Whilst I agree that land reform in Bolivia is essential to develop a healthy social democracy (my opinion) I really don't think the NS should ever be a platform for politicians- they use too much emotive rhetoric. All this article has done is give rise to a flood ill defined irrational arguements about semantics. Oh and back handed insults as usual antileft.

What a nice coincidence that in this week's issue of your magazine you have articles about Zimbabwe and Bolivia. Kindly read this:-
1.- He came to power with more than fifty percent of the electorate's vote.
2.- Great hopes were placed on him as he was seen as a representative of a long-oppresed people.
3.- Favourable international opinion was on his side as remorse-bitten former colonial powers saw a chance to erase a black spot in their histories. In some cases by default.
4.- Accepted even by his opponents, he was seen as a positive sign of change in a society in dire need of better conditions and opportunities for its people.
5.- Obviously with everybody (cronies on first line) and eveything at his feet, his prejudiced and ill-formed mind began to think that he was God's gift to mankind and started on a series of far-fetched, vengeful and impractical social projects.
6.- To begin with, he decided to distribute the country's agricultural areas to his hungry hordes. By doing that, he disrupted the productive process which resulted, after some events, in galloping inflation which , in turn , opened Pandora's box.
7.- He decided to confront, head-on, the lighter skinned, white, productive and educated middle classes. The race issue, always latent underneath and surely a black mark on the country's history, became explosive with open strife.
8.- He intends to, or has already, nationalised key industries, by itself not a bad measure because multinational companies, the world over, hoard other countries wealth. But instead of finding a positive middle way between capital and social issues, he decided on the social issue alone. In this case employment for his party's members. Result: bloated payrolls and rampant inefficiency.
9.- Following the old political maxim"take care of your warriors", he decided upon a plan to revitalize the police and armed forces. By "revitalize" he meant of course to put them on his side and use all their facilities and prerogatives to further his political goals. At a price of course: generous endowments to the top brass.
10.- As any self-respecting dictatorship must do, he embarked on some terror tactics against his opponents. He shot a few and kidnapped some. Unfortunately for him, however, the judicial system proved to have, on some instances, that scarce commodity: justice.
11.- Clearly, he couldn't forget the use of propaganda in his government. He converted the state radio and television network into a loyal servant proclaiming lies, half lies, half truths and total untruths.
In short, he led his country into total chaos.
Now, dear reader, who are we talking about ?.
Evo Morales or Rober Mugabe ?
Answer: both

From Hugh O'Shaughnessy (of this magazine):

"These people, many of them white or near-white, would then be able to relax happy in the thought that they could virtually sever relations with the majority of Bolivians, the dark indigenous little men in the mountains whom they call the Collas.
Unlike the Collas the Cambas’ leaders each tend to have a few thousand rolling acres and good deal of spare cash. They have impeccably European names such as Branko Marinkovic or Rubén Costas and they think they have friends in the US capital who don’t like Morales."

In this article:

"the right is using racist rhetoric to build an atmosphere of violence".

Is it just the right which is using racist retoric? And if not, why do you phrase it as though it is?

Glad to see Frank Fields nonsense has been removed. I can really do without reading that kind of tripe.

So this member of a party which locked out the ones they disagreed with to railroad through an illegal and yet to actually be written constitution, supporting a president who can only see Bolivia as one race, not the many it really is, who maintains private militias to do his dirty work, who draws the racial divide everytime he cannot have his way, is saying others are racist? MAS is a joke. It represents racism and oppression in more extreme ways than ever before. The trouble in CCBA last year was caused by Evo sending in his cocaleros to start violence, killing an innocent teenager, starting fires. Reading this article it is obvious that this MP still cannot grasp that there are people in Bolivia who do not want MAS style socialism and racism, corruption and nespotism. And it is not some mythical group of white men. Look at the picture. There are many indegious people who do not buy into the self serving power grab these blinded peons of chavez are selling. The president, in order not to be a "fucking indian" needs to realize he is to represent a country of many peoples, not just one ethnic group.