Many of you who read this post may, or may not, know what is currently happening in Bolivia. Bolivia is a small country about three times the size of Montana; it is located in the very center of South America -you can’t miss it. In this country about 70% or so, are indigenous people; the various “types” of indigenous groups vary, but the major are placed into two classes, the Quechua and Aymara. This country has had quite the flamboyant history (like many South American countries). It has dealt with uprisings, revolutions, resistances, constitutional changes, etc… Currently this country faces some crucial decisions. From what I understand, the current president/government is attempting to institute the following changes: 1) Distribute the wealth of the country (mainly the wealth located in the eastern province of Santa Cruzs) 2) bring about political equality 3) attempt to remedy the ethnic tensions 4) nationalize the energy, communication, and general utilities sectors. 4) control the “spread” of “US capitalism.” The previous list is only based on what I know the government is trying to do. Continuing…. the response to these attempts to socialize the nation, the Eastern province of Santa Cruz de la Sierra, has, by way of retort, made the advance to declare autonomy from the central leftist government. Santa Cruz will vote on this autonomy referendum tomorrow (in 2 hr Santa Cruz time), and from what I am able to induct, I wish them well.

The reason why I ‘wish’ Santa Cruz luck is because the attempts of the leftist government and President Evo Morales have, for lack of better vocabulary, erred in their attempts to create what they call, “equality.”

I would like, for the remainder of the post, to examine what that word means, and if it should be established at the cost of freedom and civil rights.

If you were to ever go to Santa Cruz, you would find a beautiful city nestled at the base of the Andes Mountains, and located next to a torrent river, El Rio Pirai. The people there are very kind, humble, industrious, and loving. I have experienced the various elements of this city many time (i have lived there for over 3.5 years and visit often). This city is the most wealthy and progressive of Bolivia, it houses the most industry, agriculture, eduction, and technological advances. Due to the advances that this city has made in the last 60 years, it has become the beacon of rationality; the people there are more educated, more happy, and more successful that any other part of Bolivia. It is undeniable that this type of ‘advancement’ is due, partially, to the economical success of the free market located in that city. However, this ‘market’ is under attack. Evo Morales has attempted to “equalise” the rich elitist of Santa Cruz with the indigenous population (approx. 30% to 70%). The problem with his movement is that he has decided that it is necessary to take some of the economical freedoms away from the people of Santa Cruz, and then give the Indians an increased amount of rights. The question that we now are confronted with is: is this justifiable, or necessary? To better approach this question, let us lay it out as a proposition:

1) To bring about equality one must take right from those who have more and give them to those who have less.

The problem with (1) is how can one person have more rights than another? For the natural law theorist, it follows that (1) is false; people all are endowed with the same rights as others. However, this view for institutionalism, and governmental proponents would feel that if a group of people is discriminated against, then they have less opportunity and thus their rights have been “lessened.” It is not obvious that discrimination limits right, but rather infringes upon them. For example, I have the right to free speech. But in a country where I am a sever minority, I might be threatened to not say certain things…I could say them, but I might be beaten or killed if I do, so I don’t.  But the law in that country says I can say what I like, thus, I haven’t lost that right, it has just been infringed upon. So, Evo’s claim is false. But to be fair, and for the purpose of discussion, let us reformulate his claim so as to make it more proficient:

1A) To bring about equality one must infring upon the rights of the infringers. And free the infringed from the infringers.

So, in (1a) we come to what Evo and his government are attempting to do. They are bringing this about by distributing property of the rich to the poor, they are giving more freedoms to the poor, and also destroying certain capitals that dominate the industry.  Is this right? Should a government dictate who should be equal, and how that should be brought about? Should a government say, “you are poor, so we will give you stuff so you are not poor” and additionally, “you are poor because of those people, so we will take from them and give to you.” This seems to be a type of robin hood government. Evo Morales justifies his movement on the idea that the people of Santa Cruz have “enslaved” the Indians!!! This is preposterous, i have worked for several humanitarian companies and lived amongst the Indians and the people of Santa Cruz. I must say one thing, the Indians are poor, because they choose not to progress. They are “traditionalist” they follow the “traditions” ignorantly of their for fathers. I know Indians or people of Indian decent that are very wealthy because of their choice to be that way. Evo, should not try and fix it by treading upon the rights of the people of Santa Cruz, but rather educate the indigenous population and empower their minds. Santa C. has exercised its FREEDOM to think, to act, to create business, to learn, to work, and to progress. It is sad that the Indians are poor, I hate it! But I notice when i am down there in Bolivia that the only beggars are the poor Indians, and the poor citizens of Santa Cruz (non-indigenous) work and don’t beg. The focus should be to have more freedom via more rational thought…Mr. Morals is utterly missed the mark here.

Thus, I support Santa Cruz. They have what they have as a result of the long won deposit of their efforts and toils.