The Ancon Farmers Market

by the Comite de Defensa para la Continuidad de la Operacion del Mercado de Abastos

Seven years ago there was the intention to move the Farmers Market (Mercado de Abastos), due to the need to build a Metro station – and other awkward and improper excuses.

Given the location of the new facilities, access will be impossible for the poor customers in Curundu, San Miguel, Santa Ana and other areas. The increased rent for the new facilities, would be transferred to the users, which would increase the cost of living, something critical due to the economic conditions that the country is experiencing.

The demolition of the existing infrastructures, valued at many millions of dollars, would constitute a property loss of all the investments. We have already lived through experiences of questionable demolitions, like the one of the former US Embassy in on Avenida Balboa and of the uilding of what was the Ministry of Health, where later the Ministry of Economy and Finance operated.

The deteriorated conditions of the existing facilities have been the product of total neglect by the mayor’s office, of the state of the streets, sanitary facilities, refrigeration equipment, etc. What is appropriate is that in the same place where the current facilities are, parking structures, new multi-story buildings, including elevator and refrigeration should be built. The best location is the existing one. Let’s not continue the campaign promises of the land where the current market is situated, nor of improved farmers market facilities.

To the extent that there are more locations where agricultural products from the Interior can be sold, the agricultural sector will be strengthened. The elimination of the Farmers Market will is a policy stad against the downtrodden agricultural sector.

Enough of this demagoguery and deceit!

~ ~ ~

These announcements are interactive. Click on them for more information.

Are you a US citizen? VOTE!

Do we pierce the Darien Gap? And how?

The government wants to revive that electrical connection with Colombia project, again with a proposed route through Guna Yala, along proposed new roads. The Guna leadership — and people — don’t want that.

Then there is the long-stated goal of a road connection between Panama and Colombia, which cattle ranchers, environmentalists and the indigenous communities in Darien don’t want.

The thinking is so clueless, so stereotypical, so clearly aimed at a mobbed up construction industry. We could have those connections, and a far better energy policy, with some thinking out of their boxes.

First of all, let us not romanticize the Dule culture of the Guna nation. Nor for that matter, the Embera way of life. There are remarkable and wonderful things about both of these original nations, but even if things are much improved between them, they are traditional enemies with different world views. They’re just people with their own ways and histories, and real human concerns that may vary from each other’s and yours and ours.

One of the things they share, however, is a concern about roads bringing in outsiders to grab their land and resources. In Guna Yala they are also careful to limit outside influences that might overwhelm their culture.

The ranchers? The Darien Gap is a forest barrier between cattle diseases that are endemic in Colombia and Panamanian herds that don’t suffer from those maladies.

The environmentalists? Tearing a hole through Panama’s main remaining forest, and then watching the deforestation and social conflicts spread from either side of the highway are scenes that nobody in any of the movements to defend nature want to see. (Astroturf “greenwash” front groups for the developers don’t count as movements.)

So why not make the connection via a series of tunnels, bridges and causeways from Meteti, across the Gulf of San Miguel and just off the Pacific Coast of Darien to Colombia? That is, a route designed to never touch land that somebody can use the road to invade. Better a road connection that’s perhaps set up to add a railroad alongside, and in any case through which power lines might be threaded. Better to have a forward-looking connection designed for the coming age of electric cars, a road paved with photovoltaic bricks to provide the power that might make the electrical connection with Colombia superfluous in the first place.

Yes, there would be the costs — additional for building to avoid an invasion route, offset by the reduced costs of land grabbing and patrolling against the creation of a new smuggling road. Also offset by reduced costs of land acquisition, although one suspects that the bottom line of the current Guna Yala proposal is a presumption that nobody owns lands that are collectively owned so white men can just take them without compensation. There would also be geological and marine environmental issues to address by going offshore. The Blue Apple boys and the land grabbers would probably pay people behind the scenes to emphasize such objections.

Let’s not be stampeded into 2Oth century follies that benefit only a few construction, energy and banking interests and thus forego development that looks toward Panama’s future in the public interest.

~ ~ ~

These announcements are interactive. Click on them for more information.

Brazilian democracy in crisis
after Bolsonaro’s election

by the Center for Economic and Policy Research – CEPR

The election of far-right extremist Jair Bolsonaro to Brazil’s presidency throws Brazil’s democracy into “crisis,” Center for Economic and Policy Research Co-Director Mark Weisbrot warned tonight, following news of the election results. Bolsonaro’s rapid ascent from perennial and provocative fringe politician to presidential front-runner shocked observers and commentators in Brazil and internationally. There is much evidence his candidacy was aided by a massive, probably illegal, disinformation campaign against his opponents.

“This is a dark day for Brazil; Brazilian democracy is now in complete crisis,” Weisbrot said. “The international community must help preserve Brazil’s democratic institutions and stand up for the rights of its citizens by letting Bolsonaro know that there will be consequences if he follows through on his dangerous and hateful rhetoric.”

Bolsonaro has a long history of making statements praising Brazil’s dictatorship and disparaging its democratic institutions — notably when, in a TV interview, he said that voting “doesn’t change anything.” Rather, he said, Brazil would need a “civil war” killing 30,000 people. He’s also expressed admiration for Chile’s infamous dictator August Pinochet, saying Pinochet “should have killed more.”

In recent days, Bolsonaro has again raised alarm by talking of jailing or forcing into exile members of the main opposition Workers’ Party in “a cleanup the likes of which has never been seen in Brazilian history.” He also vowed that members of the Landless Workers’ Movement (MST) would be designated as “terrorists.” MST-affiliated schools and other institutions have been raided by police in recent years, and MST leaders murdered.

Bolsonaro is infamous for misogynistic and homophobic statements. He has also made a number of racist remarks in the past, infamously saying that descendants of Brazilian slaves “don’t do anything,” and, “I don’t think they’re even good for procreation anymore.” He’s chillingly told a campaign rally: “Let’s make Brazil for the majorities. Minorities have to bow to the majorities. Minorities will fit or just disappear!” He’s also warned that “Not one centimeter will be demarcated for indigenous reserves or quilombolas [descendants of escaped slaves living on lands claimed by their ancestors]” were he to become president, leading to concern that Indigenous rights — including to ancestral lands coveted by mining and other business interests — may be trampled under a Bolsonaro administration.

Bolsonaro has signaled that he would support business interests over environmental concerns, and has spoken of withdrawing Brazil from the Paris Climate Accord, raising alarm among environmentalists and in the scientific community who have voiced concern over the likelihood of increased deforestation of the Amazon rainforest. Brazil has for years been one of the world’s most dangerous countries for environmental defenders, and the Bolsonaro presidency could make their situation more dire.

“Governments around the world must make Bolsonaro understand that there will be a strong reaction against antidemocratic actions or rights abuses on his watch,” Weisbrot said. “While he may have been elected democratically, there are tens of millions of Brazilians who voted against him. The international community must help to safeguard the rights of Brazil’s most vulnerable.”

Just before the October 28 vote, 18 members of Congress wrote to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo urging the State Department “to take a strong stand in opposition to such backsliding; leaving clear that US assistance and cooperation with Brazil is contingent on the upholding of basic human rights and democratic values by its leaders.”

Weisbrot noted that Bolsonaro’s rise was abetted by years of politicized attacks against the left-leaning Worker’s Party, led by hard right actors in the media, the judiciary, and Brazil’s Congress.

Many observers cast doubt on the legitimacy of the election after former president Lula da Silva was barred from running in contravention of the UN Human Rights Committee, and Lula had very restricted access to the media. The contested jailing of Lula, who was sentenced to 12 years on unsubstantiated charges, created a political vacuum which Bolsonaro was able to fill.

“By preventing former president Lula da Silva, Brazil’s most popular politician, from running in this election, the country’s right-wing elites subverted democracy and paved the way for a dangerous fascist to take power,” Weisbrot said.

~ ~ ~

These announcements are interactive. Click on them for more information.