Trying to find enthusiasm in politics today is much like trying to find logic on Sarah Palin’s Facebook page. Thinking back to the Obama campaign, and all the pop culture references that were birthed through assorted youtube videos and Hollywood advertisements which will surely grace the “answer” side of Trivial Pursuit cards for generations to come, I’m reminded of a more hopeful time, when Afghanistan and Iraq seemed more end-able, global warming was being touted as something we could fix, rather than a slumping poll topic, and positive health care reform seemed inevitable, instead of “God, I hope this doesn’t screw us if it passes.”
Even locally, here in Alaska, amidst our own recent VECO scandals, bigoted ABT sermons, and gubernatorial sociopathy, I recall watching Eric Croft’s eyes light up, back in April, as he talked about an emerging Anchorage, where people were finally rallying around the concept of a community centered on investing, improving, and embracing this town as our home, and planning for its prosperous future, rather than a way station before retirement delivers us to warmer climates and the gated, colorless monotony of a suburban lifestyle.
But now, we see foreboding signs of a nightmare enveloping the dreams of societal advancement here in Anchorage, in Alaska, and conceivably throughout the rest of our United States of America. And it’s bipartisan. We see it in the Democrats failing miserably at taking a stand for the values that are supposed to represent the ultimate, unwavering backbone of the party:
“The Democratic Party has a long and proud history of representing and protecting the interests of working Americans and guaranteeing personal liberties for all.”
Fantastic. That’s why I’ve alligned myself under your banner. But, quite frankly, I’m a progressive before a Democrat, concerned about the future of Alaska before any of it, and am a bit burnt out on the “history”, and would prefer to see some “present”.
And shouldn’t it start with optimism? I am so sick and tired of turning on the television and watching President Obama, Senator Reid, Speaker Pelosi, and 
every underling appearing as if they are operating under the most debilitating hangover on record. I need you to stop looking like you just traded the “robust” public option to Joe Lieberman for the bottom third of his 40 ounce to bridge the gap to the end of the day. I need Congressman Grayson to stop using his new platform to facilitate his novelty addiction to starting websites that offer nothing constructive, other than to tell progressives what they already know: The system is broken, the “Blue Dog” corporatist sell outs have less spine than single celled organisms, and the Republicans are not listening. Malaise should never be a party platform. Nor should obstructionism ever take precedant over ideas, as seems to be the case of the Republican party; once proudly defined by great American leaders like Eisenhower and Teddy Roosevelt; now dominated by paranoid antics from the likes of Michele Bachmann, and struggling to find a voice, therefor settling for a disturbing tan, under the leadership of John Boehner. I’m not even going to touch Michael Steele.
We now have a schism forming in both parties. This might result in a healthy reaffirmation of party affiliation to many, possibly even result in a purification of sorts for both parties’ cores. But, above anything else, it may very well culminate in increasingly sad turnouts and declining attention spans.
Last year’s national election results were decided by 125,225,901 votes, out of a population of 304,059,724 [U.S. Census Bureau]. So, roughly, we’re looking at a 41% turnout. Similarly, 2004 offered us a turnout of just under 40%. Locally, in Alaska, we actually experienced a dip in statewide turnout, despite our own Governor being on the Republican ticket. In 2004, 308,593 voted (48%), matched up against only 322,100, or 47%. The difference in numbers is due to a population boom between 2004 and 2008 of a little under 6%. Basically, we could theorize that the same people voted, very similarly – the GOP experienced a 1.3% drop between the two elections – but the newer lower forty-eight refugees, for the most part, didn’t turn out.
And, in Anchorage, last May delivered a run off election for Mayor between Dan Sullivan and Eric Croft. Sullivan won easily, garnering 57.3% of the vote. However, he mustered only 28,866 votes to Croft’s 21,527. 28,866 votes, in a city of 279,243, pushes his mandate to just a handful of ballots over 10% of all Anchorage residents.
Simply put, we are caring less and less. We are disillusioned, frustrated, and running out of hope quicker than snow on Mount Kilimanjaro. Sure, there are anomic periods of excitement like we saw during Obama’s campaign season of daring to dream, and again over the summer on the opposite side of the aisle with the tea party protests. But these efforts all seem to lack in stamina, and are receiving little to no encouragement or resounding follow up from our elected representatives, who often sound like we should be talking them down off of a ledge. In harsh economic times like these, shouldn’t that be there job?
In this respect, with participation in decline, I found myself at a loss for words last week, attending a lecture at UAA from the Venezuelan Ambassador to the United States, Bernardo Alvarez Herrera.
Woven deeply into the fabric of being an American is the understanding that Venezuela is famously backwards and run by a cruel dictator by the name of Hugo Chavez, who is treated by the media as if he should be outfitted in a straight jacket whenever addressing the United Nations. Brushed aside is the fact that he was democratically elected in 1998 on a platform of assisting Venezuela’s impoverished masses, and subsequently reelected in both 2000 and 2006. Largely, though, we cannot get passed the dirty word “socialist” that is applied to his form of rule, and take him, and his major achievements at home and abroad seriously (notably, millions of dollars in assistance to rural Alaskans by providing heating oil – check out a great article from Alaska Dispatch on the topic).
But, as Ambassador Herrera began his lecture, he captured me with his upbeat message, his positivity, and a simple explanation of a new wave of politics, governance, and participatory democracy (which, counter to some tea partiers, does in fact not mean intimidation and bullying) in Venezuela.
To frame his appearance, he started off by taking us down memory lane to the time where relations between our respective nations really split, under the free range corporatism granted by the Clinton administration. He, then, took us through the recent evolution of Venezuela which desperately needs to be repeated, in parallel form, in the United States, as is being done in Germany, Canada, and England, just to name a few.
photo courtesty of Elstun Lauesen
“We close our eyes, and we go back to [1994], there was a meeting in Florida; Miami. The summit of the Americas. In that summit of the Americas, according to many people, the so called Washington Consensus was established. What a consensus for Latin American meant that there woud be basically what they called representative democracy; that there would be a prevailing role of the private sector throughout the economy, that government would be less and less involved, and basically that there would be a huge free trade area in all the Americas. I remember in [1994], that was the so called Washington Consensus. And we said that when you have a consensus, it means that basically the debate is over because you have reached a consensus. Then, you close your eyes again and you open your eyes in 2009 and what you see is a completely different reality. There have been major changes in Latin America… The so called neoliberal agenda has failed in our countries. Nobody is publicly defending that position that the government should be based mainly in the prevalence of the private sector. All governments are trying to get back and take a very important role in the economy. There have been policies all over Latin America to correct inequalities and to correct the social exclusion policies of the past. Because, what happened is, after the Washington Consensus, twenty years later, instead of being better it got worse. A country like Argentina; a huge and very important country, was backrupt six years ago. Everybody lost their money. It’s a bit like what happened in the banks in New York with Mr. [Madoff]. It’s exactly the same.”
Ambassador Herrera calls this predatory stage of capitalism for what it is: a Ponzi scheme. The movement of money from one place to another, rather than the production of it. Or, as Wiki accurately describes it, a “fraudulent investment”. Unfortunately, as was the case spotlighted in Latin America, and now becoming painfully clear in the banking, health care, and oil industries as they relate to the United States, this was a strip mining process by the private sector at the expense of the public.
The Ambassador describes the impressively progressive and populist approach that Venezuela, and most of Latin America, decided to take in reaction; subtly offering it as a recommendation to the United States.
“We have the challenge of [defining] the relationship between society and oil. How are we distributing oil? How is the role of oil improving communities? How can we also develop all the sections of the economy, because relying heavily on oil [is] good, but a lot of bad things also. So it is good to diversify your economy… All those things, although we are far away, are a common agenda.”
This broaches a popular question raised in recent public debate, including in the Supreme Court. Do corporations exist to benefit society, or does society 
exist to benefit corporations? When you look at the bank bailouts shoveled out at the expense of the public, one could argue convincingly that we might be operating at the behest of corporate interest. Same goes for the health care industry, which is literally picking us off one by one unless we make it to 65, where we then are often duped into Medicare Advantage, which is another misleading facet of the private sector.
Latin America faced this same problem; private interest before public prosperity. And, even more comparable to Alaska, they shared the struggle to expand the rights of indigenous peoples and secure them a prominent and lasting place in society, rather than a fading role in a supporting cast.
“Instead of producing, [we were] only thinking about how we [would] use the money in the future markets; it was a whole distortion of the economy. And this is a reality. Democracies that were [controlled] mainly [by] elites… of this representative democracy, has changed. And you see all of Latin America; there governments [are now] representing the vast majority of the people; in some cases representing the excluded people of Latin America.
“We have to go back and we have to talk in terms of civilization. For example, they say that the thing is to live well; the whole notion of living well, meaning to have an equilibrium with your country, your fellow countrymen, the environment, et cetera. You might think, for some people, they don’t understand. This is like poetry instead of politics. But when you talk and you go and see what we’re doing, we’re going forward and putting forth new values. This is incredible. And if you see the changes in the world, even if you see the changes in the US… We are entering a new era. And, believe me, once you empower people, once you give them the chance to feel that they have a say, they will never go back. They will keep participating.”
photo courtesy of Elstun Lauesen
Ambassador Herrera described the unfolding situation in Latin America; new constitutions in Bolivia and Ecuador alongside developing international partnerships and a renewed vision concentrating efforts on bringing everyone forward, especially indigenous peoples; educating, enriching, and empowering their countrymen rather than leaving the working poor and disadvantaged behind; using proceeds from natural resources to build communities, replacing the status quo of making the rich richer under the guise of the failed concept of trickle down economics. And the proof is in the progress. Extreme poverty in Venezuela has dropped from 20.2% in 1999 to just 9.5% in 2007, according to their embassy figures. Household poverty has fallen from 42% to 28.3% in the same time frame. The United States currently has a poverty rating of 13.2%, and many pundits estimate that we are going to see a “jobless recovery;” a sad label and unfortunate oxymoron that could very well translate into that number growing exponentially while Wall Street continues it’s dominating Ponzi scheming crimes against society. The commonplace argument contends that money spent on the middle and lower classes results in an entitlement society, where people wait for their unemployment benefits. But history would argue that people, if given motivation and opportunity – and allowed participation, as Ambassador Herrera enthusiastically stresses – go to work, leaving the application of the term “entitlement society” where it should appropriately fall: in the laps of the top 1%, many of whom sit by the pool waiting for their checks.
Similarly, native cultures need to be embraced, celebrated, and supported, as is the growing case in Latin America, where schools require students to learn one of the 26 native languages. This is a significant and crucial step up from Alaska’s previous administration’s instructions to First Alaskans to assimilate or freeze.
Venezuela appears to get it. And, moreover, they appear excited about it. Above and beyond the economic recession, America is compounded with a national emotional depression. We don’t believe our voices count anymore, and, largely, our elected representatives are throwing their hands up and echoing that sentiment before begging transnational corporations for more campaign money. We are literally voting people into office to represent special interest over We the People.
It’s time to take the advice of those we have been very busy misdiagnosing as our enemy. What the Ambassador describes as a “participatory revolution” in Latin America might be our only way out of this massive pit of degradation we’ve been digging for thirty years.
.jpg)
