For Farmer to Presidente

From farmer to president

The new millennium brings to the world unaccountable advances in subjects like technology, science, mass communications and many more. Oddly enough, to rule a country an academic education and a university degree are not necessary. This paradox illustrates reality and political aspects of many nations. In was unthinkable in the nineties; in two thousand it is a hard fact.

Ordinary men become head of countries. One day, they were farmers, soldiers or shine shoes boys. The next one, they have reached the Office of President and the power that comes from it. Poor people and the dispossessed are their natural audiences and the ballot they cast in times of elections is the return they profit as rulers.

This awkward situation has its reasons. Years of dominance and subjugation between countrymen have separated citizens in two distinguishable groups. One who includes those that encompass large richness and other that piles up those who become poorer with the passing of years. The predominant class secures power never to share it with those already outcasts. Years of dictatorial governments, torture and bloodshed make new generations. Social as well as economic instability is often the cause of government overthrowing. That is, until one day one of those forgotten ones becomes president by seizing power by means of election or force.

Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva is an example of such modest a leader. No background could have been as simple and unexpected as his. A shoe shine boy and a metallurgic worker, he became president of Brazil. Since then he has changed some of his most radical ideas and moderated his political positions. Instead of fundamental changes, his government is seeking to conduct a reformist line to include passing of retirement, tax, labor and judicial bills. Far from being a revolutionary, he has become a social evolutionist.

Venezuela’s President Hugo Chavez is another example. Once considered to be Castro’s errand boy nowadays is seen as America’s most beleaguered opponent. He won the presidency by centering his campaign on promises of aiding Venezuela's poor majority. Since he took office, he has been reelected twice. He has challenged foreign economic models by supporting alternate choices. Also, he has advocated cooperation among the world's poor nations, especially those in Latin America. His belligerent speeches include eradication of disease, illiteracy, malnutrition, poverty and other social ills. His controversial friendship with leaders like Sadam Hussein, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and members of Colombia’s FARC is giving “goose pimples” to those who chose to ignore him in the past.

Evo Morales is another of these self-made characters. He is the first Bolivian’s native that achieved the presidency of Bolivia after being a “cocalero” movement leader. Such movement is a federation of coca leaf-growing farmers who are resisting the efforts of the United States government to eradicate it. This indigenous leader has brought socialist changes into governmental programs to be soon implemented by means of a constituent assembly that vows to transform his country. He has also vouched for the passing of a new hydrocarbon bill to secure at least 50% from oil industry revenues to Bolivia by supporting nationalization of natural gas companies with the cooperation of foreign companies. His constant friendship and frequent meeting with Chavez is a declaration of Morales’s political and ideological tendencies.

One out of five adults in today’s world is still non literate -two-thirds of them are women- while 72 million children are school dropouts according to UNESCO. This fracture between people could generate new leaders like da Silva, Morales or Chavez. Head of states in the making that may well arise from social inequality in search of better opportunities and equal rights. It is then inevitable to wonder if the world if prepare for future leaders from such a boiling pot. I believe it won’t be. So it’s our duty try to fix illiteracy in poor nations and prepare futures leaders. If we know the past, we could face the future with the best tools: experience and technology. First one to understand our history and second to use mass communications so every one have the same educations opportunity. But this is only my opinion. Only time will tell.-