WORLD The perspective from two worlds TORONTO — There is nothing like a quick trip home, after seven months in the Soviet Union, to really throw a wrench into one’s perspective of things. One grows accustomed to a slower pace of life, the careful deliberation of politics, and a sense of social cohesion that stresses common goals and the respon- sibility of each to all. Upon arriving, the unavoidable first impression is, obviously, the never-end- ing melodrama of political scandal. Since I went away, there has been the ongoing sorry story of “‘Iran-Contragate’’, the neo-biblical fall from grace of Jim Bak- ker or ‘“‘Heavengate’’, and now Gary Hart’s all-too-human ‘‘Tailgate’’. For all the sound and fury, there is a pointless superficiality about it all. The screaming headlines and the amplified comment seem merely to underscore the general helplessness and even irrele- vance of people in the political process. The media is the purveyor, and the pub- lic is the consumer of scandal. But does anything change? Perhaps this is slightly unfair. There is undoubtedly much that Soviet jour- nalists could and should learn from their Western counterparts in terms of profes- sional techniques, digging for facts and presenting the news. But in the most critical area, social conscience, they’re on their own. _ Whatever the weaknesses have been with the Soviet media — and they are by no means overcome yet — journalists From Moscow ae neem ries ees Fred Weir there have always been directly plugged into the engine of social change. They see themselves as crusaders, and know that what they write will have an imme- diate and profound impact. Now that the process is opening up, journalists are ex- ploring the frontiers of glasnost, and the Soviet press is beginning to come into its own as a social arbiter, and a medium of mass communication, debate and politi- cal leverage. Soviet people read newspapers with far more intensity than any other people. A recent poll shows that among young people journalism is regarded as the most glamorous, desirable profession. This has to do more than anything else with a sense of involvement, a belief in positive change through information and debate. Cynicism is not unknown, even these days, but it is hard to sustain in an atmos- phere where a single letter to the editor can be the bombshell that brings down a cabinet minister. Not to overstate the case, but Cana- dians seem to be drearily resigned to an inexorable progression of corrupt cabi- net ministers in our own government just as we expect that, in due course, Knowl- ton Nash will give us all the juicy details. On our side of the world, news is essen- tially a business and only incidentally a social function. Another sharp contrast can be found in the attitudes of people toward their eco- nomic future. If you are working in Can- ada, at a decent job, you can still have a pretty good life. Soviets are understand- . ably envious of the consumer abun- « dance, the living space, travel opportuni- ties that many Canadians enjoy. But they have no idea, no conception, of how hard we have to work for this, of how constantly we worry about money, and fear unemployment, disability, mortgage foreclosure, the headaches of finding adequate child care, or a million other things. Soviet workers think nothing of taking a week off work, with pay, if their child is sick. They look forward to their subsi- dized month-long vacations in the coun- tryside; they avail themselves of food- order services, recreation facilities, and an array of other perks provided through their workplace. Single mothers — of which there are many — often take the pressure off by leaving their children in the around-the-clock daycare centres. They have security in their lives which embraces all of the basic necessities. They don’t worry about getting sick, put- ting their kids through college, or making payments of any kind. They have abso- lutely no fear of losing their jobs. It never ceases to amaze me, when being shown around Soviet factories, that the workers will chat, and slouch in the most casual ways, even in the presence of their direc- tor and a foreign correspondent. Cana- dian workers, from my experience, are seized by manic fits of busywork the moment top management appears on the horizon. The Soviets do not have the best of all possible worlds, however, a truth which is becoming clearly focussed in their minds these days. They have security, and freedom from want, but they do not have labor productivity, technological dynamism or, in their individual lives, a very broad range of choices. Much of the current drive to restruc- ture Soviet society is concerned with re- dressing this imbalance. First and fore- most they have set the objective of @ thoroughgoing democratization of all spheres of life. This is not to say they had no democratic input before, but they are moving ahead with a comprehensive vis- ion of grassroots participation and control. We have a well-developed formal political democracy in Canada, and it may not impress us much to learn that municipal elections are taking place all over the USSR this year with multiple candidates and public campaigns that debate the issues. However, when have Canadian workers had the chance to elect their own managers? This too is part of the Soviet democratization, and all over the country factory directorships are being thrown open to free competi tion and decided by workers’ votes. In Canada we have no economi¢ democracy whatsoever, and this reality sharply limits what we are pleased to call ‘‘our political freedoms’. When workers enter factory gates in the morning they enter a totalitarian state in which theif time and actions are entirely under thé control of an alien will. On a nation scale, our economic resources and) potentials are allocated and disposed of by a small clique who were never elected by anyone and are certainly not answer" | - able to the people. As the Soviet restructuring proceeds, we will all learn much about the inherent potential of the socialist system to renew itself, expand its goals and reformulate its priorities. If Soviet people decisively prove that it is possible to have economic security and comprehensive partici patory democracy and prosperity with broad personal choice, then even the most complacent of us will never be able to look at Canadian life in a smug way again. Latin American debt a ‘time bomb’ for IMF By CHEDDI JAGAN ‘*South America is going bankrupt and the expectation is you might have an international calamity.’’ This was how former World Bank President A.W. Clausen put it at the IMF/World Bank meeting in Toronto in September 1982. That was a time of crisis. The Latin American region’s eco- nomic GDP growth rate for 19 countries in 1981 was 1.2 per cent, the lowest in 35 years; for 17 countries including Brazil and Argentina, there was a drop, in Brazil by 3 per cent and Argentina by 6 per cent. The current accounts deficit rose from $7.1-billion (U.S.) in 1974 to $28-billion in 1980 and $33.7-billion in 1981. International payments’ deficit was $1,650-million in 1980 and $2,000-million in 1981. Palliative rescue A rescue operation was mounted by the West. Credits greatly increased to Latin America. In European currencies from the Eurocredit market, they jump- ed from $8,635-million in 1976 to $32,000-million in 1981. But under the directives and ‘‘condi- tionality”’ of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, the injection proved to be a palliative rather than a cure. After six years, the *‘patient’’ is on the point of collapse. The foreign debt has become a huge burden. It increased rapidly from $10-billion in 1966 to $100- billion in 1978 and $24-billion in 1981. In the 1980-85 period, the indebtedness nearly doubled reaching $368-billion. 8 e PACIFIC TRIBUNE, MAY 20, 1987 Beara Beeliebiys coh. TOR eae And according to the UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), it will increase further to $475-billion in 1990 and $692- billion in 1995. So burdensome is the foreign debt that many third world countries are borrow- ing not for capital development works, but simply to pay interest. Meanwhile the principal grows and the countries find themselves in a ‘“‘debt trap’’ and are subjected to pressures on domestic and foreign policies. A foreign exchange crisis also de- veloped as an increasing amount of earn- ings from exports was used to service the foreign debt. This led to a cutback in essential imported goods for consump- tion and production. Drain There is also a loss to the Third World from excessive profits on investments, unequal internal trade (buying dear and selling cheap), flight of capital, royalty on patents and technology, high cost of ser- vices, etc. This amounts to the fantastic sum of over $200-billion a year, which is used to fuel the arms race in the West. The sum total of profits obtained from Latin America by American trans- national corporations alone from 1945 to 1980 was more than $120,000-million dol- lars. Through this period, the entire flow of American capital (both private and state) to Latin America amounted to only a quarter of this sum. In the 1980s, Latin America became a net exporter of capital. In the 1982-1985 period, according to ECLAC, ‘the net transfer of profits, principal and interest was $106-billion, the annual average fot the 1981-1985 period being $36-billion. Flight of capital is caused particularly by inflation and IMF-imposed devalua- tion. Latin American deposits in U.S: banks total between $1 10-to$170-billion. In 1981 and 1982, according to UN- CTAD, ‘‘the prices of basic products — that constitute 40 per cent of Latif American exports and 80 per cent if energy sources are included — dropped almost 31 per cent, the largest decline i the last twenty years.’’ Consequently, primary products, which made up two third of the region’s export earnings i? 1966 yielded only 40 per cent of earnings in 1983. Action now The prospects are bleak. According t0 ECLAC, the 130 million living in condi tions of total poverty or critical poverty in Latin America and the Caribbean 1 the 1980s will rise to 170 million by the year 2000; the 80 million unemployé and under-employed in 1980 will reach 112 million in 1995. The Baker Plan to pump $29-billio? into the most-affected debt burdened countries has failed. Brazil and Ecuado! have stopped interest payments on thel! huge debts. Will the West follow somé small European countries in cancelling the unpayable and uncollectable debt? The World Bank sees time running ov! for the Debt Crisis. The time for action !§ now. Dr. Cheddi Jagan, a former prime mit ister of Guyana is leader of the opposition People’s Progressive Party.