 |
| Iberdrola Tower (Bilbao) - CC by Zarateman - |
President Evo Morales signed today the decree by which the four subsidiaries of Basque/Spanish energy corporation Iberdrola have been nationalized. These are: Electropaz (La Paz), Elfeo (Oruro), Edeser (services) and Compañía Administradora de Empresas (management). Morales said:
We have been forced to take this measure in order to guarantee equitable prices for electric grid service in the departments of La Paz and Oruro, and also that the quality of electric services is the same in the urban and rural areas.
Previously, in May, Bolivia also nationalized the assets of other Spanish energy corporations specialized in high tension distribution: Red Eléctrica Española and Transportadora de Electricidad. Also in 2010, four other electric companies were nationalized, included subsidiaries of French multinational GDF-Suez and British one Rurelec. Oil, concrete and mining corporations have also been nationalized in Bolivia since 2006.
An independent audit will determine in 180 days how much should Iberdrola be compensated for.
My tragic question as forced customer (modern serf) of Iberdrola and neighbor of their menacing office tower (which as the fortress of an evil overlord watches unmatched above our heads) is, when will we Basques collectivize Iberdrola matrix itself, hopefully lowering electricity costs radically, and necessarily dedicating energy generation and distribution monopolistic income to the public coffers? When?!
Source: LINyM[es].
Source: LINyM[es].
Jindal Steel a company owned by an Indian Politician has pulled out of Bolivia. t was supposed to be the largest foreign investment in Bolivia.
ReplyDeleteI read a detailed article about the investment a few months back and the issue seemed to be that Jindal Steel could not fulfill their promises regarding the investment.
I support the decision of the Bolivian Govt. and these promises of fake $$$ in the future remind me of the American Thought Process - "There's More Where It Came From" ...
What puzzles me is that why would a sitting Member of Parliament in India indulge in Business. If their intent is to Govern India they should focus solely on it - there are lots of issues facing the Indian Public.
JSPL Finally Pulls Out Investment Of USD 2.1 Billion From Bolivia
http://www.dsij.in/ArticleDetails/tabid/740/ArticleID/4867/JSPL-Finally-Pulls-Out-Investment-Of-USD-2-1-Billion-From-Bolivia.aspx
You are right in my opinion but most politicians almost everywhere are corrupt and have private and usually mafioso business. In many states account transparency is mandated but there's no explicit prohibition of them partaking in politics (not even in China, where the "communist" party is now full of wealthy "investors" - i.e. bloodsuckers). Would there be an explicit prohibition anyhow they would surely find their loyal middlemen so that alone is no solution.
DeleteIMO the only solution is collectivization of all wealth, very especially the land (a natural "gift" for all) and means of production (generated by the collective work of all through the generations, not by those capitalist bloodsuckers).
But whatever the case full transparency and a participative democracy are absolutely necessary in order to control the managers, in order to make reality the Zapatista slogan: "for whoever is in command, (s)he commands obeying".
Obeying the people, that is. Anything else is simply NOT democracy.
I believe in private enterprise and private ownership of land but there has to be some law preventing those in Public Service from running Private Businesses.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the Zapatista Slogan. People in power in India have the Swami (owner) Bhaav (emotion) not the Seva (service) Bhaav.
The more power one has more humble he/she should be.
Was reading about the Law of the Rights of Mother Earth. I think this is something all countries can emulate. I hope Latin America shows the rest of the world a good path to follow - waiting for the US and the EU to crumble. I keep checking news for the "US Fiscal Crisis" every 10 minutes or so :)
The law defines Mother Earth as "...the dynamic living system formed by the indivisible community of all life systems and living beings whom are interrelated, interdependent, and complementary, which share a common destiny; adding that "Mother Earth is considered sacred in the worldview of Indigenous peoples and nations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_the_Rights_of_Mother_Earth
There is absolutely no rational grounds for private property of the land. Notice that I do not say 'possession' (right to use by reason actual legitimate use) but property (nearly unlimited right just because of holding a title). The land for those who work it (or more generally the community and Humankind): nobody can morally argue the right of unlimited property of land beyond actual use (legitimate use always: one that does not harm the community and/or that is approved by it).
Delete"The more power one has more humble he/she should be".
But if you wait for the ones in power to act that way, it won't happen. The oppressors are always supported by the resignation of the oppressed, that explained Gandhi (for example).
Those at the bottom must rebel, organize and disobey. Or even take up arms and practice the popular justice that the official judicial system will never provide.
My objection towards collectivization is because I read somewhere that in the ex-Soviet Union the people tilling the land didn't give in their best because they knew that they were promised a certain share regardless of how good/bad they performed. There has to be an incentive for good work.
ReplyDeleteI agree that some individuals owning vast amounts of land and an overwhelming majority being labourers/serf is neither good for the economy nor for the society. This objection isn't just theoretical. I saw it happening in a far away land many years ago and I see this happening around me and refusing to be a part of it has caused me many problems and continues to do so. The oppressors think they are very clever and as you said not speaking out makes them more bold. Ultimately they would not even let you live. Gandhi was a good man but most of his Philosophy and way of working does not make sense to me. I will certainly strike - when the time is right and the returns would be optimum.
Rebellion and destroying the oppressive system is certainly necessary to create something new and better. As we lay in wait for the Mother of All Capitalistic Economies to collapse - let us remember that not all individuals in the US are happy about the system there. My opposition to the US and the EU is just with the elite and their way of functioning - they make things difficult for the common people in their lands and also for the common people living outside their boundaries. I am pretty sure the year 2013 will bring in lots of positive changes for Humanity.
I'm talking about the basic concept of property, which allows Mr. X or Ms. Y to own thousands of hectares of land without ever setting their foot on them at all, while many others have nothing whatsoever. That's essentially unfair and must be changed.
DeleteHow the non-property land is managed is another story and surely the right of use and enjoyment (possession) should be granted in many cases to individuals or cooperatives (cooperatives work well in most cases) within whatever parameters and norms the community decides for itself (and its land, not anymore the land of some distant exploiter).
What you are doing here is the typical petty bourgeois trick of equalizing property in general with whatever little property many people are allowed to hold like a home or a small patch of land. That way the oligarchs rally the small owners, no matter how poor, to their side telling them: "they want to steal your home", when in reality what we want is to take the huge swathes of land the oligarch has and give them to the dispossessed.
The reason why we are against property is not small property but the fact that, without any limitations, property tends to fall in the hands of a few boundless-greedy power-hungry mafiosi known euphemistically as "investors" and "businessmen" and what-not. So property must be strictly regulated and, if we do that, it is not anymore just "property" as we know it but something else.
But the rights of those who actually work their land should not be affected, only the oligarchs.
"This objection isn't just theoretical. I saw it happening in a far away land many years ago and I see this happening around me and refusing to be a part of it has caused me many problems and continues to do so".
Welcome to socialism, Dinesh. :)
"Gandhi was a good man but most of his Philosophy and way of working does not make sense to me. I will certainly strike - when the time is right and the returns would be optimum".
Fine. It would seed a productive debate but it would clearly exceed the space we have here. I don't have a strong opinion: whatever works best.
My bottom line was just that it is the resignation or acceptance by the oppressed what allows the powerful to even exist. And that's something I learned reading Gandhi. Said that, I do not agree with other aspects of Gandhi's thought or praxis.
"I am pretty sure the year 2013 will bring in lots of positive changes for Humanity".
Hope you are right. Best wishes in any case.