Neoliberalism K—UMich 2013 neg 1NCs 1NC: Generic
Download 1.47 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Neoliberal policies won’t work in Cuba - Cubans reject it – the aff fails
- Link: Venezuela
- Venezuela is working towards an anti-neoliberal structure—US intervention prevents
Link: CubaUS fails to understand oppressive impacts of capitalism on Cuban societyLaFeber, Marie Underhill Noll Professor Emeritus of History and a Stephen H. Weiss Presidential Fellow in the Department of History at Cornell University, one of the United States' most distinguished historians 93 -- (Walter, “Inevitable Revolutions: The United States in Central America”, 1/17/93, http://books.google.com/books/about/Inevitable_Revolutions.html?id=RqMp5TsWCqkC)//AS The need of Cubans and Central Americans to find different means for achieving their version of a just society arose in large part from their long experience with North American capitalism. This capitalism has had a Jekyll and Hyde personality. U.S. citizens see it as having given them the highest standard of living and most open society in the world. Many Central Americans have increasingly associated capitalism with a brutal oligarchy-military complex that has been supported by U.S. poli- cies-and armies. Capitalism, as they see it, has too often threatened the survival of many for the sake of freedom for a few. For example, Latin Americans bitterly observed that when the state moved its people for the sake of national policy (as in Cuba or Nicaragua),the United States condemned it as smacking of Communist tyranny. lf, however, an oli- garchy forced hundreds of peasants off their land for the sake of his own profit, the United States accepted it as simply the way of the real world? Neoliberal policies won’t work in Cuba - Cubans reject it – the aff failsCarmona - Professor of Economics at the Universidad San Pablo. Spring 2000 (Antonio, “Cuba: Reforms and Adjustments Versus Transition,” International Journal of Political Economy. Vol 30.1, pp. 85. JSTOR)//SG The difference among highly industrialized countries lies in the manner in which these elements are implemented and in their political capacity. Each country has developed its own variant mode ofproduction throughout its history. What makesWestern Europe different from the rest ofthe world's capitalist economies is their welfare state, where the interests ofworkers are safeguardedin the legal and con- stitutional framework. The welfare state in Europe was consolidated after World War II.The benefits ofthe welfare state and its reforms were won after nearly a century of worker-based struggles and the efforts of unions, labor parties, and other emancipation groups. One cannot account for the high level ofproductivity experienced in Western Europe without taking into consideration the framework in which the state operates. In Cuba, most ofthe welfare-state attributes were brought into existence with- out the installation ofan industrialization process, and in a relatively short period of time. In this manner, the overthrow ofthe FulgencioBatista regime andthe implementation ofthe so-called socialist project can be seen as revolutionary. The institutional and infrastructure capacity forproductivity exists only through na- tional state power,the very same power that guards the welfare reforms.Another reason for CUbans to reject neoliberalism is that Cuban workers are already accus- tomed to the benefits ofthe welfare state and the political space for expressing economic interests. Ultimately, what allows the Cuban government to enjoy sta- bility and support frommostworkers isthe fact that Cubanworkers are much more involved in production planningthan their counterparts in free-market econo- mies.Cubansare most likely tosupport Fidel Castro rather than allowmultina- tionalcompaniesto rule the countryand wipe away benefits that were implemented a generation ago. The logical step for Cuba to take is to maintain a high level of socialization ofproductivity and an increase in hard-currency profits. Link: VenezuelaIntervention in Venezuela is marked by self-interest and neoliberal impositionClement, Visiting Assistant Professor of Politics at Pomona, 05 (Christopher, “Confronting Hugo Chávez: United States "Democracy Promotion" in Latin America”, Latin American Perspectives 32:3, 5/05, JSTOR)//AS I offer a markedly different critique of U.S. democracy promotion. Indeed, the policy is premised on the ideological assumption that democratic governance optimizes global capitalism and international stability, but the above argument pays little attention to the narrow and orthodox intellectual forces that underpin the practice of democracy promotion. The preoccupation with party building and the "semi-authoritarian" tag used in Venezuela and elsewhere demonstrates a growing awareness that political liberalization does not necessarily result in populations or regimes that readily fall in line with free-market principles or U.S.-defined global security priorities. Experimentation and departures from the authorized model of political liberalization are frequently identified as threats to democratic consolidation. Hugo Chavez's trenchant critique of party politics in Venezuela and his sweeping political reforms run counter to the conventional written narratives of democratization. Moreover, idealism has not been the sole (or even the principal) impulse behind the practice of democracy promotion. Contrary to the assertions of Zakaria and other critics, U.S. foreign policy has not promoted democracy simply because it is moral. The practice is deployed primarily when U.S. interests can be secured by using a targeted country's electoral system (or other constitutional mechanisms) to accomplish regime change. Further- more, while these interventions may not be driven by morality, they are associated with moral rhetoric that casts the intransigent leaders (even elected ones) as dubious political actors with undemocratic intentions. The statements of several members of the Bush administration make clear that Washington considers tensions with Venezuela the result of a government in Cara- cas that lacks an "understanding of what a democratic system is all about." Other official statements and the NED's grant descriptions also suggest that a victory by Chavez's U.S.-backed opponents will not only "return" the coun~ try to democracy but also repair Venezuela's "close friendship" with the United States. Venezuela is working towards an anti-neoliberal structure—US intervention preventsAlbo, Department of Political Science, York University, 06 (Gregory, “The Unexpected Revolution: Venezuela Confronts Neoliberalism”, Presentation at the University of Alberta, International Development Week, 1/06, http://socialistproject.ca/theory/venezuela_praksis.pdf)//AS A basic goal of neoliberalism is to reduce the role of the state in domestic policymaking and increase the control of foreign capital over local economies. Venezuela has argued that the state must maintain a role in promoting domestic economic development through strategic use of tariffs and government subsidies to protect nascent industries and promote local development of jobs, as in the VuelvanCaras program. These are tools that governments around the world -including the U.S. - have used for decades to help promote national economic growth and create local jobs.'"' Yet the U.S. and EU proposals in the WTO"" would drastically reduce the ability of developing countries from employing the same strategies we used, effectively "kicking away the ladder of development."'" Venezuela has opposed these measures in global arenas, signing on with a group of 11 countries calling for the right to protect developing country's industrial policy space in the WTO, for example. Another key aspect of Venezuela's opposition to corporate globalization is in its approach to services. The "liberalization" of services involves privatizing services that are owned by the public to meet basic human needs including health care, education, and distribution of water and electricity. But these basic services are guaranteed to Venezuelans in the Constitution. Programs like Barrio Adentro and the education missions, detailed above, ensure access of Venezuelans to basic services. At the same time, promoting regional integration programs focusing on eradicating illiteracy have been a focus on the Chavez administration: on April l8th, 2005 Venezuela presented a proposal for a massive regional literacy program to a visiting UNESCO committee."" These programs exemplify the commitment to the right to basic services, and are incompatible with privatized education or health care. And the case of SAIC's interference in the Venezuelan oil company's PdVSA's computer operations is a dire warning about the danger of allowing foreign ownership of domestic services in strategic industries. The affirmative attempts to better the lives of Venezuelans has empirically failed due to the neoliberal policies that are reinforced by the 1AC Hellinger Professor of Political Science at Webster University in St. Louis and directs the International Relations Program 1991 (Daniel, Venezuela: Tarnished Democracy Pub. Westview Press pp. 197-98)//JS As might be expected, the sudden rise in oil prices was welcomenews to the politically and economically troubled nation, but President Perez soon made it clear that his embrace of an austere program of economic readjustment, designed to satisfy the conditions laid down by the International Monetary Fund, remained firm. In fact, despite expectations that the Gulf crisis would generate an additional US$2 billion in export earnings, the government admitted it would fall $800 million short on debt obligations due in November 1990.16 Some additional fund~ would be spent to ease the plight of the poorest sectors, but within a month of the outbreak of the Persian Gulf crisis, it had become clear that any improvement in economic conditions for the majority of families would have to wait several more years of what Venezuelansbitterly call the "Perez truca" ("Perez trick").February 27 will probably stand out in Venezuelan history as anevent similar to the massacre of students in the Plaza of Tlalteleco inMexico City in 1968, that is, as a turning point in which the hegemony of the governing elite can no longer be taken for granted, as the beginningof a longer term historical process of change. Even if AD were to returnto its popular roots and offer a more humane and just approach toeconomic reform, the level of repression may very well grow and threatenthe democratic gains made between 1935 and 1958. With the enormous resources of the media and the power of the international banks and corporations behind them, proponents of the neoliberal project have enormous advantages over proponents of the alternative, democratizing project of the new social movements. Download 1.47 Mb. Share with your friends:
|