Sunday, July 06, 2008

Letters to An Old Sell Out: About Latin America

Tom Hayden's having a hard time of it. Barack Obama, never truly against the illegal war, is getting weaker and weaker so Tom-Tom took to blog on July 4th ["Obama's Position on Iraq Could Put His Candidacy at Risk" (Aging Socialite's Cat Litterbox)". Among the howlers was the following:



Besides the transforming nature of an African-American presidency, the issue that matters most to me is achieving a peaceful settlement of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan -- and preventing American escalations in Iran and Latin America.



Tom-Tom, help us out. Where is Venezuela? We thought it was in Latin America.

hayden

Tom-Tom apparently missed page 325 of Barack's The Audacity of Hope where Barack calls out Chavez for the 'crimes' of calling out "America's efforts to expand its hegemony" and assuming Venezuela could "follow their own path to development." Or, as Paul Street (Black Agenda Report) observed of the book, "In its audaciously imperialist and power-worshipping chapter on 'The World Beyond Our Borders,' The Audacity of Hope criticizes 'left-leaning populists' like 'Venezuela's Hugo Chavez' for daring to think that developing nations 'should resist America's efforts to expand its hegemony' and for trying to 'follow their own path to development.' Such dysfunctional 'reject[ion] [of] the ideals of free markets and liberal democracy' will only worsen the situation of the global poor, Obama claims (Obama 2006, p. 315)." Tom-Tom, if there was one remaining reason for anyone to listen to you it was your work refuting the ideas Barack's promoting.



Tom-Tom mentions Samantha Power in his column. Is Tom-Tom unaware of all the invective Power unleashed on Hugo Chavez when speaking to Juan Gonzalez and what's-her-name on Democracy Sometimes! February 25th? It included this choice morsel by Power: "If, for instance, Ahmadinejad in Iran -- I know it’s not your question -- but even Chavez, continues to deviate from what Obama thinks are international norms that should be adhered to domestically, then that's a problem. But at least you will be in the room. The United States will not be seen or Barack Obama will not be seen to be the problem. We'll actually be able to focus on what Chavez does well and what Chavez does badly from the standpoint of the Venezuelan people." Chavez is a democratically elected leader, elected multiple times and very popular with Venezuelans. Exactly who is Barack (or Power) to decide 'for' the Venezuelans what's in their best interests? We kind of thought the purpose of elections were to give the people that choice.

Chris Carlson ("Change? Not In America's Backyard!," ZNet) also asks that question and adds this:



. . . Venezuela's Chavez appears to be a particular problem for Obama; one that has led him to include Venezuela on a list of "rogue states," along with Cuba, Iran and Syria, and to express his opposition to the Venezuelan president in a recent speech:
"I don't actually agree with Chavez's polices and how he's dealing with his people," he said. [5]
It apparently doesn't matter that the Venezuelan people do agree with Chavez's policies, and have repeatedly shown their widespread support of him in open democratic elections. And Obama evidently sees Venezuela as a "rogue state" not because it is a security threat, but because "[Chavez] has been using oil revenue to stir up trouble against the United States," as he said recently. [6]






Did Tom-Tom miss Barack's alarming spech about Latin America? The one he gave in May, in Miami, where among his 'stylistic flourishes' was referring to "demagogues like Hugo Chavez"? Tom-Tom thought Barack would bring (positive) change how?

For "E-mail to An Old Sell Out," see "THIS JUST IN! TEACHING 'PROGRESSIVES' TO READ!" & "Teaching 'progressives'."