Micheletti Leaves Government Housing

January 21st, 2010
|
Roberto Micheletti's Farewell Speech

Roberto Micheletti's Farewell Speech

Insisting that he is still president, Roberto Micheletti has abandoned the presidential palace, and returned to his own home, saying that yesterday was his last day as president. This serves to ease the pressure the United States has been exerting on him to leave. He will let his cabinet rule for the last week before the inauguration.

The effect of this is to anger those who care. Long-suffering Hondurans will probably shrug it off. Those on the left aren’t fooled, saying that Micheletti’s government is “illegitimate” whether he leaves the palace or not. Others like me are angry that the US has “manoseado” (rough translation: manhandled, groped) the transition of power, violating Honduran sovereignty, and robbing it of meaning.

At least we can expect the crisis to be over…or can we? A report was leaked yesterday by Marianella Salazar, a journalist in Venezuela citing plans for the destabilization of Lobo’s government by “taking out” key people supportive of Micheletti and somehow blaming Micheletti. The story doesn’t make sense, and is probably a fabrication, in my opinion.

This focus of the US on punishing the Micheletti administration is distracting Lobo from a much more important issue, and the cause of the entire crisis: the horrendous failure of the Honduran government. If our government were not a kleptocracy, we wouldn’t have been vulnerable to the seduction of socialism.

I hope Lobo will take the crisis as a mandate to re-found Honduras, not with a new constitution, but with a new accountability of the government to the people. Our nation desperately needs education, protection from crime, and jobs. If we can achieve an average scholarity of 12 or more years, eliminate the maras (gangs), the jobs and the economy will take care of themselves. Appeasing politicians will not achieve this.

  • Alan Campbell

    When you said 12 years, do you mean 6 years of primary school, 3 years of middle school and 3 years of high school? That’s quite ambitious.

    I hope Honduras will not get into the education rush like in SE Asia where governments paid tons of tax money and parents even get into debt to send their kids to get higher education. At the end jobs were not created fast enough and the debt worsen the lives of many people.

    Adding insult to injury, by the time jobs are created, these people would have forgotten what they learned in school. Even if they remember, age discrimination during hiring means these people would lose to new graduates. Something similar to the lost generation in Japan.

    • Well, at least we’d be much higher up in Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. In a sense, these problems would be much more preferable to analphabetism, and an unskilled workforce doomed to manual labor for lack of training. If all Hondurans had at least high-school level, and about half were college graduates, we would have the labor to lift the country out of poverty.

      But then I though of Cuba…what’s the use of education when the government controls everything, and the world has blockaded trade against your country?

      I heard in a seminar last year that successful workers of the 21st Century are those who are creative enough to prosper in a highly volatile market. This requires education, if not Phd level, at least high school and some college.

  • Aaron asked, “…Cuba…what’s the use of education when the government controls everything, and the world has blockaded trade against your country?…”

    The first is true, the second is false. Here in Miami a Cuban deported back to the U.S. from there said killing your own pig is a capital crime there. Maybe it’s exaggerated but not much.

    The second point is false. The whole world is free to trade with Cuba, with the ONLY exception of the United States. And private parties in the US DO trade legally with them in agriculture and health.

    Socialism is the worst system in the world for the poor, because it pushes everybody down instead of up, and political means for changing things are castrated. You can’t confiscate the means of investment from investors without hurting investment. Production is what counts, not pieces of paper with pretty pictures on them or accounting entries.

    –Alan,
    happy to be married to a girl from Honduras,
    the admiration of freedom-loving peoples everywhere…

    • Thanks Allan! Glad to learn something new.

    • Alan Campbell

      I have to partially disagree. Marxism and communism are definitely the worst for the poor because they ignore the nature of humans.

      Other than those two however, socialist methods have been used by the poor themselves for centuries before academics defined the term.

      Even today, when the poor have more choices, there are still areas where socialist methods are the cheapest. It’s the nature of the work in that area and the nature of humans.

      I think we should not stick to only one system. Instead, we should periodically analyze sectors of our economy and choose the cheapest. I concede however, that it would require a highly educated population and honest politicians.

Twitter Facebook Tumblr Flickr
Better Tag Cloud