That’s the question that Lee Harris asks in a column over at TCS Daily. He focuses on the unfolding situation in Latin America, where Axis of Subversion trio Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, and Evo Morales are undoing the democratic fiber of the entire continent. To explain the resurgence of state socialism in this wellspring, he looks to important thinkers of both Marxism and capitalism alike. The root? Populism.

This much is already known, and its potential effects on the region dangerous. What is not delved into is the exact nature of this populism and how it is morphing into state socialism.

Latin America, next to Africa, is one of the most inegalitarian continents in the world. Even Eastern Europe is no comparison. Military dictatorships, billionaire oligarchs, and foreign corporations have had their run of the place. Corrupt governments supported by the former two have ensured throughout this entire time that neither the latter nor themselves have had to contribute significantly to the development of their respective societies. The rage against neo-liberal economics espoused by people like Chavez reflects an actual perception among the people that it is the free market that has enriched the oligarchs and impoverished the vast majority.

Latin America is also still very much undermined by its Spanish colonial past. Most of the very wealthy in Latin American countries tend to be of European descent — in another word, white. Compare that to the poor, who are predominantly of Indian descent. Because of this, wealth is almost instantly associated with race. By being white, with lighter hair and lighter eyes, one is automatically assumed to be wealthy — and even more, corrupt to the bone. Even if you aren’t.

Mix all that up with a history that emphasizes strong political leaders through the proven unstable presidential system, compounded by tons of small parties that are either narrow-issue or bought out, and magnified even further by undeveloped and corrupt political institutions following the Third Wave transition to democracy, and you have yourself a genuine populist witches brew. A brew where people not only no longer believe in democracy, but advocate the complete redistribution of wealth based on racial terms. And there’s the socialism you’re looking for.

The indigenous rights movement in Latin America has moved beyond gaining rights and greater deserved influence in government. Now they want the whole system to go topsy-turvy. 10% of the whites own 90% of the wealth? Well, 90% of the Indians should have that 90%! And the reasoning sounds really good, especially coming from charismatic populists like Evo Morales, who is a product of this very movement.

It makes sense. The indigenous population has been repressed ever since the Spanish arrived. What doesn’t make sense is the reasoning. It isn’t neo-liberal economics that has enriched the wealthy at the expense of everyone else. It’s corrupt governance. Political institutions are so weak in Latin America that regardless of whether Chavez or the oligarchs are in power, those who have it are going to steal from the people. People thought Chavez would neutralize the oligarchs and use the country’s oil to better their condition with social programs like education and healthcare. Well, he did the latter, but instead of serving the people, he’s stealing the money and creating a cult of personality. Why do they think Evo Morales will be any different? At least with the oligarchs they had something resembling liberalism. Now not only are they poor, but they’re not very free either.

Compare this to countries like Chile. It has very strong democratic institutions, a flexible presidential system that is based on two main party alliances, and transparency and a free press that ensures that corruption in the government doesn’t go unnoticed. Under the terrible, terrible neo-liberal economics first instituted by Pinochet and wholeheartedly continued under the center-left coalition, Chile has become incredibly wealth. Sure, the wealthy have gotten wealthier. But that’s because they’re creating new businesses in their country. Meanwhile, for the first time, the country has a surging middle class, with suburban cookie-cutter homes sprawling out from Santiago. Then again, while Chile does have minor indigenous human rights issues, its community of Mapuche Indians is very small compared to a place like Bolivia, where over half the population is indigenous.

Do not expect this movement to fade. It will only grow stronger over time, as Chavez and Morales use their newly nationalized energy power to funnel money to these groups in other countries; not because they truly sympathize with them (at least Chavez doesn’t), but because the kind of Bolivarian Revolution that they’re looking for is not so much about indigenous rights as it is about complete redistribution of wealth in all of Latin America, enabling them to gain ever more power. Ever heard of the Zapatistas?…

Chavez wants his revolution to reach the borders of the United States. With the Zapatistas taking money under the table, making campaign tours, and rallying the repressed indigenous communities in Mexico, that tidal wave could really hit if governments don’t begin to neutralize him now. These groups have radicalized because they have been fighting for years to no avail, and now they have a powerful backer that can help them achieve change if they follow his agenda. The best way to neutralize him is to begin enacting policies that indigenous groups were pressing for in the first place: better education, healthcare, roads, and equal opportunity. Is that too much to ask to stem the red tide rising from Latin America?

*****

As a side note, education is a big issue here. A lot of these people certainly don’t know better. They just know that redistribution of wealth from the “corrupt oligarchs” to themselves sounds really good. Oligarchs and the governments they dominated practically brought this on themselves, as indigenous communities never got near equal treatment as their own did. I have a thing for making conversation with taxi drivers whenever I’m down there, especially about the news and what they think of it. One guy I talked to, a Peruvian, had no idea who Hitler or Stalin was. How can we expect socialism to die when our collective history, our collective consciousness, fades from memory? If people are ever going to learn from the past and resist leaders like Chavez, they need to be educated and treated as if they are citizens of the countries they live in.