|
|
Which city has changed the most in the time you’ve known it?
I think probably Bogotá. Years ago it seemed to live somehow beyond the logic of capitalism, and one seemed to breathe a remote air
there, nine thousand feet above the rest of the world. The United States felt like it was a galaxy away. Bogotá used to be a small city of houses, many of them in a sort of English style. Now it’s a huge city of brick apartment towers. It’s changed radically
in, oh, thirty or so years.
You have written about your youthful optimism about the Sandinistas, and about how you now think of that kind of revolutionary idealism as naive. From the US perspective,
the belief in democratic institutions as a check on tyrannical ambition now seems to have been naive—so what’s left?
Clearly, nothing that we know of. The twentieth century’s great utopian experiments, including consumer capitalism, are exhausted,
but there doesn’t seem to be an alternative vision on the horizon that people might want to sacrifice for and struggle to achieve, and the wreckage all around is great. We live in a dangerous time.
Much of your reporting has been about the unsatisfying aftermath of conflict, whether it’s survivors desperately seeking justice or the inability of the authorities
to change anything. What are some of the better and worse ways you’ve seen this handled?
I think it’s rather that some conflicts have achievable solutions and others don’t. The narcotics trade, for example, has scythed
through the social structures of much of the world, destroying families and communities and governments and the very possibility of governance. Mostly it has generated enormous violence and endemic corruption, and if there’s a solution to mafia-like institutionalized
corruption, no one has yet found it. I feel obligated to say, for perhaps the hundredth time, that the origins of this disaster lie squarely in the United States and its politically motivated and utterly misconceived war on drugs.
On the other hand, one sees tremendous advances in the solutions to urban problems. For example, innovative public transportation,
decentralized public services, arborization, all kinds of small and huge innovations are possible in the discrete space of a city.
Resource struggles have of course long been a part of conflicts across the hemisphere, but over the course of your reporting career, climate change has cohered into
a tangible threat with more immediately visible consequences. How, in your opinion, has this changed the fights over land or indigenous sovereignty?
One of the regrets of my life is that I didn’t understand in time that the environment was a life-or-death issue, and so I never reported
on it. It’s obvious, though, that some high percentage of south-to-north migration is caused by the devastation of the environment. Rural people can no longer survive producing food for the rest of us. The migration of hungry, desperate people isn’t about
to stop, and governments in the Northern Hemisphere can either attempt the ICE solution or plan realistically—that is, spend the money—toward a repaired environment and a multilingual, multicultural future everywhere.
You have expressed skepticism about Mexico’s ruling party, Morena, under the country’s last president, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, as little more than a continuation
of the Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI), which ruled Mexico for most of the twentieth century. Does Claudia Sheinbaum’s tenure so far strike you as more of the same?
Absolutely not. She is Obrador’s appointed successor, and she is a committed member of the party he founded, which more or less replicates,
or tries to replicate, the early structures and political habits of the populist party that ruled Mexico forever, the PRI. But she’s a different, much less needy person, facing a different world, one with the out-of-control president of a hugely powerful neighboring
country studying how he can exercise his will against hers. For all our sakes, I hope she’s lucky.
Are there any young politicians or activists you have your eye on—some cause for cautious optimism, some particular political or charismatic talent?
Nope. But I have to believe they exist. Or let me rephrase that: there is a multitude of young, idealistic, energetic, brilliant young
persons out there. I don’t know whether any one of them will be sufficient against the enormous problems we are facing, and the speed of change. In Colombia, for example, community organizers in areas pacified after the signing of a peace accord between the
FARC guerrillas and the government in 2016 have been doing remarkable work repairing their societies and the environment. But they are being murdered in horrifying numbers.
I’m not a particularly political person—no activist, for sure—but I would love to see, long to see, a new flowering of movements and
organizations coupled with innovative analysis, working toward difficult but achievable goals. (And I would be even more excited to hear from dozens of readers lamenting my ignorance and pointing out all the places where this is actually happening.) What I’ve
been thrilled by, obviously, are the tens of thousands of people in Minneapolis, confronting danger and fighting for human decency.
|
|