I am struck that the newish Bolivian president Evo Morales, who was elected two months ago on a populist tide that actually appreciated his indigenous ancestry and union leadership, is a great example of the way different ‘frameworks for critical engagement’ operate in the public minds. The North American/Western European media can spin him as a loony conspiracy theorist (like Venezualan President Hugo Chavez) hiding in his palace, afraid of ‘neo-liberal’ corporationists who have him ‘padlocked.’ Or, independent and Two-Thirds World media can represent him as speaking plainly about the evil effects of capitalist globalization, only unique in that most national leaders are groggily in bed with the elite beneficiaries of that patriarchal, white-supremacist, imperialist capitalist globalization. I don’t know the man, so can I form a view of him that is more accurate?
In a BBC interview, Evo states an observation of social progress I can agree with:
“I have a lot of trouble understanding all the detail of finance and administration – but if you combine intellectual and professional capacity with a social conscience, you can change things: countries, structures, economic models, colonial states.”
And besides – he put a picture of Che up in the ornate presidential suite. You gotta respect the ovaries that takes.
