Exposing Five Key Media Myths about Chavez’s Health and Swearing-in

By Ewan Robertson and Tamara Pearson - Venezuelanalysis.com




Over the last few weeks the private English media has stepped up its campaign against the Venezuelan revolution, spreading a number of lies and misconceptions around President Hugo Chavez’s health, the politics and legalities involved in his swearing-in for his new term, and the Venezuelan government’s handling of the situation.

The media, often taking its line directly from Venezuela’s right-wing opposition, is exploiting a sad time for the Venezuelan people. Media Observatory journalist Mariclem Stelling, talking on public television station VTV, called it a “combination of glee, irony, and necrophilia...an attempt to remove [Chavez] from his political role”.

“They build the news from the economic and political interests to which they respond,” she said.
Here, Venezuelanalysis.com debunks the top five lies currently being spread by private media.

1) The Venezuelan government is being secretive about Chavez’s health

This charge has been made by international media since Chavez first announced he had cancer in June 2011. Criticisms by the private media of government “secrecy” around his condition have intensified as the swearing-in date approaches, in part reflecting an increasingly fractious Venezuelan opposition anxious for details they could use to their advantage.

Mass media sources describe Chavez’s medical condition as “a mystery”, with outlets such as the Los Angeles Times referring to government information on Chavez’s post-operatory recovery as “sporadic and thinly detailed medical updates”. Outlets such as the British BBC and the Australian have picked up the opposition’s call for the Venezuelan government to tell the “truth” on Chavez’s health, implying that the government is withholding information, or outright lying.

The argument that the Venezuelan government is keeping secrets feeds into the discourse most mainstream media use in relation to the Bolivarian revolution, recently describing the government as “despots” (Chicago Tribune) and “autocratic populists” (Washington Post).

Other media has put out its own versions of Chavez’s state of health, with the Spanish ABC going to great lengths to describe even his bowel movements, and reporting that he is in a coma, and the multinational Terra mistaking its desires for reality, reporting that Chavez is already dead. These media outlets have just one “anonymous” source for their reports; they somehow, apparently, have an infiltrator (or an “intelligence source” as they call it) among Chavez’s Cuban medical team.

The government has in fact released 28 statements updating the public on Chavez’s condition since his operation on 11 December, an average of around 1 per day. These statements are available in full text on the internet, and are also being read out by communication minister Ernesto Villegas on all Venezuelan public television and radio.

In the latest statement, released yesterday, Villegas said that Chavez’s condition remains “stationary” compared to the last report, where the public was informed that he has a respiratory “deficiency” due to a pulmonary infection.

It is true however, that beyond mentioning the general cancer site; the pelvic region, the government hasn’t revealed the exact type of cancer that Chavez has, nor the exact nature of the operation that he underwent on 11 December. This is possibly due to privacy reasons.

When asked directly about this issue in a recent interview, Jorge Rodriguez, a doctor and key figure in Chavez’s United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV), said “I’d give the example of Mrs. Hilary Clinton, who had a cerebral vascular accident. There are three factors which influence these cases: the part of the brain where it happens, the size of the affected zone, and if it produces a hemorrhage or obstruction. Well fine, I’ve not seen any serious and decent doctor ask in which zone she had the lesion. And I think it’s fine that they don’t ask because that lady has the right to privacy. I’ve not seen Ramon Guillermo Aveledo (the executive secretary of the opposition’s MUD coalition) asking to know if her accident affected her in the frontal lobe, in which case, of course, she couldn’t continue giving the instructions she normally gives”.

Of course, when the international media report on the Venezuelan opposition’s stance towards Chavez’s health situation, they invariably fail to mention that the opposition’s approach has a lot less to do with a crusade for truth, and more to do with its hopes of creating a political and constitutional crisis over the issue. They make out that the Venezuelan government is being deliberately misleading and manipulative with information, but would never point the finger at Western leaders such as George Bush or Barack Obama for not announcing the exact locations of their frequent, long, and luxurious vacations, for example.

2) It is unconstitutional if Chavez doesn’t take the oath of office on 10 January

This is another lie that takes a leaf straight from the opposition’s book. Most opposition leaders, and even the Venezuelan Catholic Church, are arguing that if Chavez cannot be officially sworn-in as president on 10 January then he will lose his status as president of Venezuela. They say that in that case, Chavez should be declared “permanently absent”, and the head of the national assembly, Diosdado Cabello, would have to take over as president and call fresh elections. The opposition also claim that the swearing-in ceremony cannot be postponed, and that if Chavez continues on as president after 10 January it would be a “flagrant violation of the constitution”. Their strategy is to use their own interpretation of the constitution in order to try and depose Chavez on a technicality while the president-elect lies in Cuba struggling in post-surgery recovery.

Private media outlets have latched onto this argument, and misinformed about the Venezuelan constitution. In a highly misleading article, the Washington Post claimed that a delay in Chavez’s inauguration ceremony would be “a stretch of the constitution’s ambiguous wording”. Similar comments were made in other U.S. outlets, with Time arguing that Venezuela’s constitution is “a murky map that could send the western hemisphere’s most oil-rich nation into precarious governmental limbo this year”. Reuters argued that the Venezuelan government is “violating the constitution” and the country will be “left in a power vacuum”, and the BBC, which maintained a more reserved tone, still portrayed interpretations of the constitution as muddied debate between government and opposition.

However, Venezuela’s constitution is clear on the situation. The conditions under which a president can be declared permanently absent and new elections called are covered by article 233, and are, “death, resignation, destitution decreed by the Supreme Court, mental or physical incapacity certified by a medical council designated by the Supreme Court with the approval of the National Assembly, abandonment of the post, [or] a popular recall of the mandate”.

Currently Chavez’s status is that of “absence from the national territory”, a status which is granted by the national assembly. This could eventually be declared a “temporary absence” from the presidency, which is granted by the national assembly for a period of ninety days, and can be extended for 90 further days, as outlined by articles 234 and 235 of the constitution.

What the opposition are trying to do is use article 231 of the constitution, which describes the presidential inauguration, to argue for Chavez’s deposal. The article states that the president elect “will assume their mandate on the 10^th of January of the first year of their constitutional period, through a swearing-in ceremony in front of the National Assembly”. The opposition claim that Chavez’s inability to attend that ceremony means that he has not assumed his term and his “permanent absence” should be declared.   However, as noted above, not being able to attend the inauguration ceremony is not considered a reason for “permanent absence” in the Venezuelan constitution, leaving the Venezuelan opposition without a constitutional leg to stand on.

Rather, this situation is dealt with by the second half of article 231, which states, “If for any supervening reason the president cannot take office in front of the National Assembly, s/he will do so before the Supreme Court”. No date is specified.

Venezuelan constitutional lawyer Harman Escarra, an opposition supporter who helped draft the 1999 constitution, explained in an interview with Venezuelan daily Ciudad CCS that constitutionally, even if the president can’t attend the 10 January ceremony, the new presidential term still begins, including the constitutional mandate of the president’s council of state, the vice-president, and government ministers. As such, he affirmed that in Venezuela “there isn’t a power vacuum”.

The constitutional lawyer further explained that under both the letter and spirit of article 231 of the constitution, “The President, from the point of view of sovereignty, is the President. There’s no other, and the mandate of the popular majority cannot not be overturned because of the issue of a date at a specific moment, because that would be to violate a sacred principle that is in article five of the constitution, which says that power resides in the sovereignty of the people”.

Therefore, it is erroneous for international media to report that Venezuela is entering a constitutionally ambiguous situation in which either the status of the president or the next constitutional step is not clear. Further, it is not only misleading, but dangerous to wrongly paint Chavez allies as looking to subvert the constitution to stay in power, when the opposition is trying to question the government’s constitutional legitimacy in order to provoke a political crisis and depose Chavez as president. The opposition is not the “critical” and “unbiased” democratic voice that the private media represent them as. Such reporting also displays a certain level of hypocrisy, as one can be sure that if the U.S. president or British prime minister were unable to assume a particular inauguration ceremony for health reasons, such outlets would not start casting doubt on their legitimacy, as they are currently doing with Chavez.

3) Should elections have to be called, they may not be “fair”, and opposition leader Henrique Capriles has a good chance of winning

This third myth adds to the previous two to create the impression that the Bolivarian revolution is undemocratic. It is spouted by most private media, but especially media from the US, which rarely points out the utterly unfair conditions in which elections are held in its own country.

The Washington Post claimed that if Chavez were to die and new elections had to be called, “Chavez’s inner circle…may consider postponing the election or even calling it off”.

“That’s why the first responsibility of the United States and Venezuelan neighbors such as Brazil should be to insist that the presidential election be held and that it be free and fair,” the WP said, and even suggested that “Mr Chavez’s followers or military leaders” might “attempt a coup”.

The US State Department has also called for any elections that Venezuela has to be “free and transparent” and the Chicago Tribune in an article today said, “In October, Chavez vanquished his first serious challenger, Henrique Capriles, despite being too sick to campaign... Too sick to give speeches, he bought votes through political stunts like awarding a free government-built home to his 3 millionth Twitter follower.”

The Chicago Tribune’s statement is a lie; Chavez attended one to two huge rallies around the country in the month before the presidential elections, including one in Merida the authors of this article attended, as well as fulfilling his duties as president. And, of course there is no basis or need for these calls for “fair” elections. None of the private media will remind its readers of the 16 elections held over the last 14 years, that 81% of Venezuelans voluntarily turned out to vote in the October presidential elections, that Venezuela is building up participatory democracy through its communal councils, and that Venezuelans have access to completely free and widely available health care, education, and even to subsidised housing—basic conditions necessary for democracy to be practiced.

The Washington Post argued that the Venezuelan government “fears” free elections because “a fair vote would be won by opposition leader Henrique Capriles, who lost the October presidential ballot but is more popular than Mr. Maduro.” This is wishful thinking, another example of the media mistaking its desire for reality. The opposition did not receive more votes than the governing PSUV in the recent 16 December regional elections, despite Chavez’s absence. The opposition is weak, divided, disillusioned after 14 years of losing election after election (except the 2007 constitutional referendum), has no street presence what so ever, and has no program or cause to unite around, beyond wanting power.

4) A split within the Chavista leadership between Maduro and Cabello is coming

This is another idea bandied about by the Venezuelan opposition and propagated by the international media. The notion, or hope, is that if the worst were to happen and Chavez were to die, Chavismo would immediately become divided among itself and fall apart. In particular, it is argued that national assembly president Diosdado Cabello would try to seize the presidential candidacy of the PSUV from Vice-president Nicolas Maduro. Some opposition figures appear to be actively encouraging this, with opposition legislator Maria Corina Machado demanding that Diosdado Cabello take power on 10 January and that “distrust” and “fear” exist between Cabello and Maduro.

On cue, always backed by vague “analysts” or “observers”, the international media has informed the public of, “A potential rift inside Chavismo between Maduro’s more socialist faction and that of the more pragmatic Cabello” (TIME), or, “Mr Cabello wields considerable power and is thought to harbour his own political ambitions” (BBC), and that, “Chavez's death or resignation could set off a power struggle within the party among Maduro, Cabello, Chavez's brother Adan and state governors” (LA Times).

Such commentary has been slammed by Maduro, Cabello and other leaders within Chavismo, who all stress the unity of different currents within the Bolivarian movement in the current difficult situation. Indeed, the scenario of a direct power grab by Cabello or any other figure within Chavismo of Maduro’s role as successor if Chavez cannot assume his presidential term is very unlikely. Just before Chavez flew off to Cuba for surgery in December, he told the nation that, “If such a scenario were to occur, I ask you from my heart that you elect Nicolas Maduro as constitutional president of the republic”. Chavez has such strong support and respect from among his followers that it would be almost unthinkable for another leader within Chavismo to publicly go against Chavez’s express wish that Maduro be his successor. Any attempt to usurp Maduro’s leadership and candidacy in fresh presidential elections would be seen as political suicide.

5) That the revolution is over without Chavez

Most private media have also subtly cast doubt that the revolution will continue without Chavez, suggesting that the leadership will collapse, that Venezuela is already in “economic chaos” and “disaster”, that Venezuela is living a political “crisis” right now, and that the revolutionary process can’t survive without Chavez. The Chicago Tribune said that, “Whoever ends up running Venezuela will preside over the mess Chavez made of a prosperous and promising nation” and there is now “high unemployment, record inflation and rampant crime”. This is despite Venezuela ending 2012 with 19.9% inflation, the lowest in years, and unemployment lower than the US.

The media is ignoring the fact that the country has been doing fine this last month without Chavez, that the PSUV leadership won 20 out of 23 states in the regional elections in December, without Chavez’s presence, that there is no crisis here; schools started again as normal today, the barrio adentro clinics are open, people are working, shopping, returning from Christmas season vacations, as normal. There is no panic buying, no looting, no political unrest.

Most importantly, the media is ignoring, is invisibilising the biggest factor there is; the people of Venezuela. Chavez isn’t just a person, or a leader, he represents a political project; of economic and cultural sovereignty, of Latin American unity, of freedom from US intervention, of all basic rights satisfied, and of participatory democracy. The majority of Venezuelans have showed their support for that project by turning out to vote en masse time and time again, including in elections in which Chavez wasn’t running, with voting rates generally increasing each year. In most other countries people would be tired and would have gotten over so many elections by now. Venezuelans have marched in the thousands and millions around the country again and again, not just to support electoral candidates, but to march for workers’ rights on May Day, as well as for other causes such as gay rights, defending journalists against violent attacks by the opposition, in support of various laws, and more. It was Venezuelans, en masse, who helped overturn the coup against Chavez in 2002.

The list of gains over the last 14 years is a long one. To mention just a few: complete literacy, broadly available and free university education, free healthcare centres in most communities, free laptops to primary school children, free meals for primary school children, subsidised food, subsidised books, increased street culture and street art, a range of new public infrastructure such as train lines and cable cars, laws supporting the rights of disabled people, women, and so on, government assisted urban agriculture, legalised community and worker organising, nearly a 1000 free internet centres, music programs, pensions for the elderly, and much more. These huge changes can’t be quickly reversed, and the Venezuelan people have every reason not to let them be.

Further, over the last 14 years, Venezuelans have woken up. They read and know their laws, everyone, even opposition supporters, spends hours each day debating and discussing politics and economics. Apathy still exists, but is way down. There is a political consciousness and depth that can’t be turned off overnight.

While it is true that after Chavez there will probably be bureaucracy, corruption, reformism, and some internal disagreements, these issues existed with him as a leader as well. Any change in political circumstances is an opportunity to bring these problems to the surface and to confront them.

The people of the Bolivarian movement are fighters, and are here to stay.

January 08, 2013

Venezuelanalysis

Bahamas Blog International

Venezuela without Chavez: A Possible Scenario

By Roberto Lopez – Marea Socialista:




This article is written by a member of the leftist Marea Socialista (Socialist Tide) current of Venezuela’s ruling United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV). It is the first of several voices from within the Bolivarian movement to be featured by Venezuelanalysis.com this week, each offering an interpretation of the current situation in relation to Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez’s health and swearing-in, as well as the possible future political scenarios that Venezuela faces.


1) Chavez’s leaving power seems to be a certainty in the short term (from a few months to a year), either through death or because his health will prevent him from returning to active office. If he returns and is sworn in on January 10 or at a later date, his precarious health condition will keep him almost permanently in Cuba and the real running of the country will fall on one or more other individuals.

2) This implies the beginning of a period of profound change in the political leadership of the Bolivarian Revolution. This period could last several months or even several years.

3) The recent and resounding electoral defeats suffered by the opposition in October and December place the post-Chavez political dispute within Chavismo itself. This will continue for at least several months and perhaps a year or two. Currently, the right wing is not in a political position to act offensively to regain power within the country, but obviously that weakness can change as time goes on.

4) We can infer that the present pro-Chavez leadership headed by Maduro and Cabello will deteriorate as time passes. Causes: none of them have the leadership qualities of Chavez and therefore none of them are able to generate the consensus that existed when Chavez was in office. The deterioration of consensus implies a deterioration of governance over national, regional and local institutions. Generally, one can say that the long-term continuation of the Bolivarian Revolution is not assured with the current leadership, which has constituted Chavez’s inner circle and his immediate environment for the past 14 years. We will witness an on-going crisis of governance that will result in constant rearrangements whose actors and trends cannot be accurately predicted.

5) Several processes will occur simultaneously:

a) An internal struggle for a new distribution of power within chavismo (redistribution of control over state institutions and over effective control of the national budget). Although formally they might manage to reach agreements for slicing up the bureaucratic pie, strong shocks will in fact begin to be produced because the country is not a sum of its parts but an organic whole. Those clashes will be concealed initially, but will progressively become more public. This could even lead to violent scenarios, such as attacks against certain leaders of the various pro-Chavez fractions.

b) The deterioration of this leadership for Venezuelans who support the process. This may occur due to the government’s inability to address popular demands around critical issues; for example, labor disputes and collective negotiations involving significant sections of the state (teachers, academics, Guyanese industries, etc.). Chavez will no longer be there to appease people’s emotions with the refrain of “the president didn’t know” or “they’re not complying with the president’s directives.” The errors of the bureaucracy will not be forgiven by the people, as occurred when Chavez firmly held the nation’s leadership.

c) A widespread conspiracy by the “empire” [the US primarily] to penetrate the various civilian and military pro-Chavezleadership circles to promote the reversal of the revolutionary process. This could be supplemented with future scenarios in which pro-Chavez forces and opposition forces unite to achieve the goal of ending the revolution. At the moment, however, those scenarios are not yet possible (thankfully), but they could be created in the short term.

d) In the internal struggle within Chavismo, imperialist forces and their local allies will constantly seek to exert their influence. The empire is likely to attempt to carry out various actions on its own, even violent ones, which could then be blamed on the intra-Chavista struggle. The goal of this would be to add more fuel to the fire and encourage the strengthening of internal tendencies that are more likely to compromise with imperialism.

6) The imperial forces will seek the right moment to end the Bolivarian Revolution. In promoting their initiatives, they will not rule out Libyan or Syrian-type scenarios (i.e., fostering a civil war) to overthrow the Bolivarian government and restore imperial rule over Venezuela.
In conclusion, the removal of Chavez from power opens up a scenario of uncertainty and political crisis in Venezuela, which seriously threatens the continuity of the revolutionary process and opens the door for the international bourgeoisie and their allies to attempt to regain domestic political power.

Given this reality, it is essential that revolutionaries strengthen their organizational activities and joint actions based on broad and democratic debate over the political agenda being raised by popular organizations.

Ensuring the continuation of the revolutionary process will depend on the emergence of new forms of popular collective leadership, which will be born in the heat of the difficult political confrontation that will characterize the months and years ahead.

If this strengthening of alternative revolutionary leadership does not occur, it is likely that reformist trends will end up predominating within the Chavista bureaucracy, pushing for a general agreement with the local bourgeoisie and US imperialism as a way to “save and sustain” the Bolivarian process.

If this latter trend prevails, the re-taking of power by imperialism would progressively occur and the reformist leaders and facilitators of Chavismo would gradually be displaced by more reliable traditional bourgeois leaders. That process could take several years, possibly the entire current presidential term (2013-2019).

The means of avoiding this will always be through the strength of the popular movement led by a truly revolutionary program. This cannot rely on small and tiny groups or tendencies that exist within or outside the PSUV. It will depend on a massive confluence of revolutionary activists (including the military) and social organizations to confront the imperialist conspiracy and reformist reconciliation.

In this strategy — which I believe is the only alternative that exists to save the revolution — we must try out all means for exercising democracy and achieving the broadest possible consensus for allowing unity of action throughout the country.

This article originally appeared in Spanish on la.guarura.net and was translated into English by HavanaTimes.org.

January 07, 2013

Venezuelanalysis

Bahamas Blog International

The Patois Bible: Relevant or irreverent?

By Desrine Bogle

THE debate around what is commonly referred to as the Patois Bible that began in 2010 was reignited with the December 9, 2012 release of the New Testament in both written and audio forms of Jamaican Creole. However, do most persons enter the debate dispassionately?

 

Unfortunately, as Jamaicans, we still do not want to recognise that what we speak is in fact a language. It has been given many disparaging names, the most dignified of which is "the dialect". From a linguistic standpoint, a dialect is nothing but a regional variety of a language. Thus, for example, American English is a dialect of Standard English. Mexican Spanish is a dialect of Castilian and Canadian or Senegalese French are dialects of Standard French. Jamaican Creole is not a dialect of English; speakers of English cannot readily comprehend it, despite its having some English words.

So, what value does this Patois Bible have? For linguists, the translation of the Bible into Jamaican Creole seeks to deflate the argument that Patois is a corrupted, vulgar or a broken form of English, devoid of scholarly merit and inappropriate for written texts, moreover the sacred word of God.

For translation specialists, the Jamaican Bible translation project, dubbed the Patois Bible, has significant merit because of the historical relevance of Bible translation. Some facts will undoubtedly clear the air and hopefully make the project more acceptable.

 

For centuries, Christianity, and more precisely Roman Catholicism, was the only religion in many parts of the then known world including Europe. From the late fourth century until the Reformation, the only authorised translation of the Bible, called the Vulgate, was available in Latin. However, Latin was not understood by the masses, which spoke their vernacular, which were forms of Latin that were considered, at the time, corrupted, broken or vulgar. Sounds familiar?

 

Despite this unpopular view towards the vernacular languages, Great Reformers like the German Martin Luther and the Englishman William Tyndale saw the need to render the Inspired Word into the language of the masses. They set about to translate the Bible into the vernacular language of their compatriots.

 

On September 21, 1522, Martin Luther published the translation of the New Testament. This translation became known as the September Bible. In 1534, Luther completed the translation of the entire Bible from the original Greek and Hebrew, which was known as the Luther Bible. In 1526, William Tyndale published his translation of the New Testament, which was referred to as the Tyndale New Testament.

 

In 1535, he completed the translation of the first half of the Old Testament. He was strangled to death and burnt at the stake before being able to complete the translation of the entire Bible.

 

The Bibles of these two Reformers are significant for several reasons, chief among which is the fact that their translations were done from the original Greek and Hebrew and not from existing translations. The Patois New Testament, like these great translations, uses the original Greek and Hebrew and not English translations.

 

During the Reformation, the significance of translating the Bible into what was considered broken, corrupted or vulgar languages was to make the Word accessible to the masses that did not master Latin. The translators of the Reformation were wholly concerned about the people accessing the Word to enrich their spiritual experience; they did not spend time questioning the validity of their native language for expressing the Sacred Word of God. The move also demonstrated that these vernacular languages were no less worthy than Latin to express the Holy Word.

 

The Bible translations into English and German were met with staunch opposition by the clergy of the Roman Catholic Church, of the time that felt, for various reasons, that the act of translating the Sacred Word into these vernacular languages was sacrilegious. What was the price for translating parts or the entire Bible? Surely not praise.

 

The translations were banned and the translators were ex-communicated and killed, being deemed heretics. Tyndale printed 3,000 copies of his translation. They were banned and burnt. Only two copies remain today.

 

Translating the Bible was a victory for the Reformers who gave the common man an opportunity to understand the Word in his own tongue. Was not the goal of Pentecost to have every man hear the Word in his own tongue?

 

Translating the Bible into vernacular languages was also a victory for those languages that were considered corrupted versions of Latin. The translations helped in the standardisation of those vernacular languages. The Luther Bible was written in Early New High German. This translation was influential in standardising the German language.

 

The Tyndale New Testament, written in early modern English, greatly influenced future versions of the Bible, especially the King James Version. Tyndale's translation had an indisputable influence in shaping modern English.

 

The standardisation of Jamaican Creole will, contrary to popular belief, not mean the death of English. It will give credence to a language that has existed and has been used by Jamaicans of all social classes for over a century, but which has been demonised as vulgar, corrupted or broken English.

 

The translation of the Bible into Jamaican Creole follows a similar trajectory to German and English Bible translations. Many scoff at the move, deeming it sacrilegious and a waste of time and money. Others see in this translation a more sinister motive to oppress the masses by depriving them of mastering English.

 

Linguists see the translation of the Bible into the Jamaican language as a victory in efforts to standardise it. Like the Great Reformers, translation specialists believe that the Bible can, and should, be translated into vernacular languages, just as into any other language. Why not into Jamaican?

 

Desrine Bogle holds a PhD in Translation Studies. She is the chair of the Department of Humanities at Northern Caribbean University in Mandeville.

January 06, 2013

Jamaica Observer

Bahamas Blog International

A Tribute to Barack Obama... America’s 44th President

Tribute to Barack Obama

BY DION FOULKES
Nassau, The Bahamas

The re-election of America’s 44th president is a profound accomplishment for our great neighbor to the north and a good omen for the rest of the world.

This is part of a broader trend in which the arc of history continues to bend towards greater equality and inclusion in the universal human family.

That arc must be bent by every generation, in every age, and in every place where exclusion and inequality smothers the human spirit and shackles progress.

As a student at the University of Indiana more than a few years ago I was privileged to participate in a campaign that successfully pushed for a U.S. federal holiday to honor the life and witness of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Those efforts included organizing hundreds of students for a modern March on Washington, ending at the National Mall in Washington D.C. where Dr. King led an earlier historic March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom.

Because of the power of the dream expressed at that protest march at the Lincoln Memorial in 1963, just 40 years after Dr. King’s death the world witnessed the first inauguration on the west steps of the U.S. Capitol Building of an African American as president of the most powerful country in the world.

That was four years ago.

On the 21st of January 2013, Martin Luther King Day, President Barack Obama will take the oath of office for a second time.

Both Dr. King and Mr. Obama understood that progress only comes when enough people feel the need to move “Forward”.

Here at home, The Bahamas long ago met the challenge of the forward movement when we ended the property vote, extended the franchise to women, achieved majority rule and opened up the highest offices in the land to all Bahamians regardless of race, ethnicity or gender.

Both major political parties in our nation count among their members and founders those who fought for human dignity and the expansion of human rights for every Bahamian, no matter their color or creed.

For any one party - then or now - to claim this legacy as an exclusive possession would be an act of amnesia, or gross arrogance.

I share with other second and third generation Bahamian politicians a personal connection to this national movement for freedom and progress.

My father,  H. E. Sir Arthur Foulkes, in the late 1950s collaborated with others to create the National Committee for Positive Action, the NCPA, which transformed the face of Bahamian politics.  To those who were saying, “no we can’t” or “maybe we shouldn’t”, our fathers said, “yes we can”  and they moved forward.

Both King and Obama would recognize in the NCPA a kindred spirit, a movement for change that grew out of the audacity of hope, a movement that combined high principles with grassroots organizing, idealism with pragmatism, thoughtful action with extraordinary courage.

I am proud that the party of which I am privileged to be a member, and which bears the name “freedom”, has a rich legacy of expanding democratic freedoms, be they political, economic or social.

The Free National Movement (FNM) moved forward with freeing the broadcast media and expanding civil rights.

The FNM moved with greater transparency and accountability in government.

The FNM moved forward with more progressive labor and inheritance laws.

We moved forward with a social safety net for the vulnerable and created empowerment and training opportunities for the economically displaced.

Barack Obama is a product of both the African Diaspora and European settlement, a convergence of which helped to mold the histories of both The Bahamas and America.

And, lest we forget, this child of a mother with deep roots in America is also the son of an African immigrant.

His story reminds us that while we must be ever vigilant regarding illegal immigration, we must be equally vigilant against the scapegoating of those from other lands, including those with so-called unusual names -- such as Barack Hussein Obama.

Part of the appeal of America is the ability to inspire and assimilate others into the enduring power of the American Dream, a dream rooted in the pursuit of a singular ideal:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights.”

America’s election of a black man after a brutal legacy of slavery and racism is a testament to those ideals and a continued test for America, despite this historic election.

This struggle for justice and equality has never been confined within national boundaries.

In our 21st Century world older, imperfect democracies like The Bahamas and the United States of America have a shared moral obligation to ensure that those fighting against injustice and inequality within state boundaries find global allies.

Mass hunger, genocide, the spread of nuclear weapons and the effects of global warming are challenges for all states, whether they have a population of 330 million or a population of 330,000.

In The Bahamas and throughout the world there is tremendous hope that President Obama has the life story, vision and temperament to continue the work with the global community to re-energize international institutions and practices that are needed to confront a host of transnational issues.

President Obama’s experience living abroad, his openness of mind and spirit and his communications skills has helped him to live up to his stated commitment to seek common solutions over unilateral adventures.

Just as President Obama recognized that his election was a new moment in America, he appreciates that his re-election is a renewed moment for the world.  Today a country’s domestic concerns cannot be separated from broader international challenges.

The Bahamas, the Caribbean and the world look forward to a new era of cooperation with the United States of America and its president to promote human prosperity, to ensure energy security and to craft a sustainable future.

The journey that led to the historic election of America’s 44th president suggests that these goals can be achieved if we never lose the audacity of hope and a commitment to the conviction that all of God’s children, whatever their ethnicity, gender, color, creed or economic status are entitled to the fruits of justice, opportunity and freedom.

• Dion Foulkes is a former minister of labour in the previous Free National Movement administration.

January 04, 2013

thenassauguardian

Bahamas Blog International

Stem cell research and therapy has the potential to jump start a more than $100 million medical tourism industry in The Bahamas

Stem Cell Research May Bring $100m Industry

By AVA TURNQUEST

Tribune Staff Reporter

aturnquest@tribunemedia.net

STEM CELL research and therapy has the potential to jump start a more than $100 million medical tourism industry, according to the government’s task force, which delivered its verdict on the country’s proposed plunge into the controversial science yesterday.

In a presentation to Minister of Health Dr Perry Gomez, the group outlawed the use of embryonic cells to create new stem cells and reproductive cloning, and gave recommendations on how the country could maximise its potential to advance global medical research.

Stating the therapy’s profound implications, the committee called for an overhaul of existing legislation concerning medical tourism, and widespread education and consultation to ensure that decision makers are well-versed with the importance of the groundbreaking science and related ethical issues.

Dr Arthur Porter, who led the special research team, said: “We put together the framework for stem cell work to be carried out to the benefit of Bahamians in an ethical way and to support the potential for a medical tourism industry, and we delved into the specifics of what can be done and what should not be done.”

“What we don’t want to do is make it an open season for anybody who wants to do anything. What we want to do is we want to have that reputable high class science and therapy can be done here under the right sort of regulations and the right sort of ethics control because not only are you controlling it for the jurisdiction and the reputation of the jurisdiction also frankly the sophisticated person won’t go to a place that is uncertain so it’s much better that we start off right the first time.”

Dr Gomez announced the task force last month, giving the panel of experts 60 days to study stem cell research from an ethical and medical point of view before delivering a final report.

Task force members include: Dr Robin Roberts, Rev Angela Palacious, Dr Paul Ward, Dr Barrett McCartney, Dr Indira Martin, Dr Wesley Francis, Dr Glen Beneby, Dr Duane Sands and Mrs Michelle Pindling-Sands.

Stem cells are undifferentiated cells that have the capacity to renew themselves and to differentiate into various cell types – such as blood, muscle, and nerve cells. Stem cells are divided into two categories – embryonic stem cells and adult stem cells.

Dr Porter said: “Probably the most challenging ethical reasons [against the use of embryonic cells] are around the disruption of a blastocyst to create new stem cell lines, that was something that we felt as a group was difficult for us to overcome especially within this jurisdiction, and within the religious issues that we have here.”

“However, existing stem cell lines that may have been generated elsewhere over time that under the right conditions and the right ethical supervision should be allowed but again the creation of new stem cell lines in this country should not be permitted.”

A blastocyst is an embryo that has developed for five to six days after fertilisation. The committee approved the use of adult stem cells, said Dr Porter, who also noted that this year’s Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine was awarded for discovery that mature cells can be reprogrammed to become pluripotent, which characterizes the potential of a cell to differentiate into different cells.

Dr Porter said: “The second and perhaps more scientifically practical is that people are moving away from embryonic stem cells and in fact much of the research now is on adult stem cells or adult stem cells which are being transformed to be able to act in ways pluripotent stem cells can.”

“The needs to go back and take stem cells out of an embryo are becoming less and less. What we looked at for The Bahamas is to be future ready, to not look to what other countries have done but let’s create an environment so that we can capture the future.

He added: “We believe over the next ten years that we are going to see a renaissance in the use of this therapy and that we are always going to have to be looking forward and asking ourselves the question: ‘Is this new development okay?’ ‘is that new development all right?’”

The committee also approved the use of umbilical cord blood, which Dr Porter said has been used globally for over 15 years, and the use of somatic cell nuclear transfer, which is a type of technique in which adult stem cells are encouraged to behave as early stem cells.

Dr Porter said: “We are on the frontiers of new science so the appropriate clinical trials, the appropriate committees, the appropriate ethics support, should be given to the use of these areas.”

“The purveyors of stem cell work, the medical practitioners, research scientists, foster the skills necessary to perform good clinical trials. It is important whenever new therapies are introduced that we have the right practitioners, the right scientists, and the right facilities to be able to ensure quality use,” he said

According to Dr Porter, the group predicts a renaissance in use of stem cell therapy over the next ten years.

Noting that medical tourism was a “several billion” dollar industry, Dr Porter said the Bahamas’ market could earn more than a hundred million dollars per year. He also noted trickle down benefits for physicians, labs and the wider economy.

Dr Sands said: “This is a rapidly developing, rapidly evolving field, there are many countries in the world that have embraced medical tourism and as such have tried desperately to ensure that the process of approval, of ratification, of consideration of new projects, is done in a timely fashion. Similarly efforts have been made to ensure that phenomenal scrutiny of the proposed projects, the participants et cetera, is carefully done.”

He added: “So we need to ensure that the legislation in The Bahamas is robust enough to protect the integrity and reputation of this country, while at the same time promoting good science and this is an ongoing process so we need to make sure that the laws are constantly keeping up with what is happening on the ground.”

Dr Gomez said he plans to present the stem cell report to Cabinet early next year. He added that the report will affect possible future legislation and the development of guidelines for the use of stem cell therapy in the country.

December 28, 2012

Tribune 242 

Bahamas Blog International

Firm steps taken in the updating of Cuba’s economic model

• Council of Ministers Vice President Marino Murillo Jorge, head of the Policy Guidelines Implementation Permanent Commission, reports to National Assembly

O. Fonticoba Gener

 

 

 

 

DURING the last period between sessions of the Cuban Parliament, the process of implementation of Policy Guidelines approved by the 6th Party Congress has progressed at a satisfactory pace, with new measures implemented to update the country’s socioeconomic model and others, already in place, being perfected.

This was the essence of the report presented by Council of Ministers Vice President Marino Murillo Jorge, head of the Policy Guidelines Implementation Permanent Commission, during the final plenary session of the 7th Legislature.

In a summary of progress made in the implementation process, he said, "The tasks which the Commission, national bodies and entities, local governments and enterprises must complete in 2013 and 2014 will be the most complex, those of greatest importance and impact on the updating of our economic model and on society as a whole."

Given their nature and scope, he said, these tasks must be studied carefully, in order to adopt the best decisions for the country, with the coherence required.

WORK UNDERWAY

Murillo reported that the drafting of the theoretical conception of Cuba’s economic model is well underway. This document will guide the work of all bodies involved in the nation’s development.

He said that also advancing is the establishment of fundamentals for the country’s long-term Economic and Social Development Program, which include the definition of indicators to be used to evaluate the model’s performance and, above all, to precisely determine goals to be met.

Murillo indicated that a timeline is being prepared for the implementation of macro-economic policies, included among the most important are a new methodology to determine wholesale and retail prices; monetary policy measures to be adopted to control the circulation of money; and procedures for financial planning, as tools to better coordinate macro-economic policy, the Economic Plan and State Budget.

Murillo made special mention of the new Tax System Law No. 113, which will go into effect in January, and highlighted the fact that regulations were included, which is not the case with the current, soon to be replaced, law.

While the Tax System Law is the highest authority, establishing the principles and taxable bases, he said, the Regulations detail procedures and norms governing the law’s application, which can be changed within the parameters established, without having to propose changes to the general law.

Murillo reported that work is currently being done on the design of the first 230 non-agricultural cooperatives which will open the gradual, experimental process of establishing this new form of economic activity. The legal framework for non-agricultural cooperatives went into effect December 11.

MORE AUTONOMY FOR ENTERPRISES

According to Murillo Jorge, a number of experimental changes in the functioning of enterprises will begin January 1, directed at expanding autonomy and authority in the economic and financial management of enterprises.

This process is being undertaken to advance in the construction of a working model of the socialist state enterprise and to support macro-economic policies, among others approved.

The objectives of this process are the re-capitalization of enterprises; increased earnings to make possible the financing of increased wages for workers; the creation of a wholesale market and the reconciliation of costs which the Cuban economy can sustain with their value on the international market.

The policy to be followed in the implementation of these changes, he said, has been approved and work is underway on the legal framework.

The experiment will expand the context in which enterprises function and, on a small scale, allow for trying out needed changes. The process of full implementation will begin with the consolidated sugar group AzCuba, and that of the biotechnological and pharmaceutical industries, BioCubaFarma, as well as the state shrimp farming enterprise.

Murillo explained that the experiment will additionally include limited changes for other enterprises, selected because of their importance to the country’s economic development. These will, for example, allow for the sale of excess production available after state contracts have been fulfilled, at accorded prices.

OTHER STEPS FORWARD

As part of his report to deputies, Murillo Jorge addressed the approval process underway of a proposal to make state entities’ social objectives more flexible, with the goal of allowing such institutions to more fully develop their potential.

This proposal would allow for the adoption of measures such as the establishment of the principal social objective by the body or institution creating the entity, with no reference to the currency in which it will operate. Another option would be permitting the director of an enterprise or entity to make decisions about secondary activities, related to the social objective.

Murillo Jorge likewise emphasized the importance of studies being done on the development of linked production sequences, in an effort to increase productivity and contribute to a better structural balance within the economy. These efforts are directed toward the fulfillment of Guidelines No. 7, 89, 103, 129, 132, 136, 185, 217 and 219.

He also reported that work continues to facilitate self-employment. Among the measures are the inclusion of new activities (such as real estate agent, measurement instrument repairer and antique dealer), the renewed granting of licenses for activities previously suspended, as well as a new regulation which defines the scope of all types of approved work.

The policy which governs the awarding of subsidies to individuals for home construction, Murillo explained, has also been updated, with more financing available if the dwelling is to be built in a seismic zone; for coverage of transportation costs of building materials and for costs associated with technical documentation or for long-term leasing of land rights. New categories of persons eligible for subsidies were also established, including renters or persons living in rented rooms. Subsidies will also be available for the repair of leaks and plumbing problems.

IMPROVING GOVERNMENT ADMINISTRATION

The experience of Artemisa and Mayabeque provinces, involved in an innovative project to perfect their administrative systems and leadership bodies, was also discussed during the National Assembly plenary session.

Second in charge of the Permanent Commission, General Leonardo Andollo, emphasized the importance of Decree No. 301, which defines state functions to be assumed by national state administrative bodies and entities with respect to provincial authorities in the two provinces.

"This decree provides the legal framework allowing the experiment to operate on an institutional foundation in which the delegation of authority and attributes at the different levels are clearly defined."

"No antecedent to this document exists and it is an important foundation for the future, since today there is no such regulation which defines precisely and comprehensively, the procedures involved."

He explained that as part of the project, in Güines municipality, Mayabeque, an effort is being made to consolidate, in a single building, all administrative services the population requires. Plans include the creation of a single administration and shared logistical support, for example, in the area of data and telecommunications, while studies continue to guide improvement of the project.

Andollo reported that regulations for Government Information Councils and Technical Committees in the two provinces have been approved and that the process of integrating all higher education centers is underway there, as well as in the Isle of Youth.

One important accomplishment of the experimental project, he said, is that throughout the process thus far, there has been no administrative instability, significant when taking into consideration that administrative structures in each of the two provinces have been staffed with 26% of the original personnel and the principal indicators of development have been maintained at levels similar to those of other provinces.

Despite the progress made, Andollo indicated that difficulties persist. Among these are limitations on efforts to concentrate leadership bodies in the smallest number of locations possible and the insufficient availability of supplies needed by leadership bodies and service providers.

 

December 18, 2012

 

Granma.cu

 

Bahamas Blog International

Hugo Chavez has given everything he has ...and asked for nothing in return... ...Today, Venezuela grows and flourishes ...thanks to his commitment and vision ...thanks to his dedication and determination ...thanks to his love

Chavez

By Eva Golinger:



The first time I met Hugo Chavez was at the United Nations in New York in January 2003. He asked me my name, as if we were chatting between friends just getting to know each other. When I told him “Eva”, he responded “Eva, really?”[i] “Yes, Eva”, I said. “My brother is named Adan”, he said, adding, “My mother wanted me to be a girl so that she could call me Eva, and look, I appeared!” He smiled and laughed with that laugh of his, so pure and sincere it’s contagious to all those near.

He appeared. Chavez, who even underestimated himself.

This man appeared, larger than life, with an immense heart full of his people, pueblo, beating with homeland, patria. A human being appeared, with a great capacity to persist and stand defiantly in the face of the most powerful obstacles.

Hugo Chavez dreamed the impossible and achieved it. He assumed responsibility for the grandiose and difficult tasks that remained undone from the time of independence, those that Simon Bolivar couldn’t attain due to the adverse forces against him. Chavez fulfilled those goals, turning them into reality. The Bolivarian Revolution, the recovery of Venezuelan dignity, social justice, the visibility and power of the people, Latin American integration, national and regional sovereignty, true independence, the realization of the dream of the Patria Grande, and much, much more. These are Chavez’s achievements, the man who appeared just like that.

There are millions of people around the world who are inspired by Hugo Chavez. Chavez raises his voice without trembling before the most powerful, he says the truth – what others are afraid of saying –, he kneels before no one, he walks with firm dignity, head held high, with the people, el pueblo, guiding him and a dream of a prosperous, just and fulfilled nation. Chavez has given us the collective strength to fight inequality, injustice, to build nations and to believe that a better world isn’t just a dream, it’s an achievable reality.
Chavez, a man who could spend time in the company of the world’s richest and most powerful, prefers to be with those most in need, feeling their pain, embracing them and finding ways to improve their lives.

Chavez once told us a story, or told it many times as he often does. He was driving in his motorcade, out in the Venezuelan plains, los llanos, on those long roads that seem to continue infinitely. A dog suddenly appeared at the side of the road, limping with a wounded leg. Chavez ordered the motorcade to stop and went out to get the dog. He hugged the wounded animal, saying it had to be taken to the vet. “How can we leave it here alone and wounded”, he asked. “It’s a being, it’s a life, it needs to be cared for”, he said, demonstrating his sensitivity. “How can we call ourselves socialists without the lives of others mattering? We need to love, we need to care for all, including animals, which are innocent beings. We can turn our backs on no one”, he recalled.

When he told that story I cried. I cried because of my love for animals and the widespread mistreatment they suffer, and how necessary it was for someone like him, Chavez, to say something like that to awaken consciousness about the need to care for those who share our planet. But I also cried because Chavez confirmed something in that moment that I already knew, something I felt in my heart, but was unsure of in my mind. Chavez confirmed his simplicity, his sensitivity and his capacity to love. He confirmed he is a man whose heart feels pain when he sees a wounded animal. A man who not only feels, but acts. That’s who he is.

When Chavez assumed the presidency of Venezuela, the country was limping. He had seen its wounds and knew that he had to do all he could to help. He took Venezuela into his arms, embracing it closely, soothing and seeking how to make it better. He gave everything he had in him - his sweat, soul, strength, energy, intelligence and love – to change Venezuela with dignity, growth, sovereignty, and nation-building. He looked after it day and night, never leaving it alone. He found its beauty, its strength, its potential and its greatness. He helped it to grow strong, beautiful, visible and happy. He led its rebirth and filled its pulse with force and passion, with people’s power and a dignified homeland.

Chavez has given everything he has and asked for nothing in return. Today, Venezuela grows and flourishes, thanks to his commitment and vision, thanks to his dedication and determination, thanks to his love.

Thank goodness you appeared, Chavez.

Eva Golinger is an investigative journalist and writer on Venezuelan affairs, and author of ‘The Chavez Code’ (2006) among other titles. This article was translated by Ewan Robertson and edited by Eva Golinger. It first appeared in Spanish on RT. 

December 11, 2012

venezuelanalysis

Bahamas Blog International