After the independence processes, Latin American countries had been trying to practice their sovereignty and achieve development. But the 20th Century was full of abuses, interventions and impositions by the First World. The United States, in their anti communism campaign, was decisive in the past history of our continent as it sponsored reactionary dictatorships which were loyal to the White House, such as those of Augusto Pinochet in Chile, Videla in Argentina or Strossner in Paraguay. Washington was afraid of the idea of more countries following the Cuban or Nicaraguan example; they also wanted to avoid the repetition of a phenomenon similar to Salvador Allende in Chile. These servile governments used to represent the U.S. interests and defend the privileges of the Latin American elite classes who ruled the society far away from the poor. The dictatorships were strong and criminal in countries like Argentina, Chile or Paraguay, and more disorganized and coward in countries like Ecuador or Venezuela. Then, a fervent hope haunted our continent and promised to bring us security, human rights, development and peace. It was democracy.
From the end of 70’s to the end of the 80’s, most Latin American countries had returned to the Rule of Law in Democratic Regimens. But it didn´t mean that the common people were going to govern. The new civil governments started to implant in the continent the neo-liberal model of production that enlarged the social differences. In most cases, the new leaders who won elections represented exactly the same interests as the previous dictators; through hidden pacts the political right parties distributed between them the control organs, the courts and the power of the State. Then, the democratic hope was reduced to the populism of the parties and their leaders that during their electoral campaigns offered the paradise and delivered gifts. Most of those democratic governments acted under the prescriptions of the World Bank, International Monetary Fund and the U.S. Government which imposed its whishes through the Consensus of Washington.
At the end of the 20th Century Latin American people realized that those who said the neo-liberalism was going to be the solution for our entire problems were wrong. For the first time in continent’s history, after Salvador Allende, left political projects started to win elections in Latin America and the search of changes was clear and likely. Our nations stated constituent processes to abolish the established order imposed by the right side; the first one was Colombia that met a Constituent Assembly after defeating the Status Quo defenses by 1991. Then, Venezuela and Ecuador followed Colombia, but in the Ecuadorian case the traditional right parties kidnapped the Assembly in 1998 and consolidated their political pact.
Nowadays, most Latin American nations have governments which defend left principles, so according to the political speech of the media and of neo-liberalism, the social process that Latin America is living has two sources: the good left and the bad one. The Chilean model followed by President Ricardo Lagos and his successor President Michelle Bachellet, the Brazilian model led by President Luis Ignacio Lula Da Silva and the Uruguayan model promoted by President Tabaré Vasquez and followed by President Jose Mujica, are considered by the moderate right side and most of the media as successful examples of the good left, as they include respecting the juridical security, calling international investment and maintaining good relations with the media. On the contrary, the bad left is represented by Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Bolivia, Paraguay and Ecuador, but this last one has been also in the middle of both lefts, as well as Argentina. The political speeches of the opposition can’t understand that the proposals of President Hugo Chavez definitively can’t be applied on other countries because each one responds to a different reality. In the case of Bolivia, it is one of the poorest nations in the continent and after decades of neo-liberalism, for the first time in their history, the segregated indigenous groups, which are the majority of the country, came to power and are developing a different economic model in which the low-class people is the center of production. Thirty years ago, the highest aspiration for a Bolivian indigenous child was to be a peasant as his parents, now, they aspire to be company managers, congressmen and the President of the Republic.
It is important to know that when the new left came to power, it was in front of a series of challenges to demonstrate that the socialist practices had changed, but, some of the new leaders lost their perspective. What is happening in Venezuela is the result of an irresponsible left blinded by power, unable to accept different thinking and their government can become a danger for freedom and democracy. But it is not a reality that is too far from the Colombian one conducted by President Alvaro Uribe.
It’s worth pointing out that we have a very diverse continent with a lot of cultural, social and political characteristics in common, that is trying to find a way to achieve a different conception of development and share it to the rest of the world. But, the established order is not going to give up easily; all the powers of the old structures are fighting against the change as we saw it in Honduras, when the Status Quo overthrew President Manuel Zelaya to avoid his attempt to call for a Constituent Assembly in order to assure a real Social Pact through a new constitution.
