Poverty Alleviation and Resources in a Multi-leftist Context
In a recent lecture, Dr. Ponniah spoke about the changes in Venezuelan poverty rates and answered a question concering the cause of an increase in poverty circa 2002-2004. The cause given was that of an “oil strike” by the opposition(presumably from the right) which halted economic growth and redistribution.
The question then becomes, to what extent is the alleviation of poverty dependent on available resources rather than a shift in polical and social movements and philosophy? Also, what philosophies or policies might the modern/progressive left movement in Latin America adopt to further encourage this shift?
To the former question, we need to first consider the bare economic realities of resource availability and scarcity. Because the poverty decrease in Venezuela can be directly attributed to the state seizure of oil concerns, there is a genuine hazard present that the country will slide back into large scale poverty if and when the oil runs out.
There is also the possibility of a further political shift towards the “old school” leftism with increased nationalization of industry, or even the onset soviet style communism, which would likely be to the detriment of the impoverished, and certainly to those who may have thus far gained some relief from the same. This would preclude the foreign investment which the Doha Declaration recognizes as crucial for development.
To the latter question, Dr. Ponniah suggested (to paraphrase) that the solution would require a balancing of left and right perspectives. This would seem to be the wisest course of action to avoid some of the moral hazards of adopting either philosophy to an extreme. For example, foreign investment might be encouraged, but should be strictly removed from entering the realm of political influence for fear that corruption and despotism may result, as seen in numerous parts of South and Central America in the past.
© 2009, Mark Wells. All rights reserved.
Test reply
Tested nested reply