By Julia E. Sweig, Nelson and
David Rockefeller
In 1935 Franklin Roosevelt told
a Democratic Party convention that his New Deal social, labor and public works
programs had enraged the "economic oligarchs" of the United States.
Coming from that very class, Roosevelt sardonically "welcomed" the
hatred of his class, and with noblesse oblige, realpolitik, and a huge heart,
forged the American progressive social contract that allowed capitalism and
democracy to coexist throughout the 20th century. His New Deal begat Lyndon
Johnsons' Great Society: both, which involved spending government revenue on
people and passing laws to regulate the environment, finance and markets, made
good on the American self-image of meritocracy and social mobility. Because of
its widespread capacity to limit social conflict and polarization, Roosevelt
and Johnsons' social contract gained the buy-in of ardent Republicans- Nixon and
even Reagan-before their party succumbed to the chaos created by today's fringe
elements.
Decades later, the old
consensus has morphed into one best embodied by the
Clinton-Blair-Cardoso-"Third Way" of "as much market as possible
and as much state as is necessary." That quote comes from President Juan
Manuel Santos, a scion of one of Colombia's wealthiest families, who having
burnished his hard-line credentials as Alvaro Uribe's war minister, is now
leading Colombia through a transformative moment in its history. His government
and the FARC, working for two years in Havana, have now negotiated three of the
four major planks of a peace agreement after fifty years of insurgency and war
that has produced millions of victims among dead, kidnapped, tortured, displaced,
and impoverished Colombians.
Earlier this week in New York,
I heard Santos talk about concepts like eliminating poverty, reducing
inequality, instituting land reform, and making education accessible to all
Colombians. His discourse, and hopefully the policies to implement it,
represent a striking contrast to what I heard in Medellin only a few years ago
when the suggestion that land reform might help reduce rural conflict elicited
accusations of sympathy for the FARC. Or when visiting Bogota with a retired
American general and a Wall Street financier, a group of business leaders told
us not to worry that (then) some 30 percent of Colombians lived on less than 2
dollars a day. Why? As one put it, "2 dollars a day goes a lot farther in
Colombia than it does in New York City."
Eighty years ago, Roosevelt
fought against that kind of cavalier disregard. Santos clearly rejects it and
understands the link between peace, democracy and social inclusion. It is too
soon to say that he is Colombia's Roosevelt. But by challenging the status quo
that his own class has sustained and benefited from, and by trying to move
Colombia down the arduous and unpredictable road away from political, narco and
terrorist violence toward reconciliation, Santos' world class political courage
impresses and reassures even this skeptic.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий