South of the Border

Cinema Libre Studio

R1 DVD

In 2009 Oliver Stone visited Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, an ex-Army officer increasingly referred to by the U.S. media and government as a dictator, a drug addict and an anti-American force. Was this depiction true? The answers were so interesting he also interviewed President Evo Morales of Bolivia (Bolivia’s first Indian president) and went on to include Lula da Silva (Brazil), Cristina Kirchner (Argentina), Fernando Lugo (Paraguay), Rafael Correa (Ecuador) and Raul Castro of Cuba. What each President told him was chilling.

The United States has a long history of meddling in the politics of South American countries. That interference continues to the point that the U.S. is still sponsoring revolutions and civil war in these countries. In South America the countries under the leadership of Chavez are uniting against the IMF control of their economies. Only Mexico and Colombia are still holding out.

Why this alliance of South American countries? For decades the International Monetary Fund, dominated by the U.S. Treasury, has been propping up these traditionally poor countries. Its predatory capitalist policies are detrimental to the local people, as they urge the privatisation of much of the public infrastructure. The profits from this are exported to northern hemisphere countries. Thus countries that are rich in resources are continually being stripped of that wealth and the profits from its sale. The same is happening in Africa. When President Chavez managed to keep the oil profits in his country and invest them into industry and farming, the country’s productivity jumped 6% in the first year. He also used some of the money to import doctors from Cuba. There is no doubt, then, that the countries can lift themselves out of poverty IF THEY CAN INVEST IN THEIR OWN FUTURE. To do this they have to break free from the IMF.

Chavez raised the ire of the U.S. by borrowing money from Iran to pay off the IMF loans. They and the tame media began a character assassination job on Chavez to “prove” he was a leftist enemy of the United States, supporting terrorism, drug production and so on. He is currently accused of harbouring Iranian nuclear weapons manufacture. They vilified him to the rest of the world but he continued to help other South American countries break loose of the U.S. economic stranglehold. Given the lies that the U.S. State Department told about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq it appears they may be softening up world opinion for another invasion. They were furious when Chavez started spreading his doctrine of breaking away from the IMF among the other Presidents. Condoleeza Rice is shown saying that they must now regard Chavez as “a negative force in the area” and the CIA Director says “Mr Chavez probably does not have the interests of the United States at heart”. No surprise there.

What does the U.S have to gain from this attack on Chavez? Oil. By reestablishing the traditional corrupt rulers and landowners they can ensure a stable source of supplies like oil (Venezuela is the world’s third biggest oil producer) and natural gas (Bolivia supplies much of the U.S. gas). In countries like Bolivia and Columbia the governments were “advised” by U.S. Federal Drug Administration officials. That advice has now been ignored by Bolivia as they have more important things to worry about. The drug problem in the U.S. is seen as an American problem – fix your own problems in your own country first.

As Stone worked from country to country the same impressions came out. The new Presidents are dedicated men and women, usually from lower social classes and owing loyalty to their people and not to the U.S. For the most part the people have responded. In Venezuela the army seized power in a revolution to oust the former corrupt regime. Chavez was in charge following an election. He started to push through his reforms and it is from here that the U.S. slur of “dictator” comes.

He was himself ousted some years later in a U.S. – sponsored coup and the traditional regime set about re-establishing themselves. Although claiming they were restoring democracy they sacked the Supreme Court and Parliament and proceeded to tighten their grip on the country. The IMF immediately supported the government and advanced loans. The people revolted and demonstrated outside the presidential palace and the army was called in to restore peace. Then a strange thing happened. The army commanders listened to the people. They restored Chavez to power within a couple of days. He restored Parliament and the Courts and arranged another election. His people gave him a resounding win in spite of an openly hostile media aided by the U.S.

President Correo of Ecuador describes the difficulty of facing up to the U.S. and the IMF. No matter what it cost them the IMF wanted Ecuador to remain under their influence and not to pay off their debt – they could just “roll it over”, and keep looting the country. Correo makes a valuable insight into the problem of world poverty – to recover control of their resources should be the goal of poverty-stricken countries.

President Lula da Silva of Brazil is another who is not afraid to face up to the United States. When the subject of U.S. military bases on Brazilian soil came up he offered to let them keep their bases – provided he could establish his own military base in Miami.

One message comes across clearly from each of the Presidents – they want the future of their countries to be better than the past. If they can regain control of their own economies, retain their own wealth in the countries and use it to further the cause of their people they will not be dependent on the IMF. All the Presidents are approachable and willing to share their insights with Stone. This is a credit to his ability to put a subject at ease and get to the hub of the matter. The President of Bolivia even shows him how to select good coca leaves. These leaves are a mild stimulant that helps the local people to function at Bolivia’s altitude. In the U.S. the same can be said for coffee, but it led to charges in the media that the President was a drug addict.

Chavez feels there may be hope for a cooperative future with the U.S. under President Obama. At a conference of leaders of the American countries Obama shook hands with Chavez. That was reported in the media as shaking hands with the enemy.

Can the problem be fixed? If so then Venezuela will be a model case for other countries to break out of poverty. The biggest enemies are the predatory capitalists and the media companies they control. Until the U.S. people call their media and their politicians to account this cannot change. It is documentaries like this that will provide an alternative to media slant and make the public better informed.

Reviews appear on the Synergy website with a single cover image. In the digital and print edition, reviews appear with multiple images and with expanded content.

This review will appear in Volume 3 No. 6 of the digital and print edition of Synergy.

We recommend you download the free digital edition (or buy the print edition) to get the most from Synergy. The print and digital editions of Synergy also include a large selection of articles and features not found on the website. If you have a limited download quota you can view the digital edition via the Issuu viewer on the digital edition page.

If you came to this page directly (and missed our menu), click here to go to the front page of Synergy Website or use the following link: http://www.synergy-magazine.com