[Marxism] Latin American Integration
sartesian at earthlink.net
Sun Apr 30 08:44:06 MDT 2006
I'm not against it at all. I just say it's a lot easier said than done.
I say market forces will, if not overthrown, overwhelm these good
intentions, these fine sentiments, these good deeds. History, not my
cynical jaded nature, has made that abundantly clear.
And history is right at the doorstep: it has been reported that
Venezuela has entered into a $2 billion dollar contract with Russia to
provide it, Venezuela, with 100,000 boe/day so that Venezuela might meet
its contractual agreements for export, as its own production cannot
satisfy contractual obligations and the 300,000 boe/day guaranteed at
preferential rates and delivery to Cuba, Nicaragua and other countries.
No, I don't think that is a good thing. No I am not saying "see I told
you so." I am saying the future is not quite so bright that you need to
wear sunglasses. Or maybe the purchases from Russia are part of
continental integration also?
Moreover, I asked anybody to look at continental integration in the
overall terms of trade, of economic interaction, for the whole
continent. Not an unreasonable thing, is it? We are talking about
continental integration, no? Not just that of Bolivia with Venezuela
with Cuba. Where in those interactions do we see improved continental
Who could be against looking at the economic, social determinants and
measures of continental integration? Why, the spin doctors alliance,
----- Original Message -----
From: "David McDonald" <dbmcdonald at comcast.net>
To: "Activists and scholars in Marxist tradition"
<marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu>
Sent: Sunday, April 30, 2006 10:25 AM
Subject: RE: [Marxism] Latin American Integration
. I think of this as
> Extending the Umbrella of Revolutionary Impunity, making it easier for
> little, poor, disadvantaged and pillaged countries like Bolivia to
> US and chart their own course. Who could be against such an obviously
> thing? Why, Dr. No, that who.
More information about the Marxism