitir a continuidade destas instalações no paÃs. As declarações do boliviano fizeram o Peru consultar seu embaixador na BolÃvia, Fernando Rojas, já que aumentou a tensão entre Lima e La Paz, cujas posições são opostas em torno das negociações para um Acordo de Associação e Cooperação com a União Européia (UE). Ao enfatizar que "não quer as desculpas de ninguém", GarcÃa afirmou hoje que as declarações de Morales se baseiam em "grosseiras mentiras e manipulações", e lhe pediu a seu colega que "diga onde está a base". EUA Lima e Washington reiteraram que os EUA não têm intenção de instalar ou transferir ao território peruano a base militar existente em Manta (Equador), que os americanos deverão abandonar em 2009. Um porta-voz da embaixada dos EUA em Lima disse à agência Efe que Washington "não tem planos de estabelecer uma base militar no Peru", afirmando que só ajudará, no marco de um programa de cooperação, "a melhorar uma instalação militar peruana" na região de Ayacucho. A polêmica sobre a suposta instalação da base americana no Peru foi criada depois de o comandante general do Exército peruano, Edwin Donayre, dizer há duas semanas que as Forças Armadas do paÃs andino estavam "em conversas" com os EUA para construir um aeroporto em Pichari, explicou uma fonte oficial à agência Efe. O governante peruano disse ainda que um hipotético apoio de Morales a uma greve nacional convocada pelos sindicatos para 9 de julho no Peru lhe parece "repulsivo" e "é um tema de se denunciar internacionalmente". Morales O presidente da BolÃvia, Evo Morales, rebateu hoje que seu colega do Peru, Alan GarcÃa, é "antidemocrático" por tê-lo mandado se "calar" devido à s suas declarações sobre a mudança de bases militares dos EUA para o território peruano. "Acabamos de receber uma mensagem do Peru onde (GarcÃa) manda me calar. Acho que em um presidente que isto é antidemocrático, não escuta o diálogo, não escuta o povo", disse em entrevista coletiva, ao concluir a cúpula do Mercosul na cidade argentina de Tucumán. Morales disse que lamenta "muito" a reação de GarcÃa, que lhe pediu hoje para não se intrometer em seus assuntos internos e lhe esclareceu enfaticamente que os EUA não têm nenhuma base no Peru. "A soberba monárquica é um vÃcio que não se deve copiar, é algo que vem da época colonial que ficou para trás", disse o presidente boliviano, que reafirmou que não suavizará suas denúncias da "intromissão militar" dos EUA "em nossa região". Em sua chegada a Lima, o embaixador peruano em La Paz, Fernando Rojas, admitiu que as relações com a BolÃvia "estão deterioradas", embora tenha defendido que se aborde o assunto "com sentido construtivo". Já o vice-chanceler boliviano, Hugo Fernández, afirmou hoje que Morales não teve intenção de se intrometer em assuntos peruanos e expressou o interesse de seu governo "de melhorar as relações com o Peru, se foram deterioradas por um mau entendimento". Source: http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/folha/mundo/ult94u418244.shtml .