Two weeks ago I wrote a post about President Morales of Bolivia and what the impact of his lineage from the Aymarans was. I knew nothing about the topic when it was given to me but wrote based on what information I found from some articles I read. I had already approached the topic with an optimistic viewpoint, as the treatment of Natives in any country has always been something that I find to be saddening and maddening. However, the good work of a leader cannot be based in his genealogy alone, but instead by goodwill and the effects of his policies, right? So I asked a Bolivian acquaintance of mine what the thought of Morales and the changes he has made.
President Morales has supposedly tried to improve the condition of the lives of his people. But Morales has little education, barely finished high school, and cannot make a speech worth anything. Apparently, none of his policies really do any good and because of his background he is very easily influenced and manipulated by other leaders, for example Hugo Chavez of Venezuela. Therefore, Bolivian foreign policy has diminished in success and imports and exports have decreased. Because of this, the country is getting even poorer.
My source's opinion is that Morales came into power because most of the population there is indigenous and they were very easily manipulated by an alluring leader, so they voted for him in the hopes that he would represent them well in congress and Bolivia would be a better place to live. Instead, things have gotten worse for them and international relations have become strained.
I did not do any lengthy research, but nothing that I read said anything alluding to the ideas above. I think this is a good lesson for all of us In The News students and Extempers: we cannot fully understand the scope of a situation by reading mainstream news articles or reviewing American opinions only. Sometimes our own opinions get in the way of the truth and biased sources lead us to believe things that are simply untrue. I was very thankful to receive such insight from an actual Bolivian citizen, for who could know better about the condition of Bolivia? I do hope that if President Morales does not find a way to improve the lives of the people he presides over, a new leader will. I know that if I were an Aymaran in modern-day Bolivia I would have voted for Morales based on his genealogy, however shallow that may be. Perhaps this will teach a lesson not only to the indigenous voters, but us outside spectators as well. I for one am not going to be so hasty to form an opinion in the future; there is always a story behind the story.
I think this post is remarkable on a lot of levels. First, the information is first hand reporting and that is always so very interesting. The second is that the author has the chutzpah to reevaluate her position and sources. Third, the writing and thinking on this post are remarkable.
ReplyDeleteOn a subject level, I think the lesson is bigger than don't believe every thing you read. The situation when populist leaders are voted in because the population likes the way they look speaks to racism. If you vote for someone because they are like you in genealogy, color or creed, in essence you are bestowing favor on a person because of what you see on the outside. I am sure if I were a Bolivian native I would have done the same, as all politics is local and truth about politics is always in short supply. But, if we are to draw parallels, this is perfect for thinking about the role of race and history in decision making. Also, the original material for the first post demonstrates that there is a perhaps bias in America that has do with guilt about well just about everything that makes the American mind easily prey to believing racist ideas clothed in attire that looks like native rights and correction of wrongs done in years past. The old adage of buyer beware in the world of ideas is particularly true as this post illustrates brilliantly.
I would encourage any readers of the blog to read the previous post before evaluating this one.