Positive
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Socialism Works 2: Evo Morales

Evo Morales' first term in office (2006-2010), was the most far-reaching in terms of structural changes, it is worth highlighting the fulfillment of the so-called "October Agenda," with two fundamental measures standing out: a) the nationalization of the natural gas industry, which was accomplished with much symbolism on May 1, 2006 and b) the constituent assembly, which after a rocky road led to the adoption by referendum (January 2009) of a new political constitution within a state now conceived as plurinational.

With the nationalizations of the natural gas industry and other strategically important companies, such as in the telecommunications sector (Entel), which coincided with a boom period due to the rise in international commodity prices, the Bolivian state overcame its beg-thy-neighbor status (the so-called "state with holes") and progress was made toward becoming a strong state with a comprehensive territorial presence. Thus, public investment became the main source of a model for growth, economic stability, and top-down redistribution that was praised by all international organizations.
Moreover, despite numerous difficulties and delays, important steps were taken to achieve the longed-for industrialization of the natural gas sector and other major undertakings (power generation, iron production, exploitation of lithium reserves).

The new constitution, in turn, brought progress and fundamental achievements within the framework of the new, plurinational state model with self-government. The constitutional recognition of the subject "indígena originario campesino" (roughly: people of indigenous and peasant descent) and its inclusion in state structures and in the public-political sphere can also be counted among the significant successes. The plurinationality of the state is an achievement under construction, as is the progress made on the long road to greater territorial self-government, including the possibility of autonomy for indigenous communities.

In addition, of course, the reduction of social inequality and especially economic poverty must not be forgotten. According to official figures, during Evo Morales' term in office, poverty fell from 59.9 percent to 34.6 percent, while extreme poverty dropped from 38.2 percent to 15.2 percent, due in part to various social benefits (bonos) for vulnerable segments of the population (Renta Dignidad for the elderly, Bono Juancito Pinto for school-age children, Bono Juana Azurduy for pregnant women).
Numerous studies by international organizations, such as those by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), also highlight as an achievement that during Evo Morales' reign the middle class has grown from 3.3 million (2005) to about seven million (2018) people.

Also important to mention is the development made due to the new constitutional and regulatory framework in gender equality, equal opportunities for women and men, and especially gender parity at the different legislative levels (national parliament, state parliaments, municipal councils), made possible by the permanent mobilization of diverse women's movements.
Other obvious successes include the reduction of social inequalities, the drastic reduction in illiteracy, good macroeconomic indicators, the halving of the unemployment rate (from 8.1 to 4.2 percent), the steady increase in the minimum wage, the increase in general life expectancy, and significant public investment in the country's infrastructure (especially in trunk and rural roads in countless construction projects, especially in rural areas).

Finally, there are those successes that cannot be measured by indicators, namely the restoration of Bolivia's dignity and sovereignty in the international context.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
MarkPaul · 26-30, M
This is largely a fabrication of those wanting to promote the idea of socialism. Bolivia's economy is virtually on the edge of collapse. The only thing propping it up right now, is they are transitioning to using the yuan to pay for exports and imports. And, despite their leftist rhetoric, this is mainly because their economy can't afford dollars.

Any investment in social programs will bring welcome relief to the masses, but as is the case with most socialist models, those short-term benefits will not last as pay-offs and political insider deals sink the economy. As with many things these days, your glowing report is only intended to score some points for your side of thinking. Particularly with those who literally reside on the Internet, it seems to be all that matters. No offense.
Gloomy · F
@MarkPaul Dude your alternative models are the real issue here. Socialist economies may struggle but that's also due to capitalist hegemony and general economic pressure from the outside. Deregulated Capitalism you keep propagating for might produce a stronger economy but at the cost of the wellfare of the people. It would throw indigenous communities under the bus in the name of your glorified competition.
You defend the US economic system therefore I can't really take you seriously.

Under Socialism the people finally start benefitting from the resources in their own country while US capitalism only exploited those in the past.
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@MarkPaul I leave out the obvious projection at the end.

Bolivia has also has to deal with a US backed coup.

'Welcone relief to the masses.'

Its historically the poorest country in South America despite having large mineral wealth because the profits have traditionally gone to local oligarchs an foreign companies.

As a 'liberal,' you wouldn't accept that state of affairs in your own country.
MarkPaul · 26-30, M
@Gloomy If you don't think the Bolivian citizens are not being exploited now, you have fallen victim to the socialist trap of deception. I know you like to paint this heaven-on-earth picture of your beloved socialism, so it is hard to take you seriously, but scratch beneath the surface of what your so-called socialist leaders are telling you to believe and put on your Inspector's hat. Can you do that? 🕵️
Gloomy · F
@MarkPaul I never said it's a paradise on earth but it works in favor of the people. You should examine your beloved Capitalism a bit closer...

Also the exploitation argument is bullshit Movimiento al Socialismo has been re-elected since 2005
MarkPaul · 26-30, M
@Burnley123 OMG. That wasn't a projection. Are you kidding me? I'm not the one spending all my experiences online; I'm out in the real world solving problems. I'm not arguing about what Bolivia has to deal with. My point is the current leadership is creating a crafted deception of what they are doing and where the country's wealth is going. You can take pride and enjoyment over the "socialists" sticking it to the Developed World, but they are really only engaged in the same type of exploitation. More than likely, you are too steeped in your own bitter afflictions to see it, yet alone acknowledge it.

And, I don't fit inside a label. Please keep that in mind for your future reference.
MarkPaul · 26-30, M
@Gloomy Do you see what you are doing? You are like the Cry-Baby-trump supporters who support his behaviour by saying, "Look at what Hillary did." Are you that uneducated? That isn't a defence and only suggests you have an off-centre view that prevents you from having a level perspective. I mean, your bias is so obvious. I can't be the only one who sees it.
Gloomy · F
@MarkPaul No I didn't make the argument that Socialism is bad but Capitalism is worse.

Also nice you ignored the fact that Bolivia is a functioning democracy with its people electing socialists.
MarkPaul · 26-30, M
@Gloomy I didn't ignore it. And, I am not disputing the right of a population to choose their form of government, economy, or rules of law. But, I am not going to accept a rosy picture because that is what the rhetoric suggests. My point is your tribute only highlights all the positives the government is proselytizing. If their government was capitalist-oriented, no doubt you would tear it apart. Yet, for some (biased) reason here you are simply promoting it... no questions asked. That bothers me. That deserves to be called out. You should do the right think and acknowledge what you are doing. And, if you don't know what you are doing then be thankful I pointed it out to you and show some grace.
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@MarkPaul Dude, you post angry tirades ten times a day about "Gutless, evel, child murdering etc etc, Baby Trump!" I imagine you literally frothing at the mouth as you punch the keyboard with red bleary eyes glaring menacingly at the screen.

You are extremely online and extremely awful at it. Fwiw, posts on here have limited impact on the world but what impact your's have are counter-productive to your intentions. You make your own side look ridiculous. Even though I hate Trump and think a lot of rightwing arguments are disingenuous... I think you actually do have Trump derangement syndrome!
Gloomy · F
@MarkPaul You prove again how you are one of the most condescending idiots Similar Worlds has to offer.

Why would I tear it apart if it were capitalist? I mean if it were capitalist resources would be sold out and it would be pretty bad. I support Scandinavian countries who are capitalist for example.
MarkPaul · 26-30, M
@Burnley123 I don't subscribe to a label. I'm not on any side. I spend my limited time on here providing a perspective. I can't really challenge your fantasies about me; those are yours alone.

I'm sure you are an expert on online posting with your years and years of experience, but I have my own style, method and approach. You seem to favour a weak-kneed and genteel way of expressing yourself. Good for you. As for me, I spend most of my time in having an impact on the world outside of my posting here. Just so you know, I have to work for a living. I don't have endless days off to "punch the keyboard." Perhaps you should consider that not everyone is lazing about like you.
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@MarkPaul Ok man. I wish you well.
MarkPaul · 26-30, M
@Gloomy What...??? I didn't say if YOU were a capitalist; I said if a capitalist government talked about all the good things they were doing for their citizens you would tear it apart, but a screed from a socialist government you are all in with no questions, doubts, or healthy skepticism. Get it now?

You have this chip on your shoulder that literally prevents you from seeing any point that deviates from your own. My suspicion is your neighbours are wary of you for that reason alone.
Gloomy · F
@MarkPaul Like I said not true that's why I support Sweden for example cause while it is capitalist it did lots of good.
MarkPaul · 26-30, M
@Gloomy Well, thanks for your grudging endorsement. It took a lot of work to get you to admit it. I feel like we are making some progress. Good job.
Gloomy · F
@MarkPaul or you could have read my previous comment more carefully before you kept on angrily typing in which I never brought up the what I would think if I were a Capitalist and stated that I support Scandinavian countries.
MarkPaul · 26-30, M
@Gloomy OMG. I never said, fantasized, or implied your were a capitalist or imagined what things would be like if you were a capitalist. You call me condescending, but you're the one who has this know-it-all attitude. Read what I took my time to say to you and stop acting like you're some kind of misunderstood victim.
Gloomy · F
@MarkPaul [quote]I didn't say if YOU were a capitalist[/quote]

That was your hysterical reply to me answering you without using the "what if I were a Capitalist"

I don’t act like a victim just pointing something out.
MarkPaul · 26-30, M
@Gloomy Look, I believe in logic and good hard reasoning. I am not condescending or hysterical. And, I don't like you mischaracterizing me. My point is not "If you were a capitalist." It is if the report you made was from a capitalist oriented government you would question it and tear it apart. Since it largely comes from a socialist-leaning entity you accept it at face value. What can't you understand? How much more do I need to dumb this down?
Gloomy · F
@MarkPaul alright you didn’t understand my correction of your initial misunderstanding fine you don't get it.

and again no I think Sweden and Finlands anti homeless initiatives are great. Your condescending nature and just plain disingenuous arguing leaves me no choice but to say bye!
MarkPaul · 26-30, M
@Gloomy Okay.