To my thought, the integral factors of these readings display themselves intertwined and often interdependent. Three themes throughout the readings that seem to relate both to corruption and necessary to reform (and expressly for our insight as being from the background of U.S. citizenship and as interested in service partnership) include:
I. Connections Between Central American Policy and the United States Foreign Policy
We cannot ignore the U.S. relation to Honduras and Central America. The U.S. is very involved in the affairs of Latin American countries, but often in our media-fed view of world relations, despite geographic proximity, Latin America is presented less presently and pressingly than many other areas (esp. the Middle East.) Furthermore, it is to be noted that the United States is not indubitably a world benefactor, but often has its own interests in mind, and whether or not those benefit the countries in which it interferes is to be debated. For example the idea of the United States as a nation that often proselytizes democracy as the ideal form of government might be criticized against nations in which democracy has been relatively unsuccessful, as democracy as an idea and democracy as a practice are often quite different. Honduras is rooted in democratic practice, but sometimes this democracy has been a guise for another form of government. The Honduran public perception of democracy seems to be less unwavering than that of perhaps many if not almost all citizens of the United States. The coup d’état of 2009, which resulted in part from a referendum proposed by Zelaya that threatened democracy was replaced by a military intervention that may have also had the power of threatening democratic procedure. Instating President Lobo, however, began to restore public assure in democracy. Thus, some of the people of Honduras see democracy in light of political situation instead of as a guiding principle for a nation.
II. Education in Honduras
In any nation, education is foundational to the success of that nation—to a reduction in poverty, an increase in the development of assets rather than development in the black hole of the cycles of various issues, decrease in violence. As Honduras is a young nation (~40% under the age of 15,) movements like Movimiento Alonzo and educational reforms do have immense power. The fact that only about 50% of children who have access to education finish primary school and that on average even this takes nine years is staggering. Due to teacher strikes, students might miss as many as half of the required days in a public school. High unemployment rates plague the region. And segueing into another issue, often schools becoming recruitment grounds for maras, and the lengthy times that students are out of school, they are on the streets and more vulnerable to the cycle of violence within the youth culture of the country.
III. Gang Presence and Interaction with Communities
Relating back to international relations, gang violence is certainly not a specifically Central American problem and the gang violence in the U.S. versus Central American is not necessarily distinctly separate. For example, MS-13, one of the most violent and widespread Central American street gangs has a presence in most of the states of the U.S.A. (There’s a decent National Geographic documentary about MS-13, if anyone’s interested; it’s on Netflix.) Gang members are fluid between Central America and the U.S. Sometimes the U.S. deports criminals in gangs back to C.A., and thus the cycle is worsened in the region. Gang violence also relates to education and family life as it becomes cyclical with a lack of options and a lack of direction for youth, making programs like the Alonzo Movement imperative and necessary for social development outside this atmosphere, and the development of values (long term vs. short term thinking; success outside of solely money and power.) Internal government corruption within even the police force and the hold of gangs on many communities and businesses certainly makes this an uphill battle.
These are really just examples. To me, what is most important is not any set of issues or areas, but rather the connections between them. Cause/effect cycles. The relation of education to violence to political systems to international relations to international and internal service relations, etc.
2 Comments
I think the three critical points you bring up are definitely important to figuring out the best way to help reform Honduras, especially your first point about Democracy. As you said Democracy is very different in theory and practice. Although why does it seem to work out for many other nations, but not for Honduras. There are a plethora of reasons that can be said from the readings that all lead to the ultimate reason: political corruption. But why all the corruption? To me it seems that this is a culturally and historically rooted problem. From what we have read, it seems to me that the “for my friends everything, for my enemies the law” (Democracy Undermined) is not just a political saying. There seems to be a cultural belief in patronage, politically and otherwise. Because handing out government jobs etc to your friends is a political practice buried in a cultural belief, it’s no wonder it’s a hard practice to shake. I feel that even historically democracy is up against a challenge. Political elites may look back at history and see that other people took full control of the country so why can’t they?
The biggest shock to me was the fact that Hondurans don’t even want democracy. I can see why since it hasn’t really worked in their favor. Having a democracy didn’t seem to improve their country, but instead as you said was really just another avenue for political elite to take over. Perhaps they feel that a “mano duro” really is the only way to stop the corruption because a democracy hasn’t proven to be much better.
I think that’s a really interesting point–that the political corruption is also such a deep-seated cultural issue. How do you reform something that isn’t merely a matter of policy, but the values and traditions of the people enacting the policy? How can a people expect a corrupt government to “uncorrupt” itself? It’s interesting to think, from my perspective, that democracy is the government type that gives people a voice, and yet that people would elect not to have this voice, because that’s not as important to them as what they think will work in their country. I almost think that what needs to change first is not the system itself, but the values behind the system and among the people in charge so that they stop looking backward and inward to self-interest and start looking forward and outward, and how do you even go about beginning that?