Datasets:

dgonier

/

debate-llm

like 0

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Overall a customs union would be the logical next step to deeper integration in North America but it is up to its leaders and its people to decide what path they wish to take. As this discussion has shown Canada and Mexico are key trading partners of the U.S. but the U.S. attitude towards its two neighbors has been more characterized by disinterest than true friendship. The sheer volume of trade that crosses the southern and northern borders is simply astonishing. In 2011 U.S. exports to Canada totaled $281 billion and to Mexico $198 billion. U.S. imports from Canada amounted to $317 billion and from Mexico $263 billion.14 The trade relationship is significant but since the U.S. remains committed to a multilateral agenda and is consistently distracted by security concerns it has not given the region the attention it deserves. But Canada and Mexico have an important role to play too. Canada must start treating Mexico as an equal partner and Mexico must reach out to Canada as it did during the NAFTA negotiations to build consensus on priorities for the continent. Thinking trilaterally will be a major challenge to policy makers that have continually tackled the agenda in the traditional bilateral way. But this is not impossible. What this paper hoped to achieve was to inspire a different way of thinking about the relationship between Canada Mexico and the United States and engage the reader in an intellectual exercise to question whether as a country as a region and as a people we have truly examined each and every option on the table before brushing it aside as impossible. When Europe began its integration project fifty-five years ago many questioned its merits. Even today facing economic crisis criticism is strong. Yet the European Union has undergone numerous crises throughout its history and survived all of them. Its reaction to crisis has also always been the same—more not less integration as evidenced by the recent signing of the fiscal pact. The region has adapted and remained influential in the world. its soft power despite crisis has also not declined as states still seek to join the union. On March 9th 2012 all 136 members of the Croatian parliament voted in favor of accession to the EU. Iceland Macedonia Montenegro Serbia and Turkey remain candidate countries. Regional integration offers a possible solution to North America’s economic social and political problems and a customs union is a viable next step in this process. Maintaining the status quo limits the region’s growth and prevents the realization of the economic reality of our continent. Jean Monnet once wrote “people only accept change when they are faced with necessity and only recognize necessity when crisis is upon them.”15 North America has just faced a crisis and is still dealing with the recovery. but its policy makers remain prisoner to a way of thinking that limit the potential of a diverse innovative and inspiring people who should demand more of their leaders. </source> [/INST] <claim>Text: The United States Federal Government should pursue a customs unions with North America</claim> <psg>a customs union would be the logical next step to deeper integration in North America Canada and Mexico are key trading partners of the U.S. but the U.S. attitude towards its two neighbors has been more characterized by disinterest than true friendship The trade relationship is significant but since the U.S. remains committed to a multilateral agenda and is consistently distracted by security concerns it has not given the region the attention it deserves. Thinking trilaterally will be a major challenge to policy makers that have continually tackled the agenda in the traditional bilateral way. the European Union has undergone numerous crises throughout its history and survived all of them Regional integration offers a possible solution to North America’s economic social and political problems and a customs union is a viable next step in this process. North America has just faced a crisis and is still dealing with the recovery. but its policy makers remain prisoner to a way of thinking that limit the potential of a diverse innovative and inspiring people who should demand more of their leaders.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> This paper argues that a customs union is the next viable step for North American integration. Though some critics argue that a customs union creates more barriers to trade the previous section on the EEC customs union shows that it actually creates more trade than it diverts. In fact an FTA like NAFTA is more likely to divert trade “because the FTA grants preferences to goods originating inside its boundaries without providing to imports from third countries the corresponding customs union benefit of free circulation once within a common tariff wall.”176 What this is referring to are the restrictive rules of origin (ROO) requirements of NAFTA which are possibly the most restrictive of any FTA. In fact ROO costs are estimated to amount to 2-3% of the NAFTA GDP.177 The reason ROO have such a negative effect is because they “dilute the expansionary effects of integration through their distortionary effects on factor prices sectoral production and trade flows.”178 Simply put ROO divert trade but also have the effect of raising prices on consumers due to the added administrative costs placed on exporters. </source> [/INST] <claim>The plan creates net growth in trade – empirics prove</claim> <psg>This paper argues that a customs union is the next viable step for North American integration. Though some critics argue that a customs union creates more barriers to trade the previous section on the EEC customs union shows that it actually creates more trade than it diverts. an FTA like NAFTA is more likely to divert trade “because the FTA grants preferences to goods originating inside its boundaries without providing to imports from third countries the corresponding customs union benefit of free circulation once within a common tariff wall ROO divert trade but also have the effect of raising prices on consumers due to the added administrative costs placed on exporters.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Given the analysis of the EEC’s creation formation and performance the following observations are noted as the key lessons from the European experience: • Economic integration is a very technical process that often takes place at very high levels of government but also involves various actors from the private sector such as industry business and civil society. • Integration is a dynamic and evolutionary process and must adapt as circumstances change. • Clear and achievable benchmarks must be set to motivate member states to meet their long-term goals. • Strong leadership and effective institutions to oversee the process are necessary to overcome obstacles that arise. • The impact on national legislation must be considered early on. • Member countries have to be willing to compromise and maintain a sense of common purpose that can foster the political will necessary for such a project.4 By identifying the key themes and lessons that the Six learned on their path to customs union one can begin to understand the complexity of the process while shedding light on those mechanisms that lead to success. In fashioning a model that could apply to North America these items must be kept in mind and serve as guiding principles and in some cases warnings of what can be expected. </source> [/INST] <claim>Solvency is empirical – the European model is transplantable</claim> <psg>Given the analysis of the EEC’s creation formation and performance the following observations are noted as the key lessons from the European experience: • Economic integration is a very technical process that often takes place at very high levels of government Integration is a dynamic and evolutionary process and must adapt as circumstances change. • Strong leadership and effective institutions to oversee the process are necessary to overcome obstacles that arise Member countries have to be willing to compromise and maintain a sense of common purpose that can foster the political will necessary for such a project. By identifying the key themes and lessons that the Six learned on their path to customs union one can begin to understand the complexity of the process while shedding light on those mechanisms that lead to success. In fashioning a model that could apply to North America these items must be kept in mind and serve as guiding principles and in some cases warnings of what can be expected.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> A report by the Global Commission on Drug Policy last year including former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan recommended that governments consider new policies for legalizing and regulating drugs as a way to deny profits to drug cartels. They urged the Obama administration to end “the criminalization marginalization and stigmatization of people who use drugs but do no harm to others.” But the U.S. and Mexico refused to consider the recommendation. The U.S. government unwillingness to even look into a change in its policies is a mistake. The expansion of Mexican drug cartels in the U.S. is clear evidence that the tactics we have been using in recent years aren’t working. While the U.S. has opened new law enforcement and intelligence outposts across Mexico over the last several years they have made little more than a dent in dismantling the cartels –– killing or capturing only about two dozen high-ranking and midlevel drug traffickers. As Daniel Robelo a research associate for the Drug Policy Alliance argues in the Los Angeles Times the root cause that needs to be addressed by the U.S. is drug prohibition. He writes “These murders are not drug-related they are prohibition-related –– committed by cartels that were spawned by drug prohibition that derive their power from the inflated profits of prohibited but highly demanded commodities and that operate in an underground economy in which violence is routinely employed to resolve disputes or remove business opponents.” Legalizing marijuana which 50% of Americans already support according to a Gallup poll would sharply cut into cartels’ profits and the amount the U.S. spends in tracking down prosecuting and jailing dealers who handle the drug. Regulation would be easier to manage and revenue could be used in education campaigns to prevent hard drug use and in the rehabilitation of addicts. Instead current U.S. policies towards drug use encourage the perpetuation of underground drug cartels and indirectly contribute to the unacceptable numbers of people dying just across the border. Ignoring a possible solution to drug wars in favor of ineffective policies that support the status quo should not be an option. Mexican drug wars are at least in part our problem and we will need to make changes if we are going to solve them. </source> [/INST] <claim>CP: The United States Federal Government should remove the U.S. drug prohibition and regulate use</claim> <psg>A report by the Global Commission on Drug Policy last year including former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan recommended that governments consider new policies for legalizing and regulating drugs as a way to deny profits to drug cartels. to end “the criminalization marginalization and stigmatization of people who use drugs but do no harm to others The expansion of Mexican drug cartels in the U.S. is clear evidence that the tactics we have been using in recent years aren’t working. killing or capturing only about two dozen high-ranking and midlevel drug traffickers. the root cause that needs to be addressed by the U.S. is drug prohibition. These murders are not drug-related they are prohibition-related –– committed by cartels that were spawned by drug prohibition that derive their power from the inflated profits of prohibited but highly demanded commodities and that operate in an underground economy in which violence is routinely employed to resolve disputes or remove business opponents.” Legalizing marijuana which 50% of Americans already support according to a Gallup poll would sharply cut into cartels’ profits and the amount the U.S. spends in tracking down prosecuting and jailing dealers who handle the drug. Regulation would be easier to manage and revenue could be used in education campaigns to prevent hard drug use and in the rehabilitation of addicts. Instead current U.S. policies towards drug use encourage the perpetuation of underground drug cartels and indirectly contribute to the unacceptable numbers of people dying just across the border.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> There are a few painfully simple measures we could take to stop the current invasion and expel those who have no respect for our borders nor for our citizens. Truthfully if any combination or even one of the following actions were taken by our federal government most illegal aliens in this country would leave effectively deporting themselves. 1) Place the military on the border. Rather than sending a few hundred National Guardsmen to the 2 000 mile-long border under orders to never stop anyone entering this country illegally the way President George Bush did if say 20 000 troops along with their tanks helicopters and U.S. Air Force over flights were utilized along the border (the same way we do for other countries) illegal entries would come to a screeching halt. We could simply take the troops from Germany where 30 000 U.S. troops are stationed or any number of other locations around the world and use our military to protect our border! The Mexican border could and should be made a permanent duty station. This would allow the Border Patrol to full staff the official entry checkpoints which would greatly reduce the amount of drugs and criminals coming into this country. 2) Prison sentences for CEO’s who hire illegal aliens. Whether it is a landscaping company run-out of someone’s den in Cicero IL. a 30-unit independent hotel in Virginia Beach VA. or a corporate giant such as Tyson Foods Inc. once caught with illegal aliens in their employ the head of that company should spend the next ten years of their life in prison. Additionally a percentage of that company’s profits commensurate to the percentage of their employees who are illegal aliens should be seized. 3) Cut off all federal funds to cities which continue or adopt ‘sanctuary policies’ for illegal aliens. If a city such as Chicago IL which has such a policy in place refuses to cooperate with Immigrations and Customs Enforcement by not allowing police officers to inquire into nor report the immigration status of arrestees shielding criminal aliens from notification and eventual deportation their funds will be immediately suspended. No more federal money for roads schools no special grants no construction projects funded with federal money…Nothing. Only once all municipal agencies in that city are found to be in compliance will federal funds be restored. 4) Require anyone registering a child in a public school to provide proof of U.S. citizenship. Illegal aliens have been getting a free education for their children on the backs of American taxpayers for far too long. The practice has led to overcrowded classrooms and ‘English as a second language’ courses in all of the border states. The amount of money spent per child in public school annually varies from state to state as well as district to district. However it averages several thousands of dollars per child. Why should American taxpayers be subsidizing the families of illegal aliens? If parents were required to provide proof of citizenship to register the child many illegal aliens would simply leave the country. You take away the things that draw them here and most will deport themselves. The state of California is now bankrupt largely due to years of allowing Mexicans to illegally move their families to the state. Overwhelmed with Spanish-only speaking children they can no longer provide a decent education for American children. 5) Begin mass deportations. Again if you take away the goodies (jobs free education in-state college tuition food stamps Medicaid etc.) most will return to Mexico on their own. However there will remain a number of Mexican nationals who will refuse to leave a great many of them will be hardcore criminals (gang bangers drug dealers etc.). These human predators will only return home if forcibly removed. We have heard so many times that it is “impossible to deport 12 million people.” First the number of illegal aliens in this country is closer to 40 million second nothing is impossible. As I said most will leave after they are denied the services which they now steal with ease. The rest would be deported upon arrest for other crimes. This is the same nation which defeated both Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. This is the same nation which invented the airplane and the telephone. And this is the same nation that can do anything which we choose to do. We have the infrastructure resources and the right to deport as many illegal aliens from this nation as we want. The only thing we are lacking is a federal government with the courage to do it. We must change that and take back this great country. If we do not future generations of Americans will reside in a Third World nation and it will be a mirror image of Mexico. </source> [/INST] <claim>Text: The United States Federal Government should adopt the five point plan outlined in the Gibson evidence below</claim> <psg>There are a few painfully simple measures we could take to stop the current invasion and expel those who have no respect for our borders nor for our citizens. Truthfully if any combination or even one of the following actions were taken by our federal government most illegal aliens in this country would leave effectively deporting themselves. Place the military on the border. the way President George Bush did if say 20 000 troops along with their tanks helicopters and U.S. Air Force over flights were utilized along the border (the same way we do for other countries) illegal entries would come to a screeching halt We could simply take the troops from Germany where 30 000 U.S. troops are stationed or any number of other locations around the world and use our military to protect our border! greatly reduce the amount of drugs and criminals coming into this country. Prison sentences for CEO’s who hire illegal aliens. Whether it is a landscaping company run-out of someone’s den in Cicero IL. a 30-unit independent hotel in Virginia Beach VA. or a corporate giant such as Tyson Foods Inc. once caught with illegal aliens in their employ the head of that company should spend the next ten years of their life in prison. Cut off all federal funds to cities which continue or adopt ‘sanctuary policies’ for illegal aliens. If a city such as Chicago IL which has such a policy in place refuses to cooperate with Immigrations and Customs Enforcement by not allowing police officers to inquire into nor report the immigration status of arrestees shielding criminal aliens from notification and eventual deportation their funds will be immediately suspended. No more federal money for roads schools no special grants no construction projects funded with federal money…Nothing. Require anyone registering a child in a public school to provide proof of U.S. citizenship. Illegal aliens have been getting a free education for their children on the backs of American taxpayers for far too long. The practice has led to overcrowded classrooms and ‘English as a second language’ courses in all of the border states. The amount of money spent per child in public school annually varies from state to state as well as district to district. However it averages several thousands of dollars per child. Why should American taxpayers be subsidizing the families of illegal aliens? If parents were required to provide proof of citizenship to register the child many illegal aliens would simply leave the country. You take away the things that draw them here and most will deport themselves. Begin mass deportations. Again if you take away the goodies (jobs free education in-state college tuition food stamps Medicaid etc.) most will return to Mexico on their own. However there will remain a number of Mexican nationals who will refuse to leave a great many of them will be hardcore criminals (gang bangers drug dealers etc.). These human predators will only return home if forcibly removed. We have heard so many times that it is “impossible to deport 12 million people.” First the number of illegal aliens in this country is closer to 40 million second nothing is impossible. As I said most will leave after they are denied the services which they now steal with ease. The rest would be deported upon arrest for other crimes. This is the same nation which defeated both Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. This is the same nation which invented the airplane and the telephone. And this is the same nation that can do anything which we choose to do. We have the infrastructure resources and the right to deport as many illegal aliens from this nation as we want. The only thing we are lacking is a federal government with the courage to do it. We must change that and take back this great country. If we do not future generations of Americans will reside in a Third World nation and it will be a mirror image of Mexico.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Develop border ports of entry that ensure safety and strengthen trade by employing risk-management techniques and the latest technology. Indeed one of the greatest opportunities for binational cooperation on security which would help address both Mexican concerns about transnational organized crime and U.S. concerns about terrorism would be to develop more sophisticated approaches to managing ports of entry at the border. By using risk management techniques and the latest technology the two countries could develop more effective ways of detecting potential threats ranging from drugs to firearms to bombs and simultaneously facilitate commerce and the exchange of people across the border. While much attention has been focused on beefing up security between ports of entry the reality is that most of the real threats to the two countries are at the ports of entry rather than between them. A new focus on these could be a win-win for both countries and for both security and trade. </source> [/INST] <claim>Text: The United States Federal Government should develop border ports of entry and employ risk-management techniques and latest technology</claim> <psg>Develop border ports of entry that ensure safety and strengthen trade by employing risk-management techniques and the latest technology. Indeed one of the greatest opportunities for binational cooperation on security address both Mexican concerns about transnational organized crime and U.S. concerns about terrorism managing ports of entry at the border. By using risk management techniques and the latest technology the two countries could develop more effective ways of detecting potential threats ranging from drugs to firearms to bombs and simultaneously facilitate commerce and the exchange of people across the border. is that most of the real threats to the two countries are at the ports of entry rather than between them. A new focus on these could be a win-win for both countries and for both security and trade.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Mexico has the potential to reap great benefits from a customs union because its MFN tariffs are quite high. If done right it could experience the tremendous increase in trade felt by Italy and France as barriers to trade were reduced. However the important element that cannot be ignored is the development gap between Mexico and its two neighbors. Increased trade for Mexico will not be enough and it will need to continue to modernize and expand its economy. If Mexico is to be an equal partner in this customs union Canada and the U.S. must be committed to closing the income inequality gap. This requires a commitment to ideas like the North American Investment Fund and trilateral solutions for Mexico’s key challenges. Given the complexity of the integration process and the less than impressive performance of the NAFTA committee structure it is difficult to imagine how this process can be completed without creating new institutions or by improving the old ones. To foster continuity in the policy process and to ensure that issues brought to attention are not forgotten the three countries would be better served by a revamped Free Trade Commission that includes deputy cabinet-level officials as well as expert bureaucrats from the trade and commerce departments of each country to assist in monitoring progress and setting the agenda for future FTC meetings which need to occur on a far more regular basis. Furthermore it is imperative that in any integration scheme all sectors of civil society are included in the process. The European trade unions secured the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) in their lobbying efforts which allow civil society actors to have permanent representation and access to the Community structure. North America would benefit from a similar structure that offered various groups of society the opportunity to put forth ideas comment on legislation and provide real insights on what is actually happening on the ground without getting lost in disconnected political debates. Such a forum could also provide guidance as to where to begin the integration process and where to be more careful in the application of new projects. </source> [/INST] <claim>Text: The United States Federal Government should pursue a customs unions with North America</claim> <psg>Mexico has the potential to reap great benefits from a customs union because its MFN tariffs are quite high. However the important element that cannot be ignored is the development gap between Mexico and its two neighbors. Increased trade for Mexico will not be enough and it will need to continue to modernize and expand its economy. If Mexico is to be an equal partner in this customs union Canada and the U.S. must be committed to closing the income inequality gap. This requires a commitment to ideas like the North American Investment Fund Given the complexity of the integration process and the less than impressive performance of the NAFTA committee structure it is difficult to imagine how this process can be completed without creating new institutions or by improving the old ones</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> How neoliberalism and development work to condition lives and how daily practices constitute neoliberalism and development are questions that preoccupy many scholars these days. Through this investigation of one program operated by one NGO in rural southern Mexico we have attempted to show how technical assistance works to enact albeit partially a form of neoliberal development (Bondi and Laurie 2005. Power 2005. Ferguson 2006: p. viii). It is a major vehicle for cleansing ‘‘civil society’’ of its oppositional political possibilities rescripting it as the social realm in which communities are improved through human capital acquisition. In other words in this case civil society is fitted into a neoliberal mold through technical assistance. </source> [/INST] <claim>The aff’s development assistance to Mexico propagates the neoliberal regime</claim> <psg>neoliberalism and development work to condition lives technical assistance works to enact a form of neoliberal development It is a major vehicle for cleansing ‘‘civil society’’ of its oppositional political possibilities rescripting it as the social realm in which communities are improved through human capital acquisition civil society is fitted into a neoliberal mold through technical assistance.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> And yet the nature of these intersections is multifarious and no particular result can be guaranteed. As Mosse (2005: p. 7) referencing Li (1999) notes critiques of development programs risk missing ‘‘the political contests the feigned compliance the compromises and contingencies involved’’. So while programs such as the one reported on here may be yet another chapter in the history of the ‘instrument effects’ of development in its neoliberal guise they are also potential scenes of much negotiation and even of struggle. Indeed as another part of our research in Oaxaca has shown a group of Indigenous Zoque men living in the Chimalapas forest parlayed the knowledge gained through their previous experience with TA into one element of a highly effective campaign to maintain control of their lands (see Walker et al. 2007). In that case aspects of various technical assistance projects became one vector of empowerment that when combined with gender privilege political power based in indigeneity and access to arms enabled the Zoques to resist state and NGO efforts to implement an unwanted forest management plan (see Walker et al. 2007). Of course when they were first implemented back in the 1990s these TA programs might have been read by us as purely governmental techniques aimed at creating neoliberal development subjects (in this case ‘forest managers’). Thus we are reminded that resistance to the codifications and prescriptions of neoliberal development can take root and resurface in unanticipated ways following complicated pathways toward reappropriation recombination redeployment or even subversion. </source> [/INST] <claim>The aff can be utilized as a vehicle of resistance to neoliberalism – perm do both</claim> <psg>the nature of these intersections is multifarious and no particular result can be guaranteed critiques of development programs risk missing ‘‘the political contests the feigned compliance the compromises and contingencies involved’’ programs are also potential scenes of much negotiation and even of struggle. as another part of our research in Oaxaca has shown a group of Indigenous Zoque men living in the Chimalapas forest parlayed the knowledge gained through their previous experience with TA into one element of a highly effective campaign to maintain control of their lands technical assistance projects became one vector of empowerment that enabled the Zoques to resist state and NGO efforts to implement an unwanted forest management plan resistance to the codifications and prescriptions of neoliberal development can take root and resurface in unanticipated ways</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> The pending 2013 immigration reform bill aims to establish a pathway to citizenship for more than 11 million undocumented immigrants living in the United States. The bill also calls for the completion of 700 miles of border fencing between the United States and Mexico and doubles the number of Border Patrol agents. Critics of the bill say that heightened border control measures along with the bill's proposal to reduce the number of available work visas for agriculture will only lead to an increase in undocumented migration to the United States from Mexico. Through an exhaustive study of a time when the border was more porous Stanford historian Ana Raquel Minian illustrates how 'unilateral policies that have attempted to limit population flows across the U.S.-Mexico border through militarization have failed in the past' and are 'bound to fail in the future.'Minian's research is the first in-depth history of transnational Mexican migration from 1965 to 1986 an era of transition that saw booming circular migration between the United States and Mexico as well as expanding bi-national efforts to regulate the border. </source> [/INST] <claim>Immigration reform and past policies increase illegal immigration</claim> <psg>The pending 2013 immigration reform bill aims to establish a pathway to citizenship for more than 11 million undocumented immigrants living in the United States. The bill also calls for the completion of 700 miles of border fencing between the United States and Mexico and doubles the number of Border Patrol agents. Critics of the bill say that heightened border control measures along with the bill's proposal to reduce the number of available work visas for agriculture will only lead to an increase in undocumented migration to the United States from Mexico unilateral policies that have attempted to limit population flows across the U.S.-Mexico border through militarization have failed in the past' and are 'bound to fail in the future.'</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Undocumented Central American immigrants especially Guatemalans crossing the Arizona border during fiscal year 2013 increased considerably according to Border Patrol records. From Oct. 1 to May 1 the arrests of 14 198 undocumented Central American immigrants were reported 2 873 more than during the same period of fiscal year 2012 data of the Border Patrol's Tucson Sector show.'We're seeing more and more immigration traffic ' Maria Jimena Diaz Gonzalez consul general for Guatemala in Arizona told Efe adding that these migrants increasingly use routes in the most remote inhospitable areas of the desert.'I think we have to wait a little longer to see if this is a trend or just a momentary phenomenon ' Diaz said.Undocumented Central American immigrants have traditionally tried to cross into Texas rather than Arizona.Diaz Gonzalez attributes the route change to the massacres of migrants in the Mexican state of Tamaulipas bordering Texas.After the discovery two years ago in San Fernando Tamaulipas of secret graves holding at least 193 people mostly Central Americans migrants began looking for other paths.'The strengthening of border security is another factor that makes migrants look for more hidden places to cross ' the consul general said.The diplomat said the consulate offers various aid programs for its compatriots including the search for migrants who go missing.'Some have even called us on their own cell phones telling us they have been left stranded in the desert by people traffickers so with that information we can help rescue groups go find them ' she said. EFE </source> [/INST] <claim>Immigration is increasing – they’ve just been going through a different route</claim> <psg>Undocumented Central American immigrants especially Guatemalans crossing the Arizona border during fiscal year 2013 increased considerably From Oct. 1 to May 1 the arrests of 14 198 undocumented Central American immigrants were reported 2 873 more than during the same period of fiscal year 2012 data of the Border Patrol's Tucson Sector show.'We're seeing more and more immigration traffic Undocumented Central American immigrants have traditionally tried to cross into Texas rather than Arizona.Diaz Gonzalez attributes the route change to the massacres of migrants in the Mexican state The strengthening of border security is another factor that makes migrants look for more hidden places to cross</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Other quid pro quo measures could tackle some of the structural changes most Mexican economists are convinced are necessary for Mexico to prosper in the years ahead. My own priorities would deal with education and the rule of law but the other areas noted above would also be helpful. Assistance conditioned in this manner is not novel. It is the basis for the Millennium Challenge Account set up under President Bush for choosing which poor nations will receive U.S. aid. Financial aid to poorer regions was part of the original structure of the European Union in recognition of the benefits to all countries of the Union in minimizing regional and country differences. </source> [/INST] <claim>Conditioning the aff are key</claim> <psg>Other quid pro quo measures could tackle some of the structural changes most Mexican economists are convinced are necessary for Mexico to prosper in the years ahead. My own priorities would deal with education and the rule of law but the other areas noted above would also be helpful . It is the basis for the Millennium Challenge Account set up under President Bush for choosing which poor nations will receive U.S. aid</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> There are clear signs that the era of the Washington Consensus and neoliberal economics in Latin America is drawing to a close. The optimism about economic development of the early 1990s has receded and a slow but perceptible political backlash has set in. A series of political events has occurred that represents at least in part an intensification of popular dissatisfaction with the reigning economic model. These include the election of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela in 1998 the coup that overthrew President Jamil Mahuad in Ecuador in 2000 the Argentine debt default and street protests of December 2001 followed by the election of Nestor Kirchner in 2003 the election of Lucio Gutierrez in Ecuador in 2002 the violent protests in Bolivia in 2003 that led to the resignation of President Gonzalo Sanchez de Losada and the election of Tabar? Vasquez to the Uruguayan presidency in 2004. These events reflect the differential impact of recent economic reforms and show that in Latin America once again a prior consensus on economic policy is breaking down. Neoliberal reforms produced some positive results. Inflation was brought down new infusions of foreign investment occurred and economic growth in the early 1990s was far higher than it had been during the 'Tost decade' of the 1980s. But the reforms have had an uneven impact across and within social sec tors and since 1997 growth has slowed and new investment has declined. In light of these developments the debate on the impacts of neoliberal reform on the economies polities and societies of Latin American countries has heated up (see e.g. Huber and Solt 2004. Stallings and Peres 2000. Walton 2004. Weyland 2004). Stallings and Peres (2000) show that inequality of incomes in the region has increased and except in Chile so has poverty. Formal-sector employment has declined slightly and economic openness has not led to a revitalization of firms or enhanced worker productivity across the board. instead islands of efficiency and productivity exist in a sea of mediocre performances at the micro level. Huber and Solt (2004: 158) argue that more liberalized economies in the region had higher volatility larger increases in income inequality and greater poverty than less liberalized economies. These academic studies have been challenged 1 but they lend empirical support to the widespread disenchantment with neoliberal reform in Latin America. One element that is missing from the debate is the role of ideas. Why and how were neoliberal ideas accepted in the first place and how did policy elites formulate and implement neoliberal policies? Why weren't these ideas and policies sustainable? How might a new consensus on better and more inclusive economic policies be forged in the ashes of the Washington Consensus? This article attempts to answer these questions. It argues that the neoliberal ism of the 1980s and 1990s lost its credibility and its capacity to provide politically feasible policy guidelines because it was based on an elitist exclusionary pact among small groups of experts and elites representing the interests of transnational capital. This situation calls for a paradigm shift involving a reelaboration of development strategies in favor of majorities </source> [/INST] <claim>The shift has begun-neoliberalism in Latin America is failing and a transition is on the brink but the affirmative’s expansion of the neoliberal system allows a re-entrenchment guaranteeing widespread poverty and inequality throughout the region </claim> <psg>There are clear signs that the era of the Washington Consensus and neoliberal economics in Latin America is drawing to a close optimism about economic development of the early 1990s has receded and a slow but perceptible political backlash has set in the election of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela in 1998 the coup in Ecuador in 2000 the Argentine debt default of December 2001 the election of Nestor Kirchner in 2003 the election of Gutierrez in Ecuador in 2002 violent protests in Bolivia in 2003 Neoliberal reforms produced some positive results In light of these developments the debate on the impacts of neoliberal reform on the economies polities and societies of Latin American countries has heated up inequality of incomes in the region has increased and so has poverty economic openness has not led to a revitalization of firms or enhanced worker productivity across the board. instead islands of efficiency and productivity exist in a sea of mediocre performances more liberalized economies in the region had higher volatility larger increases in income inequality and greater poverty than less liberalized economies academic studies lend empirical support to the widespread disenchantment with neoliberal reform in Latin America neoliberal ism of the 1980s and 1990s lost its credibility and its capacity to provide politically feasible policy guidelines because it was based on an elitist exclusionary pact among small groups of experts and elites representing the interests of transnational capital. This situation calls for a paradigm shift involving a reelaboration of development strategies in favor of majorities</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> This volume interrogates laws role in constituting American borders. One project of American studies scholarship has been to explore American culture and history in relation to the rest of the world.1 But the global turn in Ameri- can studies raises new questions about the boundaries of the field and of the reach of 'America' itself. Once we view the United States in a global context once territory - formerly the implicit boundary around American studies - is decentered it becomes important to ask what the frame is around 'American' studies and to ask how in a global context U.S. borders and identities are constructed. Law is one window through which to look at the construction of American borders. Law is an important technology in the drawing of dividing lines between American identities and the boundaries (or lack of boundaries) around American global power. Borders are constructed in law not only through formal legal controls on entry and exit but also through the construction of rights of citizenship and noncitizenship and the regulation or legitimation of American power in other parts of the world. The essays in this volume highlight the multiple ways law figures in Ameri- can borders. Law has always been there in borderlands writing although law and American studies scholars have often operated in separate intellectual spaces.2 It was not at the surf but in the desert spaces of what we call the Southwest that Gloria Anzaldiia powerfully rendered the force of law in the role of la migra the border patrol. 'In the fields la migra ' she writes. My aunt saying 'No corran don't run. They'll think you're del otro lao.' In the confusion Pedro ran terrified of being caught. He couldn't speak English couldn't tell them he was fifth generation American. Sinpapeles - he did not carry his birth certificate to work in the fields. La migra took him away while we watched. Se lo llevaron. He tried to smile when he looked back at us to raise his fist. But I saw the shame pushing his head down I saw the terrible weight of shame hunch his shoulders. They deported him to Guadalajara by plane. The furthest he'd ever been to Mexico was Reynosa a small border town opposite Hidalgo Texas not far from McAllen. Pedro walked all the way to the Valley. Se lo llevaron sin un centavo alpobre. Se vino andando desde Guadalajara? The U.S. border with Mexico is the most iconic American border a space that has been the subject of much powerful scholarship.4 As Sonia Saldivar- Hull has written Anzaldiia's Borderlands 'focuses on a specific geographic lo- cale - the U.S.- Mexico border and presents a specific history - that of Mexi- can origin U.S. Chicanas.' Yet Anzaldiias analysis goes beyond this and 'opens up a radical way of restructuring the way we study history.'5 Through the work of Anzaldiia and others this geographic space opens up a way of think- ing that writers in this volume take to other locales - spaces on the edge of American sovereignty and internal places at the heart of American identity </source> [/INST] <claim>Borders exemplify the great divide drawn between citizenship and non-citizenship- La Migra harshly enforces laws in the name of “border security” depicting the immigrant body as a threat that must be kept out </claim> <psg>the global turn in Ameri- can studies raises new questions about the boundaries of the field and of the reach of 'America' itself the implicit boundary around American studies - is decentered it becomes important to ask how U.S. borders and identities are constructed Law is an important technology in the drawing of dividing lines between American identities and the boundaries around American global power Borders are constructed in law through the construction of rights of citizenship and noncitizenship It was not at the surf but in the desert spaces of what we call the Southwest that Gloria Anzaldiia powerfully rendered the force of law in the role of la migra the border patrol he was fifth generation American . La migra took him away while we watched But I saw the shame pushing his head down I saw the terrible weight of shame hunch his shoulders They deported him to Guadalajara by plane spaces on the edge of American sovereignty and internal places at the heart of American identity</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> The apparently robust and indisputable character of the Washington Consensus began to be questioned during the 1990s. Strong criticisms coming from within and outside the international financial institutions led to reformulation of the main policy recommendations. Indeed one of the most striking characteristics of the Washington Consensus is the almost continuous revision of its premises. In a relatively short period of time several elements were added to the core described above and others modified. Less than generating a new consensus they added uncertainty about what policies are desirable and viable. Thus Naím (1999) has coined the phrase 'Washington Confusion' to refer to this new stage in the evolution of the consensus. The disagreement involved not only questions of implementation (e.g. the pace and sequence of reforms) but also the nature of economic measures (e.g. whether to apply controls on foreign capital or which exchange-rate regime was preferable). Also some new (so-called second-generation) reforms aimed to improve the levels of competition within economies by means for instance of better regulatory frameworks the strengthening of institutions and reform of the judicial system (Naím 1995). These controversies marked the evolution of the conventional wisdom on market reforms. According to Naím (1999) it is possible to identify four phases of that evolution. The first involved a shift in the debate about economics and development and the adoption of orthodox macroeconomic policies together with the dismantling of past interventionist measures. The second around the mid-1990s involved the 'discovery of institutions'-the recognition that macroeconomic structural reforms were necessary but not sufficient and institutional reforms were an indispensable complement of the working of markets.11 The third was associated with financial crises in several regions in the late 1990s and prompted a redefinition of the instruments that might help countries to cope with the undesirable consequences of globalization. The last stage of this evolution is marked by the reconsideration of what development in a broad sense requires and what it would take to answer current political social and economic demands. In other words ideas evolved in parallel with reality accounting for or responding to political and economic processes that contradicted or went beyond previous expectations. While initial revisions of the Washington Consensus were more along the line of adding new elements than changing the premises (Stiglitz 1998. Burki and Perry 1997. 1998) poor economic performance financial crisis and political opposition led to a critical examination of the original policy recommendations themselves and an attempt to save the main premises by designing a post-Washington Consensus more sensitive to the social debt (Williamson 1999. Kuczynski and Williamson 2003). Two main interrelated lessons emerge from these revisions. First development involves more than macroeconomic stability and GDP growth. The preservation of the environment the consolidation of democratic practices the building up of transparent and accountable institutions and the imple mentation of social policies to attain equity are all goals that have to be included in any development strategy. Second any policy prescription has to be grounded in a complementary understanding of both the political and the economic processes involved in structural transformations. Considering states and markets as unrelated and opposed leads to an incomplete and misleading assessment of what it takes to reform a socioeconomic order. </source> [/INST] <claim>And their corruption advantage is a massive link-institutional reforms and transparency measures are seeped in the logic of neoliberalism-the two consistently go hand-in-hand with Washington’s reforms</claim> <psg>The apparently robust and indisputable character of the Washington Consensus began to be questioned during the 1990s Strong criticisms coming from within and outside the international financial institutions led to reformulation of the main policy they added uncertainty about what policies are desirable and viable Naím has coined the phrase 'Washington Confusion' to refer to this new stage new second-generation reforms aimed to improve the levels of competition within economies by means for instance of better regulatory frameworks the strengthening of institutions and reform of the judicial system The first involved a shift in the debate about economics and development The second involved the 'discovery of institutions'-the recognition that macroeconomic structural reforms were necessary but not sufficient and institutional reforms were an indispensable complement ideas evolved in parallel with reality accounting for or responding to political and economic processes that contradicted or went beyond previous expectations Two main interrelated lessons emerge from these revisions development involves more than macroeconomic stability and GDP growth the building up of transparent and accountable institutions any policy prescription has to be grounded in a complementary understanding of both the political and the economic processes involved in structural transformations</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> In the Mapping the Global Future report on possible world scenarios in the year 2020 the U.S. National Intelligence Council outlined a series of potential threats to world development and U.S. hegemony (NIC 2004. also Sparke 2007). Alongside concerns about ris- ing numbers of Muslim adherents the report perceives threats from Latin American indigenous peoples' activ- ism.' In the words of Mapping the Global Future '[par- ticularly] in parts of Latin America ... the failure of elites to adapt to the evolving demands of free markets and democracy probably will fuel a revival in populism and drive indigenous movements which so far have sought change through democratic means to consider more drastic means for seeking what they consider their 'fair share' of political power and wealth' (NIC 2004 77). In the weakest states of Central America Mexico and the Andes the report goes on to say a risk exists that charismatic and popular leaders will play on popular dissatisfaction with the gap between 'haves' and 'have-nots.' Among those most liable to populist mo- bilization are the 'increasing portions of the popula- tion ... identifying themselves as indigenous people [who] will demand not only a voice but potentially a new social contract' (p. 78). This article examines these policy scenarios in the context of development thinking about politics and democracy and in light of Latin American indigenous peoples' experiences of nation- states development and citizenship. I argue that geo- political discourses misrepresent racial tensions and weak states blaming indigenous people who in effect have organized against political violence marginaliza- tion and exclusion. The article also provides an analytically robust and epistemologically defensible geographical approach to questions of development. Whereas neoliberal develop- ment is characterized by its overweaning economically based approach in which social difference is to be identified and then approached via targeted programs postdevelopment adopts a culturally-driven approach in which macroeconomic decision making and its practices are viewed as irrelevant-and indeed damaging-to grassroots alternative livelihoods. Both approaches fail to ground their analyses in the intersections of culture- place/space-politics-economics and development de- bates are distracted by trying to overcome the antinomy between these two contradictory approaches. Working up from a grounded analysis of development difficulties faced by one marginal population in a region where neoliberalism and postdevelopment have both had their advocates and policy impacts (albeit in very different extents and scales) I suggest that geography offers an analysis that takes culture and economics institutional- ized social difference and livelihoods into account by analyzing political culture and political economy. Geog-raphy has the tools for an approach that combines sen- sitivity to cultural meaning with political economy analyses of the production of inequality and disenfran- chisement. Specifically the article analyzes shifts in the (cultural) politics of redistribution as well as the eco- nomic drivers behind calls for (ethnic) recognition. The section that follows describes how recent U.S. geopolitical concerns have influenced Latin American indigenous populations in the wake of 11 September 2001 (hereinafter '9/11') and broader imperial actions (Harvey 2005. Smith 2005). After discussing geopolitical worldviews that represent Andean Indians as equivalent to terrorists I show how indigenous peoples have long been the targets of violence in the context of weak and racialized states poor guarantees of citizenship and lack of development. In the second section that follows I address neoliberal development in Latin America and analyze the extento which it addresses the impover- ishment and marginalization of indigenous peoples. The third section outlines the postdevelopment approach often claimed to represent an 'alternative to mainstream development ' before examining the extent to which indigenous responses to geographies of fear are explained by postdevelopment frameworks. In the fourth section I draw out the comparison between neoliberal postde- velopment and geographical approaches to develop- ment in order to clarify the direction that geography can take in its analysis and understanding of urgent devel- opment concerns such as violence against Latin Ameri- can indigenous citizens </source> [/INST] <claim>The American obsession with neoliberalism has created a racial barrier between the indigenous other and the hegemon-a geographical alternative is the only way to distance us from current neoliberal and post-developmental ideology</claim> <psg>the U.S. National Intelligence Council outlined threats to world development the report perceives threats from Latin American indigenous peoples the failure of elites to adapt to the evolving demands of free markets and democracy probably will fuel a revival in populism and drive indigenous movements to consider more drastic means for seeking what they consider their 'fair share' of political power and wealth a risk exists that charismatic and popular leaders will play on popular dissatisfaction with the gap between 'haves' and 'have-nots This article examines these scenarios in the context of development thinking about politics and democracy in light of Latin American indigenous peoples' experiences geo- political discourses misrepresent racial tensions and weak states blaming indigenous people The article also provides an analytically robust and epistemologically defensible geographical approach to questions of development Whereas neoliberal develop- ment is characterized by its overweaning economically based approach postdevelopment adopts a culturally-driven approach in which macroeconomic decision making and its practices are viewed as irrelevant . Working up from a grounded analysis of development difficulties faced by one marginal populatio in a region where neoliberalism have had their advocates and impacts Geog-raphy has the tools for an approach that combines sen- sitivity to cultural meaning recent U.S. geopolitical concerns have influenced Latin American indigenous populations in the wake of 11 September 2001 geopolitical worldviews represent Andean Indians as equivalent to terrorists indigenous peoples have long been the targets of violence in the context of weak and racialized states the comparison between neoliberal postde- velopment and geographical approaches to develop- ment in order to clarify the direction that geography can take in its analysis and understanding of urgent devel- opment concerns such as violence against Latin Ameri- can indigenous citizens</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Currently neoliberalism is the hegemonic develop- ment model in Latin America such that the majority of regional development priorities and projects have been shaped by the theory interpretation and implementa- tion of neoliberalism. As such the region offers an ideal location in which to evaluate this development model in terms of its ability to address indigenous concerns. Over the past thirty years neoliberalism and its adjunct of democracy promotion have been applied albeit un- evenly and with varying degrees of enthusiasm resulting in privatization of assets and resources opening up of trade barriers legislative reforms to facilitate labor flexibility and the selective rolling backward and forward of the state in social reproduction. Far from being monolithic neoliberalism is characterized by variation hybridity with existing policies and multiple and con- tradictory aspects regarding neoliberalizing spaces sub- jects and states (Perreault and Martin 2005). As an agenda for development hope neoliberalism is premised on the notiself-adjusting market in which free market capitalism can 'construct some sort of space within which it can function' (Harvey 2000 176-77) and where the role of the state is ostensibly reduced. Ethnic difference can be interpreted as a block on the free working of the market. In the current neoliberal and geopolitical context according to one businessman ethnic mobilization 'could jeopardize the exploitation of natural resources-gas oil gold ... in territories with a significant indigenous population' (Gonzalez Manrique 2005 1). For Latin American Indian populations neoliberalism is directly linked to the nonfunctioning of market economies and the restructuring of economic rights vis- a-vis nation-states in ways that undercut indigenous security and livelihoods. This is in large part due to the restless spatialization of capital as it negotiates with 'the geography of place' (Harvey 2000 179). The geogra- phies of market capitalism are frequently destructive of local and national forms of economy just as they 'cre- atively' expand the opportunities for minority wealth creation. Although neoliberal capital compromises with its very spatialization these apparent flexibilities serve to deepen uneven development as they permit greater ex- ploitation of particular juxtapositions of landscape people and resources (Massey 2005). Latin American neoliberalisms work against a politics of redistribution by exacerbating inequality and pushing indigenous people into poverty. Privatization of land markets combined with the emphasis on individual responsibility has compounded indigenous loss of voice (e.g. Sanabria 1999). Neoliberalism's support for entrepreneurialism pushes Indians into market-oriented production and restrictive forms of political participation (Radcliffe and Laurie 2006a 2006b. Andolina Laurie and Radcliffe forthcoming). Large numbers of Indians remain impov- erished under neoliberalism trapped by segregated labor markets limited product outlets insecure land tenure and weak social welfare.11 The economic story of neoliberalism's failure repre- sents only part of the picture however. neoliberalism has also entailed the restructuring of the cultural terms of (indigenous) citizenship and the sociopolitical pact through which rights are extended and realized. The neoliberal dismantling of corporatist state systems which granted Indians some recognition and representation in decisions over rights has contributed to widespread ethnic protest. Neoliberal restructuring breaks previous forms of rule (1930-1970s) that granted Indians access to resources and political representation (Yashar 1999). This Indian-state pact was broken reworked and re- formed during the debt crisis democratic transitions and neoliberalism in a contested and tense process (Assies van der Haar and Hoekema 2001) such that although civil and political rights are now formally es- tablished on paper social and economic rights are more insecure in practice and the political and cultural bases for state-indigenous negotiations have been trans- formed. Formal democracy with regular elections and civilian representatives now exists yet slow economic growth inequalities and ineffective judiciaries and so- cial services provision combine to undermine citizens' confidence in elective democracies (UNDP 2004). On the one hand administrative decentralization and formal channels of citizen participation deepen democ- racy even as macroeconomic decision making remains with technocrat elites and social welfare comes through unaccountable NGOs (Radcliffe 2001). Policy shifts to multiculturalism entail specific politico-cultural consequences for Indians and shape their political and social rights. Under neoliberal multiculturalism the new 'indigenous slot' offered to ethnic citizens has tended to give limited (and conditional) resources to Indians and to police their expression of identity (Hale 2002. Paley 2002). Multiculturalism represents both 'opportunity and peril' for Indians (Hale 2002 487) the peril resting in its tendency to listen only to certain voices. </source> [/INST] <claim>Subjugated by neoliberalism the indigenous populations of Latin America have been neglected by the wealthy elite decimating the native economy promoting inequality and poverty and ridding natives of their rights </claim> <psg>neoliberalism is the hegemonic develop- ment model in Latin America such that the majority of regional development priorities and projects have been shaped by the theory the region offers an ideal location in which to evaluate this development model in terms of its ability to address indigenous concerns Ethnic difference can be interpreted as a block on the free working of the market. In the current neoliberal and geopolitical context according to one businessman ethnic mobilization 'could jeopardize the exploitation of natural resources-gas oil gold in territories with a significant indigenous population For Latin American Indian populations neoliberalism is directly linked to the nonfunctioning of market economies and the restructuring of economic rights in ways that undercut indigenous security and livelihoods This is in large part due to the restless spatialization of capital as it negotiates with 'the geography of place The geogra- phies of market capitalism are frequently destructive of local and national forms of economy these apparent flexibilities serve to deepen uneven development as they permit greater ex- ploitation of particular juxtapositions of landscape people and resources ). Latin American neoliberalisms work against a politics of redistribution by exacerbating inequality and pushing indigenous people into poverty Privatization of land markets has compounded indigenous loss of voice Large numbers of Indians remain impov- erished under neoliberalism trapped by segregated labor markets limited product outlets insecure land tenure and weak social welfare (indigenous) citizenship and the sociopolitical pact through which rights are extended and realized. The neoliberal dismantling of corporatist state systems has contributed to widespread ethnic protest social and economic rights are more insecure in practice and the political and cultural bases for state-indigenous negotiations have been trans- formed Under neoliberal multiculturalism the new 'indigenous slot' offered to ethnic citizens has tended to give limited resources to Indians and to police their expression of identity</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Protest against neoliberalism makes Indians vulnera- ble to state and extra-state violence echoing earlier histories of anti-Indian violence. In March 2006 the Ecuadorian president accused Indian movements of destabilizing the country with four days of roadblocks and protests. the government declared a state of emer- gency in five highland largely Indian provinces in an effort to prevent indigenous strategy meetings (BBC News 2006a). Public meetings were banned and a curfew was imposed troops reinforced security along major roads into the capital (Comercio 2006. Andrade 2006). Despite these actions CONAIE continued to engage a public debate around the institutional and political terms of free-trade decision making. Why it asked did the government make negotiations confidential? Why appoint an export agro-industry representative as Min- ister of Economy (CONAIE 2006)? In short Ecuador exemplifies the recent 'politicization of ethnic cleavag- es' (Yashar 1999 87) by which worsening indigenous disadvantage together with reorganization of decision- making structures generates Indian protest. Neoliberal economic and political restructurings are experienced as threats to Andean ethnic security with Indians 'fear[ing free trade] will damage their livelihoods and their way of life' (Andrade 2006). Yet it is not merely a question of different priorities-an indigenous alterna- tive to a neoliberal agenda. Rather 'attempts to establish a neoliberal order can act as factors of political destabi- lization' (Zamosc 2004 132). In other words the seeds of political instability now of such concern to Wash- ington lie precisely with the political agendas and consequences embedded in neoliberal macroeconomic development. </source> [/INST] <claim>There’s no escape-current attempts at revolution have failed and lead to a re-subjugation of the indigenous population-only a geography-based alternative can de-politicize the underlying ethnic cleavages</claim> <psg>Protest against neoliberalism makes Indians vulnera- ble to state and extra-state violence echoing earlier histories of anti-Indian violence the government declared a state of emer- gency to prevent indigenous strategy meetings troops reinforced security along major roads Why it asked did the government make negotiations confidential? Why appoint an export agro-industry representative as Min- ister of Economy Ecuador exemplifies the recent 'politicization of ethnic cleavag- es by which worsening indigenous disadvantage together with reorganization of decision- making structures generates Indian protest Neoliberal economic and political restructurings are experienced as threats to Andean ethnic security the seeds of political instability now of such concern to Wash- ington lie precisely with the political agendas and consequences embedded in neoliberal macroeconomic development.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> For the indigenous population of Latin America neo-liberalism is nothing more than the last episode of 500 years of genocide and tough resistance. Based on this experience they know a lot about certain historic realities like the continuity of colonialism and imperialism environmental destruction the creation and maintaining of an overwhelming debt as an instrument to control peoples as well as a systematic application of abductions disappearance of persons of torture and violence against women (cf. Porto Alegre). From the foundation of the first modern organization of Indians among the Shuar (Jivaros) in Equatorial Amazonia in the mid-60s until today’s mobilization of the Mapuche Indians in Chile this resistance has spread increasingly often with global resonance. It became obvious in the Bolivian Katarism1 whose important representative Hugo Cárdenas from the Aymara tribe was vice president of the republic from 1993 to 1997. in the guerilla war of the Miskito at the Atlantic coast of Nicaragua which troubled the Sandinista government. in the Guatemalan Indian movement whose tragic fate was sketched by Rigoberta Menchú the winner of the Peace Nobel Prize in 1992. in the rebellion of the Indians in the equatorial Andes which had released several spectacular marches to Quito around 1990. and of course in the uprising of the Zapatistas in Chiapas which shook the Mexican pyramid first in 1994 and caused sympathy and resistance far beyond the Mexican borders. The movements of the Latin American Indians are the main if not the only social movement of the past decades. In a world shaped by antidemocratic endeavors they are among the few actors combining the cultural and the social concern with democratic efforts. Through these movements the Indians have found greater attention in all countries in Latin America no matter if they represent a substantial part of the population like in Ecuador Bolivia Peru Guatemala or Mexico or if they are just a more or less important minority like in Colombia Brazil Nicaragua Panama or Chile. The women Women have suffered the most under the economic violence of neo-liberalism – not to mention the increasing violence in daily life. Protest rallies against the increasing abuse of women and the sex business (which is now economically more important than the drug trade) have achieved central importance not only for feminist movements like the feminist action network “Marche mondiale des femmes”(World March of Women) but also for all new social movements. There are many examples of women as leaders from the Zapatista female commanders in Mexico or Argentine Piqueteras (unemployed persons blocking crucial switch points to call attention to their economically distressing situation) to the mothers and grandmothers of the Plaza de Mayo in Argentine. Especially worth mentioning are the women who led the national upheaval to protect President Chávez’ life (in Venezuela) during the two-day reign of Pedro Carmona “Pedro the Short” after the US-supported coup on April 11 2002 and the Bolivian workers street vendors and the female family heads of El Alto who organized defense and campaign committees. The rural population In spite of the increasing suppression farmers and small peasants play a central role. In the majority of the cases this multi-ethnic group has become a new cheap flexible and migrant employment force. Be it the coca farmers in the Andes or the farmers of the movement of landless farmers in Brazil (this movement is member of the Via Campesina a network of farmers’ movements in over 87 countries) the rural population has begun to mobilize even in the cities. The workers A new wave of union-organized protest has formed against multinational trusts and against corrupt union leaders (the so-called “charros” in Mexico). In all countries we find independent union trusts like the Frente Autentico de Trabajo (FAT) in Mexico and secessions within the old trusts like the Unión Nacional de Trabajadores (UNT) in Venezuela. In Chile workers’ collectives have started to fill the union vacuum still remaining from the not yet completely dismantled terrorist state during Pinochet’s dictatorship. In addition important struggles are combined internationally e.g. when the workers of Coca Cola in Guatemala Colombia and in India synchronize their campaigns or when the workers in the maquiladoras (sweatshops) in Mexico Central America and the Caribbean fight for the formation of unions. The Latin American workers have occupied many factories abandoned by their owners and made them fully operational again. At the end of 2005 a continental congress for the workers of restored factories was organized in Venezuela. </source> [/INST] <claim>Indigenous peoples and women are disproportionately affected by the promotion of neoliberalism – they have laid the framework for a better alternative</claim> <psg>For the indigenous population of Latin America neo-liberalism is nothing more than the last episode of 500 years of genocide they know a lot about certain historic realities like the continuity of colonialism and imperialism environmental destruction the creation and maintaining of an overwhelming debt this resistance has spread increasingly often with global resonance The movements of the Latin American Indians are the main if not the only social movement of the past decades they are among the few actors combining the cultural and the social concern with democratic efforts the Indians have found greater attention in all countries in Latin America Women have suffered the most under the economic violence of neo-liberalism – not to mention the increasing violence in daily There are many examples of women as leaders In spite of the increasing suppression farmers and small peasants play a central role important struggles are combined internationally The Latin American workers have occupied many factories abandoned by their owners and made them fully operational again</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> The year 2004 marked a peculiar convergence in Mexican politics the tenth anniversary of both the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Zapatista insurrection. After a decade of perma- nent structural reforms NAFTA was declared a resounding success across the continent even exceeding its economic goals in Mexico by ushering in an electoral democracy. Meanwhile the Zapatistas appear to have suffered an ultimate defeat a result of a politics of exhaustion deployed with equal alac- rity by the Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI) and its democratically elected successor the Partido Accion Nacional (PAN). Together these two events - ten years of NAFTA and the Zapatista revolution - present us with two distinct Mexicos united by one historical process neoliberalism. The implementation of NAFTA on the one hand tells the story of a technocratic elites vision of Mexico's entry into 'democratic capitalism.' an entry pock- marked by displacement and pain but which purportedly redeems the na- tion in the end through increases in economic indicators. The Zapatistas on the other hand tell the story of the displaced of those subalterns whose present is sacrificed to the nation s future. These two interpretations of Mexico's em- brace of neoliberalism provide the context for my psychoanalytic reading of Alfonso Cuaron s Ytu mamd tambien z seemingly insignificant little film about two teenage boys Tenoch and Julio whose homoerotic love for each other is mediated by a beautiful Spanish woman and mother-figure Luisa.1 More ac- curately stated the homoerotically charged Oedipal complex that provides the plot device propelling this 'on the road' film through narrative time and the Mexican countryside functions as an allegory presenting the viewer with a cinematic interpretation of the changing nature of Mexican sovereignty sub- altern positionality and colonial fantasy in the context of a neoliberalism his- torically represented by NAFTA. </source> [/INST] <claim>NAFTA exemplifies the post-colonial strategy of neoliberalism oppressing the indigenous peoples who are sacrificed for the “greater good” of the country</claim> <psg>The year 2004 marked a peculiar convergence in Mexican politics the tenth anniversary of both the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Zapatista insurrection. After a decade of perma- nent structural reforms NAFTA was declared a resounding success across the continent even exceeding its economic goals in Mexico by ushering in an electoral democracy. Meanwhile the Zapatistas appear to have suffered an ultimate defeat a result of a politics of exhaustion deployed with equal alac- rity by the Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI) and its democratically elected successor the Partido Accion Nacional (PAN). Together these two events - ten years of NAFTA and the Zapatista revolution - present us with two distinct Mexicos united by one historical process neoliberalism. The implementation of NAFTA on the one hand tells the story of a technocratic elites vision of Mexico's entry into 'democratic capitalism.' an entry pock- marked by displacement and pain but which purportedly redeems the na- tion in the end through increases in economic indicators. The Zapatistas on the other hand tell the story of the displaced of those subalterns whose present is sacrificed to the nation s future. These two interpretations of Mexico's em- brace of neoliberalism provide the context for my psychoanalytic reading of Alfonso Cuaron s Ytu mamd tambien z seemingly insignificant little film about two teenage boys Tenoch and Julio whose homoerotic love for each other is mediated by a beautiful Spanish woman and mother-figure Luisa.1 More ac- curately stated the homoerotically charged Oedipal complex functions as an allegory presenting the viewer with a cinematic interpretation of the changing nature of Mexican sovereignty sub- altern positionality and colonial fantasy in the context of a neoliberalism his- torically represented by NAFTA.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> NAFTA was promulgated in 1994 almost 150 years after the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo by the United States Mexico and Canada. In contrast this treaty was the result of long-term peaceful negotiations among the three nations and it did not change the existing territorial borders between the signatories. Nevertheless NAFTA radically altered the legal structure of the border between Mexico and the United States the social geography of the borderland and as I argue in this essay the character of Mexican sovereignty. NAFTA is a trinational legal regime of trade and capital investment one that 'opened up' the borders among the three nations by changing the formal legal controls on the entry and exit of goods and capital although notably not of people. It did so primarily by requiring the dismantling of the prior import and export tariff structures for each country as well as the structures of do- mestic subsidies. Thus under the new legal regime introduced by NAFTA any and all tariffs and subsidies explicitly used to protect domestic products and markets from the foreign competition of the other two signatories were removed or scheduled for removal. While NAFTA facilitated the unencumbered movement of goods and capital across the North American continent it pointedly did not address the third leg of this capitalist triumvirate: labor. NAFTA is strangely mute on the sub- ject of the movement of laborers across national borders. And significantly ten years after NAFTA the United States and Mexico have yet to broker a single agreement on temporary workers although the U.S. economy from California to New York is visibly addicted to the importation of cheap un- documented labor from the south. This is not an oversight on the part of the negotiators of NAFTA but is the result of the paradoxical relationship that exists among capitalism liberalism and the nation-state form (a relationship I will return to in my concluding remarks). Throughout the last decade even as NAFTAs legal border regime has ushered in the unprecedented movement of goods and capital across the U.S.- Mexico border the United States has mili- tarized its border as never before to insure that immigrants - drawn to it by this very treaty - are denied easy entry into its territory. </source> [/INST] <claim>NAFTA exemplifies the double standard of the border-for ten years it has facilitated the movement of goods and capital while ignoring the needs of subjugated populations within Latin America</claim> <psg>this treaty was the result of long-term peaceful negotiations among the three nations and it did not change the existing territorial borders between the signatories. Nevertheless NAFTA radically altered the legal structure of the border the social geography of the borderland NAFTA opened up' the borders among the three nations by changing the formal legal controls on the entry and exit of goods and capital although notably not of people under the new legal regime introduced by NAFTA any and all tariffs and subsidies explicitly used to protect domestic products and markets from the foreign competition of the other two signatories were removed While NAFTA facilitated the unencumbered movement of goods and capital across the North American continent it pointedly did not address labor NAFTA is strangely mute on the sub- ject of the movement of laborers across national borders the United States and Mexico have yet to broker a single agreement on temporary workers This is the result of the paradoxical relationship that exists among capitalism liberalism and the nation-state form even as NAFTAs legal border regime has ushered in the unprecedented movement of goods and capital across the U.S.- Mexico border the United States has mili- tarized its border to insure that immigrants are denied easy entry into its territory</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> The book focuses heavily on the character and passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and then the immediately following Mexican crisis and bailout. NAFTA was a corporate project strongly opposed by a great majority of Democratic Party voters and by a majority of Democratic legislators. But with Robert Rubin's urging Clinton put passage of this legislation ahead of health care reform put a huge political effort into getting it passed and thereby set the stage for both the failure of health care reform and the Democratic Party's political debacle in 1994. Of course the business community appreciated Clinton's service and here and elsewhere he justified their earlier vetting of his candidacy organized by Rubin himself. Rubin had a serious conflict of interest in pushing NAFTA and the subsequent bailout of investors in Mexican securities. He had been a high-ranking official of Goldman Sachs which did substantial Mexican business and he had—and even continued to maintain—a number of Mexican clients. NAFTA served only the Party of Davos in the United States and a tiny elite of wealthy people who dominated a famously corrupt political system in Mexico. It was opposed by a U.S. majority and by aware and uncorrupted Mexicans. in Mexico the majority would eventually be seriously damaged by this instrument of the global class war. Its central feature was privileging foreign investors in Mexico providing also for the gradual elimination of tariffs on agricultural goods and therefore for economic disaster for several million Mexican farmers and their families. (One of Clinton's most notable lies was his claim that NAFTA would serve to slow down Mexican immigration into the United States by spurring investment and development in Mexico.) The analogy with the current U.S. crisis and bailout is more dramatic when we consider the Mexican crisis of 1994-1995. Shortly after the enactment of NAFTA in 1994 the Mexican government which for political reasons had tried to peg the peso suffered a crisis of investor confidence and an unsustainable drain on its foreign reserves. As economist David Felix described it in the Fall of 1994 'Mexican tesobono holders began cashing in and exiting to dollars [this bond was payable in pesos but with pesos indexed to the dollar] followed belatedly by foreign holders who were still stuck with $29 billion worth of tesobonos when in December 1994 the Mexican central bank its dollar reserves nearly exhausted let the exchange rate float and helplessly watched it sink. The U.S. Treasury and IMF hastily cobbled together a $51 billion bailout fund and required the Mexican government to use over half to pay off the $29 billion tesobonos with dollars. Since the government's contractual obligation to tesobono holders was merely to pay them more pesos when the peso price of dollars rose the bailout obligation amounted to a forced ex post rewriting of the contract with tesobono holders to save them from taking a bath' ('Why International Capital Mobility Should be Curbed and How It Could Be Done ' ICTFU Dec. 2001). In his chapter 'Alan Larry and Bob Save the Privileged ' Faux describes how in 1994 Greenspan Summers and Rubin helped create a climate of fear telling Congress that 'the entire world was now at risk.' Governor George W. Bush of Texas was lauded by Rubin for 'instinctively grasping what was at stake' and giving public support to the bailout. Rubin even 'called Gingrich who called Greenspan who called Rush Limbaugh to promote the bailout to the rightwing listeners of his radio show.' In fact the sales claims for the bailout were phony and the IMF financial contribution to the bailout was illegal. Mexico didn't suffer any 'debt crisis' as it was only obligated to provide pesos not dollars—the payment of dollars was forced on the Mexican government by U.S. officials who persuaded the U.S. media that the dollar payments were required by the tesobono contracts. U.S. officials told this lie and required this payment of Mexico not only to help U.S. investors but also to dissuade Mexico from resorting to capital controls which they could have done in accord with IMF rules but which would have set a pattern in violation of the neoliberal principles being enforced on the Third World by the United States and IMF. Article 6 of the IMF Articles of Agreement not only would have allowed Mexican capital controls it prohibits IMF emergency funding to facilitate capital flight—violated in this case in accord with U.S. demands and higher neoliberal principles (or rather interests). Faux points out that the bailout money 'was not used to rejuvenate the Mexican economy. It did not underwrite job creation for the unemployed or debt relief for the bankrupted small businesspeople or aid to hospitals and schools that were suddenly broke. It was used to make whole the Wall Street holders of tesobonos who had originally bought the risky Mexican bonds because Salinas was giving them a high yield.' Instead of capital controls Rubin and Summers insisted on budget reductions and 'reform' of the Mexican financial system which was followed by and resulted in the 'steepest economic crash since the Great Depression.' The Mexican middle class 'was decimated' by the forced contraction and Mexican taxpayers eventually being forced to pay the bills for the bailout. Rubin claimed that this was all because 'Mexico...had made a serious policy mistake.' But Faux points out that 'Mexico' didn't do this but rather Salinas and his successor Zedillo 'both of whom 'Alan Larry and Bob' had promoted to the American Congress as honest competent reformers who had to be supported with NAFTA even if it meant thousands of American losing their jobs.' Faux also points out that as part of NAFTA and in the wake of the Mexican forced contraction and budget crisis privatization of Mexican public assets was accelerated and local oligarchs and foreign banks (and customers of Goldman Sachs) could now buy up assets at bargain prices. So the Party of Davos and its local comprador allies did very well at the same time as ordinary Mexicans were put through the wringer. As Faux says 'The NAFTA financial model—liberalization of trade and finance leading to a speculative bubble a subsequent crash and the protection of investors from the consequences of their own actions—was repeated in various forms in the 1990s throughout the global markets in Thailand Brazil Bolivia South Korea Indonesia Russia and Argentina.' That was written in 2006. Now that the NAFTA financial model has hit home in the United States itself we can see how the Party of Davos with Goldman Sachs once again in the lead is doing its darndest to continue to socialize risks for investors and pass off costs to ordinary citizens. And with Bob Rubin and Larry Summers waiting in the wings the Democrats swallowing the latest bailouts and Wall Street still funding the Party generously we may have more of the same in a new Democratic administration. </source> [/INST] <claim>NAFTA proves that the US uses engagement with Mexico only as a way to exploit it for the benefit of the elite</claim> <psg>NAFTA was a corporate project strongly opposed by a great majority of Democratic Party voters NAFTA served only the Party of Davos in the United States and a tiny elite of wealthy people who dominated a famously corrupt political system in Mexico It was opposed by a U.S. majority and by aware and uncorrupted Mexicans. in Mexico the majority would eventually be seriously damaged by this instrument of the global class wa Its central feature was privileging foreign investors in Mexico providing economic disaster for several million Mexican farmers and their families the Mexican government which for political reasons had tried to peg the peso suffered a crisis of investor confidence and an unsustainable drain on its foreign reserves The U.S. Treasury and IMF hastily cobbled together a $51 billion bailout fund and required the Mexican government to use over half to pay off the $29 billion tesobonos with dollars Mexico didn't suffer any 'debt crisis' as it was only obligated to provide pesos not dollars .S. officials told this lie and required this payment of Mexico not only to help U.S. investors but also to dissuade Mexico from resorting to capital controls The NAFTA financial model was repeated in various forms in the 1990s throughout the global markets</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Antiterrorism and Subaltern Geographies of Fear An emerging geopolitical discourse identifies indig- enous electorates and organizations as a destabilizing force in Latin America and as a potential security con- cern for the United States and its allies. Most of Latin America's 34-40 million indigenous population is con- centrated in Andean and Central American countries. Bolivia Peru and Guatemala have indigenous majorities comprising diverse ethnic groups. Ecuador's Indians comprise around 20 percent of the national total. in Central America the populations of Mexico and Belize are 15-20 percent indigenous. Elsewhere multiple groups comprise 2-6 percent of national totals. Although diverse ethnocultural groups associated with pre-Co- lombian antecedents comprise only 8-10 percent of South America's population overall many nation-states have long been characterized by ethnic diversity multi- lingualism and multicultures.2 This section outlines re- cent U.S.-based perceptions of indigenous threat and argues that such geopolitical discourses erase an account of subaltern populations' fears based on many years of epistemic and material violence against them. Attributing to Latin American Indians the power to make weak states even weaker is a theme elaborated in Latin America 2020 Seminar: Discussing Long-Term Sce- narios (2004) a summary report from a workshop on Latin American trends. In this exegesis of U.S. insecu- rities vis-a-vists southern neighbors the scenario be- comes apocalyptic with 'new forms of political crisis' threatening that 'Latin America's agenda with the United States will compete more than ever against that country's own global agenda (which focuses on anti- terrorism and the emergence of other regions of world- wide importance)' (p. 3).3 The report suggests that al- though likely to be pro-United States in a 'clash of civilizations ' Latin America is nevertheless vulnerable to internal conflicts requiring military confrontations with 'non-state armed players (such as mafias drug- traffickers and international terrorist groups)' and ad- ditionally to the 'emergence of politically organized in- digenous groups' (p. 5). In this passage U.S. geopolitical strategists implicitly acknowledge marginalization from the safeguards of citizenship and the benefits of socio- economic development as factors behind indigenous mobilization. If ethnic political participation is not taken as legitimate and if social demands are not met the report suggests 'territorial claims by irredentist indig- enous groups could set the stage for armed insurgency and political violence' (p. 5). This geopolitical leap of speculation reflects global hegemonic imaginative geog- raphies' attribution of misleading and politically dam- aging characteristics and agendas to ethnic groups </source> [/INST] <claim>A Leap of Speculation-Insecure Americans unwarrantedly assume that the Latin American other is a dangerous terrorist threat defining American hegemonic securitization in an attempt to protect themselves from non-existent threats</claim> <psg>An emerging geopolitical discourse identifies indig- enous electorates and organizations as a destabilizing force in Latin America and as a security con- cern many nation-states have long been characterized by ethnic diversity multi- lingualism and multicultures This section outlines re- cent U.S.-based perceptions of indigenous threat and argues that such geopolitical discourses erase an account of subaltern populations' fears based on many years of epistemic and material violence against them . In this exegesis of U.S. insecu- rities the scenario be- comes apocalyptic with 'new forms of political crisis' threatening that 'Latin America's agenda with the United States Latin America is nevertheless vulnerable to the 'emergence of politically organized in- digenous groups .S. geopolitical strategists implicitly acknowledge marginalization as factors behind indigenous mobilization If ethnic political participation is not taken as legitimate and if social demands are not met the report suggests 'territorial claims by irredentist indig- enous groups could set the stage for armed insurgency This geopolitical leap of speculation reflects global hegemonic imaginative geog- raphies' attribution of misleading and politically dam- aging characteristics and agendas to ethnic groups</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> One of the least discussed and least reported issues is the Obama administration’s effort to bring the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement to the forefront an oppressive plurilateral US-led free trade agreement currently being negotiated with several Pacific Rim countries. Six hundred US corporate advisors have negotiated and had input into the TPP and the proposed draft text has not been made available to the public the press or policymakers. The level of secrecy surrounding the agreements is unparalleled – paramilitary teams scatter outside the premise of each round of discussions while helicopters loom overhead – media outlets impose a near-total blackout of reportage on the subject and US Senator Ron Wyden the Chair of the Congressional Committee with jurisdiction over TPP was denied access to the negotiation texts. “The majority of Congress is being kept in the dark as to the substance of the TPP negotiations while representatives of U.S. corporations — like Halliburton Chevron PhaRMA Comcast and the Motion Picture Association of America — are being consulted and made privy to details of the agreement ” said Wyden in a floor statement to Congress. In addition to the United States the countries participating in the negotiations include Australia Brunei Chile Canada Malaysia Mexico New Zealand Peru Singapore and Vietnam. Japan has expressed its desire to become a negotiating partner but not yet joined negotiation partly due to public pressure to steer-clear. The TPP would impose punishing regulations that give multinational corporations unprecedented rights to demand taxpayer compensation for policies they think will undermine their expected future profits straight from the treasuries of participating nations – it would push the agenda of Big PhaRMA in the developing world to impose longer monopoly controls on drugs drastically limiting access to affordable generic medications that people depend on. The TPP would undermine food safety by limiting labeling and forcing countries like the United States to import food that fails to meet its national safety standards in addition to banning Buy America or Buy Local preferences. According to leaked draft texts the TPP would also impose investor protections that incentivize offshoring jobs through special benefits for companies – the TPP stifles innovation by requiring internet service providers to police user-activity and treat small-scale individual downloads as large-scale for-profit violators. Most predictably it would rollback regulation of finance capital predators on Wall Street by prohibiting bans on risky financial services and preventing signatory nations from exercising the ability to independently pursue monetary policy and issue capital controls – signatories must permit the free flow of derivatives currency speculation and other manipulative financial instruments. The US-led partnership – which seeks to impose ‘Shock and Awe’ Globalization – aims to abolish the accountability of multinational corporations to the governments of countries with which they trade by making signatory governments accountable to corporations for costs imposed by national laws and regulations including health safety and environmental regulations. The proposed legislation on Intellectual Property will have enormous ramifications for TPP signatories including Internet termination for households businesses and organizations as an accepted penalty for copyright infringement. Signatory nations would essentially submit themselves to oppressive IP restrictions designed by Hollywood’s copyright cartels severely limiting their ability to digitally exchange information on sites like YouTube where streaming videos are considered copyrightable. “Broader copyright and intellectual property rights demands by the US would lock up the Internet stifle research and increase education costs by extending existing generous copyright from 70 years to 120 years and even making it a criminal offense to temporarily store files on a computer without authorization. The US as a net exporter of digital information would be the only party to benefit from this ” said Patricia Ranald convener of the Australian Fair Trade and Investment Network. In the private investor-state that the TPP is attempting to establish foreign corporations can sue national governments submitting signatory countries to the jurisdiction of investor arbitral tribunals staffed by private sector attorneys. International tribunals could have authority to order governments to pay unlimited cash compensation out of national treasuries to foreign corporations and investors if new or existing government policy hinders investors’ expected future profits. The domestic taxpayer in each signatory country must shoulder any compensation paid to private investors and foreign corporations in addition to large hourly fees for tribunals and legal costs. A good example of how this agreement neuters national sovereignty comes from Malaysia which was able to recover from the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis more quickly than its neighbors by introducing a series of capital control measures on the Malaysian ringgit to prevent external speculation – the TPP’s proposed measures would restrict signatory nations from exercising capital controls to prevent and mitigate financial crises and promote financial stability. The TPP regime ensures that foreign investors and multinational corporations retain full rights to undermine the sovereignty of participatory nations by skirting domestic regulations and limiting the abilities of national governments to issue independent economic policy. There has never been such a sweeping corporate assault on sovereignty and that includes US sovereignty. Leaked TPP documents detail how the Obama administration intends to surrender US sovereignty to international tribunals that operate under World Bank and UN rules to settle disputes arising under the TPP specifically designed to leave Congress out in the cold while creating a judicial authority higher than the US Supreme Court. In theory the TPP would give international judicial entities the authority to override US laws allowing foreign companies doing business in the United States the privilege of operating in a legal environment that would give them significant economic advantages over American companies that remain tied to US laws placing domestic companies who do not move offshore at a competitive disadvantage. Facing the emergence of strong developing economies like the BRICS group and other nations that seek greater access to industrial growth and development the Obama administration realizes that it must offer Pacific nations – who would otherwise have greater incentives in deepening economic ties with China – an attractive stake in the US economy. As the Pentagon repositions its military muscle to the Asia-Pacific region the TPP is clearly the economic arm of the ‘Asia Pivot’ policy roping strategic economies into a legally binding corporate-governance regime lured in by the promise of unfettered access to US markets. The Obama administration is essentially prostituting the American consumer to foreign corporations to usher in a deal that would impose one-size-fits all international rules that even limit the US government’s right to regulate foreign investment and the appropriation of natural resources solidifying a long-discussed model of finance capital-backed global governance. Of the 26 chapters of the proposed TPP draft text it is reported that only two chapters cover trade issues related to slashing tariffs and lifting quotas. The TPP would obligate the federal government to force US states to conform state laws to over a thousand pages of detailed stipulations and constraints unrelated to trade – from land use to intellectual property rights – authorizing the federal authorities to use all possible means to coax states to comply with TPP rules even by imposing sanctions if they fail to do so. According to leaked documents US standards for property rights protection would be swept away in favor of international property rights standards as interpreted by TPP’s unelected international tribunals giving investors principal control over public land and resources “that are not for the exclusive or predominant use and benefit of the government.” Due to the unconstitutional nature of the TPP members of Congress would likely object to many of its stipulations – naturally the Obama administration is employing its executive muscle to restrict congressional authority by operating under “fast-track authority ” a trade provision that requires Congress to review an FTA under limited debate in an accelerated time frame subject to a yes-or-no vote so as to assure foreign partners that the FTA once signed will not be changed during the legislative process. No formal steps have been taken to consult Congress as the agreement continues to be negotiated and Obama looks set to subtly ram the treaty into law. Such is the toxic nature of US policies that seek to bring in disaster-capitalism on a global scale while keeping those whose lives will be most affected by deal completely in the dark. The message behind this unfettered corporate smash and grab is simple – bend over! Recent statistics claim that the combined economic output of Brazil China and India will surpass that of Canada France Germany Italy the United Kingdom and the United States by 2020. More than 80% of the world’s middle class will live in the South by 2030 and what a different world that would be. The United States is economically ailing and the TPP – Wall Street’s wet dream and Washington’s answer to its own dwindling economic performance – is designed to allow US big business a greater stake in the emerging Pacific region by imposing an exploitative economic model on signatory nations that exempt multinationals and private investors from any form of public accountability. The TPP’s origins go back to the second Bush administration and it still remains in the negotiating phases under Obama’s second administration. The overwhelming lack of transparency surrounding the talks lends credence to what is known already – that the contents of this trade agreement serve the interests of those on the top of the economic food chain while the rest of us stagnate on the menu. </source> [/INST] <claim>The TPP is an example of US attempts to dominate others through trade and international organizations – it would undermine global governance and destroy human rights</claim> <psg>the Obama administration’s effort to bring the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement to the forefront an oppressive plurilateral US-led free trade agreement The level of secrecy surrounding the agreements is unparalleled media outlets impose a near-total blackout of reportage on the subject The majority of Congress is being kept in the dark as to the substance of the TPP negotiations The TPP would impose punishing regulations that give multinational corporations unprecedented rights to demand taxpayer compensation on. The TPP would undermine food safety by limiting labeling and forcing countries like the United States to import food the TPP would also impose investor protections that incentivize offshoring jobs through special benefits for companies it would rollback regulation of finance capital predators on Wall Street by prohibiting bans on risky financial services The US-led partnership – which seeks to impose ‘Shock and Awe’ Globalization – aims to abolish the accountability of multinational corporations The proposed legislation on Intellectual Property will have enormous ramifications for TPP signatories Signatory nations would essentially submit themselves to oppressive IP restrictions designed by Hollywood’s copyright cartels The US as a net exporter of digital information would be the only party to benefit from this e TPP is attempting to establish foreign corporations can sue national governments submitting signatory countries to the jurisdiction of investor arbitral tribunals staffed by private sector attorney TPP’s proposed measures would restrict signatory nations from exercising capital controls to prevent and mitigate financial crises and promote financial stability Leaked TPP documents detail how the Obama administration intends to surrender US sovereignty to international tribunals that operate under World Bank the TPP would give international judicial entities the authority to override US laws The TPP would obligate the federal government to force US states to conform state laws to over a thousand pages of detailed stipulations and constraints unrelated to trade US standards for property rights protection would be swept away in favor of international property rights standards the contents of this trade agreement serve the interests of those on the top of the economic food chain while the rest of us stagnate on the menu</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> President Barack Obama is traveling to Latin America seeking refuge from budget battles at home by promoting increased trade with countries across the region. During his trip to Chile Brazil and El Salvador he's expected to highlight the benefits of so-called 'free trade' to U.S. and Latin American businesses. While the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and many conservatives in Congress will cheer him on the truth is that free trade has been a curse for farmers and the poor throughout Latin America for years. It's time for a better approach. Avid free-traders will tell you trade between the U.S. and Mexico has grown nearly five-fold since NAFTA was enacted in 1994. They'll say two-way trade between the United States and Central America and the Dominican Republic was $37.9 billion in 2009 a significant expansion thanks to the CAFTA-DR free trade agreement. While free trade can dramatically increase exports--and boost corporate profits--its impact on the working class and poor isn't so rosy. Examining impact of NAFTA--the hallmark free-trade agreement among the United States Canada and Mexico--provides a glimpse at free trade's impact on Latin America's poor. Research has shown that the 1.3 million jobs created in Mexico during the peak period of the maquiladora industry between 1994 and 2001 only provided a small portion of the jobs needed to cover the millions of workers pushed off their farms or forced out of Mexico's devastated domestic industries. Researchers have found that only 10 percent of Mexicans have seen any rise in their incomes or standard of living thanks to NAFTA. In fact the vast majority are far worse off. Mexican corn farmers--the cornerstone of Mexico's agricultural economy before NAFTA--have been hit the hardest. Some estimates suggest millions of Mexican corn farmers were driven off their land unable to compete with highly mechanized U.S. corn imports. Left with no job options at home many have come here. Now Obama wants Congress to ratify a free-trade agreement with Colombia signed during the Bush administration. This deal won't just turn a blind eye towards egregious labor rights violations in Colombia where more union leaders were assassinated in 2010 than the rest of the world combined. Most likely it will push more farmers into producing coca the raw material for cocaine. A free-trade agreement with Colombia would devastate that country's small farmers--just as NAFTA did in Mexico. The escape valve for Mexican farmers has been emigration to the United States with an estimated 30 crossing the border every hour. The escape valve for Colombian farmers will be farming coca. </source> [/INST] <claim>Free trade as a system causes human rights violations and should be rejected – US free trade policies in Latin America have empirically been bad</claim> <psg>President Barack Obama is traveling to Latin America seeking refuge from budget battles at home by promoting increased trade with countries he's expected to highlight the benefits of so-called 'free trade' to U.S. and Latin American businesses the truth is that free trade has been a curse for farmers and the poor throughout Latin America for years Avid free-traders will tell you trade between the U.S. and Mexico has grown nearly five-fold While free trade can dramatically increase exports--and boost corporate profits--its impact on the working class and poor isn't so rosy Researchers have found that only 10 percent of Mexicans have seen any rise in their incomes or standard of living thanks to NAFTA the vast majority are far worse off Mexican corn farmers--the cornerstone of Mexico's agricultural economy before NAFTA--have been hit the hardest Obama wants Congress to ratify a free-trade agreement with Colombia signed during the Bush administration The escape valve for Mexican farmers has been emigration to the United States with an estimated 30 crossing the border every hour. The escape valve for Colombian farmers will be farming coca.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Venezuela’s Bolivarian revolution is seen by proponents and critics as a paradigmatic example of the leftward shift in contemporary Latin American politics. The centrality of Venezuela to the hemispheric political realignments of the twenty-first century has some justification. President Hugo Chávez was the first of the ‘leftist’ presidents to assume executive authority his election triggering – depending on one’s ideological leanings – fears of a domino effect and regional leftist contagion or evidence that a leftist political alternative was possible in Latin America a region historically dominated by right-of-centre political forces and neoliberal-inspired economic policies. A decade of Chavismo (the term tends to be used interchangeably with Bolivarianism) has produced a truly transformative project in Venezuela one whose sustainability and capacity for institutionalization are questionable but which has without doubt seen a significant redistribution of economic and political power from an elite minority to the politically excluded and economically marginalized majority. Outside of domestic politics the Bolivarian revolution has redefined the regional political narrative introducing a new language of citizenship rights participation cultural pride and sovereignty. The historical subservience of the South to its neighbour in the North has been fundamentally challenged by the Bolivarian revolution and new regional institutions that reflect a truly ‘Southern’ and anti-neoliberal agenda have been inspired and initiated by Venezuela. In 2005 as the contours and popular potential of Bolivarianism became clear a new end goal was defined by Chávez at the World Social Forum. The Bolivarian revolution was striving to create a model of Twenty-first-century Socialism a quest that the Venezuelan electorate mandated in re-electing Chávez to the presidency in December 2006. The Bolivarian revolution should be understood more as a case of socialism by default than design – with the exact meaning of the term socialism ill-defined and contested. It is a revolution that has been in a constant process of change. There are three separate stages in the evolution of Bolivarianism: its moderate social democratic beginnings. its more radical left-of-centre proposition. and the final third stage – of creating a model of Twenty-first-century Socialism. This chapter explores the drivers of this change and argues that it has been influenced by factors external to the project itself – specifically the hostile reaction of domestic opponents and the USA the oil price rise and the leftward shift in Latin America. These exogenous factors led to ad hoc initiatives that have become central to the model of Twenty-first-century Socialism and its identification as a leftist project. A second interrelated argument is that the Bolivarian revolution is a specifically Venezuelan phenomenon. Owing to the country specificity of the variables that underpin Bolivarianism (identified as the influence of the pre-Chávez political legacy and the dominance of the oil economy) the revolution cannot be replicated or transposed to other country contexts. Moreover the extent to which Chavismo Bolivarianism or Twenty- first-century Socialism should be understood as ‘of the left’ is open to question. Chávez is eclectic in ideology and organizational strategy. The revolution is strongly nationalistic and informed by opposition to the pre-Chávez Punto Fijo system that dominated Venezuelan politics for forty years. As such Bolivarianism should rightly be understood as an anti-puntofijista project that evolved a socialist identity rather than as a socialist project per se. This calls into question the homogenizing sweep of the ‘rise of the left’ thesis the juxtaposition of a ‘good’ and ‘bad’ left that has been used to frame understanding of developments in the region (Castañeda 2006) and the utility of containment strategies specifically those pursued by the Bush administration in the USA which are intended to delimit the potency and potentiality of the Bolivarian agenda. </source> [/INST] <claim>The Bolivarian shift in Venezuela is an example of how we can move away from neoliberalism </claim> <psg>Venezuela’s Bolivarian revolution is seen by proponents and critics as a paradigmatic example of the leftward shift The centrality of Venezuela has some justification A decade of Chavismo has produced a truly transformative project in Venezuela which has without doubt seen a significant redistribution of economic and political power from an elite minority The Bolivarian revolution was striving to create a model of Twenty-first-century Socialism There are three separate stages in the evolution of Bolivarianism the Bolivarian revolution is a specifically Venezuelan phenomenon The revolution is strongly nationalistic and informed by opposition to the pre-Chávez Punto Fijo system that dominated Venezuelan politics for forty years Bolivarianism should rightly be understood as an anti-puntofijista project that evolved a socialist identity rather than as a socialist project per This calls into question the utility of containment strategies specifically those pursued by the Bush administration in the USA which are intended to delimit the potency and potentiality of the Bolivarian agenda</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> This chapter has sought to contribute to the debate on the nature of Chavismo. It has done this by focusing on those poor communities which are providing the momentum for Venezuela’s present political evolution. Concentrating upon popular politics does not imply ignoring ongoing struggles within the state between competing political factions within Chavismo or the relationship between the Venezuelan state and the international economy or the tensions with the political opposition (national and international). Rather it is a lens through which we can construct a nuanced and complex picture of the political dynamics and fault lines of Chavismo and in this way develop analysis in solidarity with ordinary Venezuelans’ struggles for human dignity and social justice. In this context solidarity is understood in terms of mutuality accountability and the recognition of common interests as the basis for relationships between diverse communities. Rather than assuming an enforced commonality of oppression the practice of solidarity foregrounds communities of people who have chosen to work and fight together. Solidarity is thus always an achievement and involves an active struggle to construct the universal on the basis of differences (Mohanty 2003: 7). Analysis of Misión Barrio Adentro demonstrated the importance of ensuring community health provision as a right rather than a political gift thus challenging traditional clientelistic relationships between the local state and community. The institutionalization of this process has however demobilized a community that in the past undertook collective struggle for healthcare and has also co-opted key leaders and organizers as the providers of basic services. Thus the granting of rights in this localized participatory manner has undercut the political autonomy of the community resulting in its fragmentation. This in turn undermines the socio-political conditions necessary for the development of a more consolidated participatory social democratic project. Study of Misión Ribas demonstrates that the constitutional underpinning of a misión is not the same as its implementation on the ground. La Independencia has experienced the development of an educational practice that is linked to the resolution of local community problems rather than one that adopts a marketized and individualized neoliberal curriculum. Use of traditional methods of teaching ensures the passivity of the student in relation to the teacher however and creates fragmented and potentially localized political and social understanding. This could restrict poor communities to improving their own conditions but not challenging macro-structures of power and inequality. In contrast where the banking method of teaching has been abandoned and a model of popular education introduced a new knowledge has begun to emerge one able to challenge both micro- and macro-structures of power. This is part of the process of creating self-governing communities. Social transformation becomes linked to the production of emancipatory knowledge constructed through the communities’ own practice and based in their own historical experience. The educational mission reflects the struggle between a participatory social democracy and a project that potentially transcends the structures of liberal democracy and the market economy. In the case of the Consejos Comunales the reproduction of traditional political relations is accompanied by an institutional structure that is framed within a municipalized social democracy. This is contested by certain ‘politicized’ communities whose praxis develops forms of selfgovernment beyond the limits of this institutional structure. They therefore challenge both the liberal state and the market economy. There are potential drawbacks in localized governance: competition between communities could be created as well as fragmentation in the resolution of community problems. This could result in an institutionalization of the poor’s political agency at the expense of their autonomy and mobilizing capacity thereby accentuating the potential trade-offs in classic social democracy as opposed to ensuring their resolution. These problems may be overcome at the national level however with initiatives to implement inter-local projects. Again it is community political agency and creativity which will shape the direction that the political struggle takes and the type of state that is produced as a result of this institutional experiment. An analysis of Misión Barrio Adentro Misión Ribas and the Consejos Comunales illustrates first the simplicity and arrogance that characterize those that seek to disqualify Chavismo as a form of illiberal populism. The experiences of the communities involved in these projects demonstrate that popular politics are criss-crossed by a political rationality and creativity that is masked by dominant elitist conceptualizations of the ideal of political evolution – liberal democracy – against which Venezuela is implicitly compared in such characterizations. It is clear that while there are tendencies that reproduce traditional illiberal relationships between state and society and within popular political culture there are other tendencies that mirror a municipalized and participatory social democracy and the nascent development of paths to anti-capitalism. Thus there is a clear shift away from rule over subjects to rule by citizens defined and practised in ways compatible with but also contesting of political liberalism and the market economy. Tensions between institutionalization and mobilization and between representation and autonomy which are characteristic of classic social democracy are at times accentuated by the localized nature of social and political policy and at other times creatively overcome by a focus upon popular rationality and practice as the basis of new democratic cultures and institutions. The forms of democracy and development that are being created by Venezuela’s popular classes demonstrate the counter-hegemonic practices that are the progressive kernel of Chavismo. This reinvention of utopias challenges the discourse of the ‘two lefts’ which seeks to disqualify debilitate and silence political projects that rupture the ‘end of history’ dystopia of political and intellectual elites. </source> [/INST] <claim>Trying to move Venezuela away from Chavismo is bad - </claim> <psg>the nature of Chavismo Concentrating upon popular politics does not imply ignoring ongoing struggles within the state between competing political factions within Chavismo it is a lens through which we can construct a nuanced and complex picture of the political dynamics and fault lines of Chavismo in this way develop analysis in solidarity with ordinary Venezuelans’ struggles for human dignity and social justice the practice of solidarity foregrounds communities of people who have chosen to work and fight together This in turn undermines the socio-political conditions necessary for the development of a more consolidated participatory social democratic project Social transformation becomes linked to the production of emancipatory knowledge constructed through the communities’ own practice and based in their own historical experience . This could result in an institutionalization of the poor’s political agency at the expense of their autonomy and mobilizing capacit Comunales illustrates first the simplicity and arrogance that characterize those that seek to disqualify Chavismo as a form of illiberal populism there are tendencies that mirror a municipalized and participatory social democracy and the nascent development of paths to anti-capitalism Tensions between institutionalization and mobilization are characteristic of classic social democracy are at times accentuated by the localized nature of social and political policy This reinvention of utopias challenges the discourse of the ‘two lefts’ which seeks to disqualify debilitate and silence political projects</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Neoliberalism is the deregulation and expansion of the market economy it includes eliminating barriers to trade such as tariffs and government subsidies of national industry and implementing national policies that favour the needs of business and investment (Brown 1). Tax rates for businesses are decreased in order to compete with other nations for foreign investment and to prevent losing foreign investment to a competing nation. This in turn causes a loss in state revenue which means a loss in the amount of funding available for social welfare programs (Rudra 414). Labour regulations are weakened financial trading is deregulated and the prices of agricultural products are no longer controlled by the state. The state is viewed as an inefficient producer and state controlled industries and social programs are sold to private businesses. The state reduces its spending by cutting funding for social programs including health and education laying off public employees or reducing their wages. These reforms are intended to minimize the role of the state in the economy promote efficiency and maximize productive outputs (Sadasivam 635). Hojman argues that neoliberalism became dominant in Latin America especially in the 1990s because of the debt crisis the availability of highly educated technocrats a new middle class of entrepreneurs the failure of import substitution industrialization (ISI) and public support. Most Latin American countries adopted the reforms in the 1980s and 1990s following the debt crisis except for Chile which began its neoliberal project in the mid 1970s (191). I believe that the debt crisis coupled with the terms of renegotiating external debts are the primary reason for neoliberal reforms. According to Portes the debt crisis was caused by the increase in oil prices in the early 1970s. Because of this increase in oil prices during Latin America’s attempt to industrialize most countries in the region were forced to borrow money to continue their development path. This allowed growth to continue (9). Latin America was borrowing money to pay for oil from the OPEC nations who in turn put their funds into multinational banks. The banks had to pay interest on these deposits and they encouraged Latin American countries to borrow this money. This borrowed money was in turn used by Latin American countries to purchase oil and other imports from the ‘industrialized’ countries (Dietz 21). In other words the banks had to provide a secure way of gaining interest payments and therefore had to find borrowers for the large sums of money they were receiving from oil-rich countries. Ugarteche writes that many of the nations borrowing the money from the international institutions were undemocratic and did not mind allowing their nation’s economies to fall deeper in debt. Latin America’s foreign debt doubled in a matter of twenty years from 1980 to 1990 (21). A large amount of this debt increase was due to interest rate increases over the period. The risks of interest increases fell solely on the borrower nations (23). As the interest rates climbed exports from Latin America fell in price which caused many nations to threaten to default on their loans (21). Defaulting on foreign loans is not good for the lenders or the borrowers. Therefore most banks and nations agreed renegotiation was better than declaring bankruptcy. Before a nation was permitted to enter renegotiation talks however the international lending institutions namely the World Bank (WB) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) required the imposition of structural adjustment policies on the indebted nations. These requirements followed neoliberal ideology and included the changes to government economic and social policies discussed above (Ugarteche 23). These policies were forced on countries to ensure repayment to the institutions. The banks disregarded the effects these reforms would have on citizens since caring about people’s lives would not be helpful to their goal of collecting money with interest. The consequences of neoliberalist policies are far reaching for any nation but particularly hurtful for the majority of Latin American residents. Income inequality has increased in most nations that have implemented the reforms (Bray 68). Job losses and subsequent higher unemployment rates resulted due to the sale of state run enterprises and the scaling back of the public service (Kurtz 269). Because of the removal of subsidies on necessary items such as fuel food and social services their prices have increased (Crisp & Kelly 542). When Fujimori the former president of Peru came to power in 1990 he immediately undertook neoliberal reforms. Immediately following there was an increase in the price of gasoline by 3000% telephone and water prices increased by 1300% and electricity prices increased by 5300% (Hays-Mitchell 72). Another aspect of neoliberal restructuring policies is the encouragement and creation of export processing zones (EPZs). Export processing zones are parcels of territory where special laws exist regarding production. These zones are meant to attract foreign investments. The incentives offered to corporations include the ability to import without tax minimal corporate income tax freedom from labour unions lessened regulations on the environment and labour and state subsidized infrastructure (Teeple 89). Transnational corporations have the ability to invest in whichever country they please and EPZs offer an extreme advantage in that the production costs to corporations are minimal in these zones. Wages are low infrastructure costs are born by the state and employee protections are nil (Teeple 90-91). Hojman argues that in Mexico EPZs helped to create a new middle class of transnational executives public servants politicians professionals tradespeople and media personnel (202). He does not specify if these people are those who have improved their standard of living due to employment opportunities within EPZs. I assume he is referring to people attracted to the export-processing zones in order to profit from the increased production activities. It is unclear why he makes this argument because chances are these upper-class people have always been upper-class and the fact that they have moved to an EPZ does not mean anything for the regular worker in these zones. Contrary to Hojman Sadasivam has shown that EPZs profit from women’s cheap labour and offer jobs which are repetitive in nature and dead-end. These women are targeted for these jobs because of their ‘vulnerability docility and dispensability’ and the jobs do not include any security or safety requirements from the employer. She uses the example of EPZs in the Dominican Republic where the women must endure “strict discipline sexual harassment low pay occupational health hazards excessive and forced overtime and arbitrary suspension and dismissal for protesting or organizing” (642-643). The rationale of neoliberalism causes states to be judged solely on their ability to secure economic growth. This ensures the legitimacy of the government (Brown 4). Therefore the government gives up control to the market and if economic growth ensues the state itself is legitimized. Neoliberal ideology does not consider the well being of people and linking legitimacy to economic growth indicators alone greatly reduces the perceived responsibility of the government (and the political process itself) to care for and protect its citizens. Brown claims that the adoption of neoliberal policies does not mean that the state has control over the market but rather the state cedes this control to the market which directs the actions of government and society (4). Nations compete with one another for large corporate investments. They offer incentives such as lower taxes and free infrastructure. This money is taken from the budget of the country and placed into the hands of corporate investors instead of going to programs which would improve social welfare. This indicates a degree of control over budgetary process which is taken from the hands of a democratic populous and placed into the hands of transnational corporations (Weyland 144). The people in Latin America view large corporations as equally powerful as their own governments which they elected. When the elected officials create policy which is not beneficial to the majority of the people democracy is lessened (Weyland 145). Or non-existent. A guise which legitimates dominant international power structures. Democracy cannot live up to its definition when people have lost control of the distribution of their resources to international financial institutions and large corporations. In effect the democratic state hands power to undemocratic actors. The IMF which controls the public policy of many Latin American countries is a good example. Cypher notes that international lending institutions such as the IMF are made of representatives from various states. They are not all equal however as nations who contribute more funding to the banks receive more votes and in the case of the US the option to veto (71). Through an undemocratic voting process in international financial institutions such as the IMF the US can ensure its corporate interests are heeded in countries where US companies are extracting profits. According to Kurtz business interests are at the forefront of state policy under neoliberalism. Because the decisions and actions of business affect the growth prospects of nations governments must consider their interests when making policy decisions which leaves other groups with a weaker voice (268). Corporate interest groups are the only internal groups with access to state decision-making where neoliberalism prevails. External groups such as multinational lending institutions and transnational corporations also enjoy access to state policy formation (Grugel 4). Grugel uses the example of large agribusinesses which now produce almost 25% of agricultural outputs in Central America (4). In order for transnational capital to manipulate internal state conditions for its own benefit it needs exclusive access to the decision-making process of governments. Oneal says that historically democratic regimes in Latin America have received less investment from the US than authoritarian regimes and those investments in countries with an authoritarian government have been more profitable (582). Now that most Latin American countries are formal democracies one could argue that these democracies are not in fact real but are in place solely to legitimize the authoritarianism of the international capitalist system. This new form of concealed authoritarianism successfully prevents democratic opposition by transferring real decision-making out of the hands of elected governments and covertly controls their actions. Neoliberal reforms have happened and are happening at the same time countries in Latin America are adopting democracy. Neoliberal reforms are directly linked with increased inequality poverty and lack of access to social support via programs sponsored by the state. In the period of ISI interest groups would have most likely formed to counter the choices of the state if policies resulted in such outcomes (Kurtz 264). Under ISI the state could regulate and somewhat control the marketplace. In this way citizens could hold the state responsible for their quality of life. This also meant that the state had an incentive to provide for its citizens (Kurtz 269). Statism can promote oppositional expression (Kurtz 270). When the state controls distributional outcomes people and interest groups can articulate their dissatisfactions to a unified responsible body unlike mobile capital. Munck points out that privatizing and deregulating the market left the state with less control over the lives of its people (92). Therefore the state has been removed from the focus of protest groups because it is no longer a controlling factor in their lives. When there are more neoliberal economic reforms implemented within a state it appears that there are less accounts of political mobilization. Political activities against a government tend to happen more frequently under authoritarian regimes where it is more difficult to enact protest activities rather than happening more frequently in a democratic setting where it is easier to demonstrate opposition. Under authoritarianism the people have an obvious target to express their dissatisfaction whereas under a more liberalized economic regime individuals have conflicting interests and complaints against various targets (Kurtz 294). It is not democracy which prevents opposition but liberalization. Many Latin American states were democratic and statist and their citizenry were more mobilized and politically active. Although neoliberalism has weakened democracy in Latin America it also seems to have secured it in most countries at least in terms of procedure. One of the reasons why democracy could have survived the reform process is because the reforms were enacted during a time of crisis and the population was willing to take drastic measures in hopes of higher economic stability (Weyland 136). A secure system of democratic formal procedure does not mean democracy in fact exists whether or not the reforms happened during a crises situation. Liberal democracy is undermined by neoliberalism in that social policy must prove profitable competition must not be hindered and individuals must be seen as rational actors. The independence from the market of many institutions within liberal democracy such as ‘law elections the police and the public sphere ’ is necessary for the preservation of a healthy tension between democracy and capitalism. Expanding the market into these previously independent realms greatly impedes democracy from performing its primary role of checks and balances (Brown 6). Neoliberal adjustment policies which a state must undertake to renegotiate loans does not only mean that a state must reconfigure its marketplace control wages and lower funding to social services. The state effectively loses control over its own policy making decisions to the multilateral lending institutions (Cypher 70). Reforms transfer policy decisions out of the hands of the government and into the hands of the international economic system therefore the social sphere of economic policy within a country becomes apolitical and political decisions that are made do not have a direct impact on the citizenry (Kurtz 273). Neoliberal reforms remove issues from the sphere of political action and therefore cause the decline in interest groups (Kurtz 279). When citizens make electoral choices they really do not have the opportunity to effect real change since economic and social policymaking has been relegated from their government and into the hands of international capital and lending institutions. This can be seen in Latin America where social and political organizations have declined as have the amount of people showing up to vote (Weyland 144). The individualization effect of neoliberalism promotes competition and prevents group cohesion. There is no focus point for protesting if the real power structures exist outside of the nation state. This decline in political organizations has also meant that politicians are less accountable. These organizations help people make decisions by promoting awareness of issues and forcing political accountability. They also help to advise politicians what the will of the people actually is (Kurtz 267). Since the privatization of pensions in Chile which happened in the early 1980s strike activity has dramatically decreased. This indicates a lower level of political organizing. Before the pension plan was privatized it often provoked political participation. With privatization of the program individuals make their own decisions between various private funds (Kurtz 276). Under more democratic regimes in Bolivia Ecuador Mexico and Peru protesting against the state became easier and more acceptable however under the new regime of neoliberalism in each of these nations political protests were reduced to less than 20% of what they were under previous authoritarian regimes (Kurtz 289). Another example is unions. In Latin America there are many people who are without work and the focus for unions has been changed to obtaining and keeping employment rather than fighting for social benefits (Rudra 420). Workers are forced to preoccupy themselves with secure employment rather than improving the conditions of employment. The political activism of the peasantry is also negatively impacted by neoliberal reforms. Kurtz argues that the reform of previously communal lands into individual land titles creates division within the community and breaks down the stability of their historical social and cultural way of life. Disputes often erupt because some villagers may decide to sell their land which causes fragmentation land usage also causes conflicts between villagers. This in turn hampers the political actions of the peasantry as they would traditionally act collectively but now must concern themselves primarily with their own perceived self-interest (273). In Mexico lands which were held collectively in a legal sense since the 1930s went under neoliberal land reform in 1992 after a change in the constitution. The land had to be divided among individuals and this caused conflicts between the residents. All the control over dividing up the land and monitoring disputes was held by the political elites. This made the peasants more vulnerable and discouraged them from collectively organizing or speaking out against market reforms. The only state within Mexico where peasants openly resisted market reforms was in Chiapas where land liberalization was least widespread (Kurtz 278). Like Mexico in Chile there existed many land cooperatives where land was legally held collectively since the early 1970s when it was legally protected by a democratically elected government. From 1975 to 1979 land counter-reform was implemented by the military dictatorship while it was extensively liberalizing the state and the market. The government privatized most of the land co-ops and half the residents were left landless and some even homeless. The land was sold to private families and agribusiness. Because of these reforms many peasants were prevented from acting collectively to protect their communal lands and ways of life (Kurtz 277). The cost of this type of liberalization and individualization is incalculable. One cannot put a figure on the permanent loss of unique cultural livelihoods or on the loss of the independence of traditional cultures from market or consumer culture. Trainer illustrates this point by noting that in Haiti where many people do not have enough to eat land is “efficiently” used in a productive manner to grow flowers for export (9). While many people may not have access to land in order to adequately sustain themselves large export businesses reap profits and contribute to the country’s overall GDP while simultaneously impoverishing its citizenry. Inherent property rights are to blame for this ironic situation I think he could have taken his point further by examining the issue of property rights especially how they are promoted and protected for corporations in a liberal market-oriented state and how this kind of injustice is not viewed as unethical giving their inherent value within neoliberal ideology. Liberal democracy is being hijacked by neoliberalism in Latin America. This new neoliberal order is a form of authoritarianism to which it is increasingly difficult to mount opposition. The interference of international lending institutions in a sovereign nation’s budgetary policy-making nullifies an essential process inherent in healthy liberal democracies. Innocent workers peasants women men and children all pay for the actions of international lending institutions who often loaned money to undemocratic regimes. The re-configuration of Latin American society in order to repay already rich nations is a global injustice. Human rights to sustenance culture political process labour standards and self-determination must come before the property rights of greedy corporations. </source> [/INST] <claim>Neoliberal reform in Latin America is exploitive and retrenches authoritarianism</claim> <psg>Tax rates for businesses are decreased This in turn causes a loss in state revenue which means a loss in the amount of funding available for social welfare programs The state is viewed as an inefficient producer state reduces its spending by cutting funding for social programs neoliberalism became dominant in Latin America . Most Latin American countries adopted the reforms in the 1980s and 1990s Latin America was borrowing money to pay for oil from the OPEC nations who in turn put their funds into multinational banks This borrowed money was in turn used by Latin American countries to purchase oil many of the nations borrowing the money from the international institutions were undemocratic and did not mind allowing their nation’s economies to fall deeper in debt ). Job losses and subsequent higher unemployment rates resulted due to the sale of state run enterprises and the scaling back of the public service Another aspect of neoliberal restructuring policies is the encouragement and creation of export processing zones Sadasivam has shown that EPZs profit from women’s cheap labour and offer jobs which are repetitive in nature and dead-end These women are targeted for these jobs because of their ‘vulnerability docility and dispensability’ and the jobs do not include any security or safety requirements from the employer The rationale of neoliberalism causes states to be judged solely on their ability to secure economic growth the government gives up control to the market Neoliberal ideology does not consider the well being of people and linking legitimacy to economic growth neoliberal economic reforms implemented within a state it appears that there are less accounts of political mobilization Political activities against a government tend to happen more frequently under authoritarian regimes where it is more difficult to enact protest activities rather than happening more frequently in a democratic setting where it is easier to demonstrate opposition Liberal democracy is undermined by neoliberalism in that social policy must prove profitable competition must not be hindered and individuals must be seen as rational actors in Chile half the residents were left landless and some even homeless property rights are promoted this kind of injustice is not viewed as unethical giving their inherent value within neoliberal ideology Liberal democracy is being hijacked by neoliberalism is a form of authoritarianism to which it is increasingly difficult to mount opposition Innocent workers peasants women men and children all pay for the actions of international lending institutions . Human rights to sustenance culture political process labour standards and self-determination must come before the property rights of greedy corporations</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> There have been various allusions in this book to supranational relations between Latin American states and between them both individually and collectively and the United States. The latter’s promotion of neoliberalism and free trade agreements has been challenged by ALBA the network of countries and organizations which aims to replace conditionality and unilateralism with reciprocity and collaboration. Reference has been made in the introductory chapter and elsewhere in this volume to the range of state-level economic and social programmes already under way under the banner of ALBA. This level of agreements is only one dimension of what in ALBA is a very flexible conception of development and collaboration. ALBA also hopes to incorporate into regional development strategy dimensions built ‘from the bottom up by the transnational interplay between state and society actors’ (Muhr 2008: 148). Thomas Muhr’s research in Nicaragua before the election victory of Ortega demonstrates how ALBA can encourage linkages within and between countries involving town councils social movements squatters’ organizations peasant leagues and many others. This may sound utopian but it offers a way to open new political avenues and new forms and types of political engagement as well as offering support to the left in states where activists are still building a presence at sub-national level a trajectory apparent in states where the left has won office as several chapters here have illustrated. Imagine for example an alliance between ALBA and the current mayor of Mexico City Marcelo Ebrard of the PRD (Partido de la Revolución Democrática Party of the Democratic Revolution). Ebrard whose PRD mayoral predecessor López Obrador narrowly lost the controversial 2006 presidential election launched a ‘backyard’ urban agriculture programme in 2007 with the aim of creating food security for the capital’s population. People are offered technical support to form a cooperative and grow their own crops by utilizing available space. Modelled on Cuba’s sustainable organic model the programme enables the PRD to mount a practical challenge to the neoliberal Mexican state’s inability to protect its people almost half of whose 106 million population live below the poverty line of $5 a day (Thomson 2008). Networking such schemes across the region Lievesley and Ludlam|13 218 with ALBA facilitating the sharing of knowledge collaboration across borders and access to ALBA banking services could thus contribute to a realistic alternative development paradigm and also to political change where conservative national governments continue in power. Some would argue that the ALBA states have been able to ‘get away’ with an increasing assertiveness with the formation of what has been termed the building of the new regionalism or continentalism because the USA’s attention has been focused upon others areas of the world. A 2008 Council on Foreign Affairs report stated: ‘The era of the United States as the dominant influence in Latin America is over … [the Monroe Doctrine] is obsolete’ (Grandin 2008: 5). This could not be farther from the truth. US policy towards Latin and Central America during the presidency of George W. Bush was as interventionist and imperial as ever: in his administration’s elaborate transition programme for a post-socialist post-Castro Cuba. in the encouragement of the activities of the political opposition to Chávez and Morales in Venezuela and Bolivia. in the pursuit of bilateral trade agreements with the aim of breaking the unity of Mercosur and ALBA. in its complicity with the repression unleashed by the Colombian government and its paramilitary allies upon the Colombian people in the name of drug eradication and counter-insurgency. Washington justifies its activities as promoting democracy and castigates radicals such as Chávez for destabilizing the region. For General James Hill former commander of US Southern Command addressing Congress in March 2004 the major security threat was ‘radical populism’. he maintained that ‘some leaders … are tapping into deep-seated frustrations … to reinforce their radical positions by inflaming anti-US sentiment’ (Barry 2005: 12). This is similar in sentiment to the conclusions of the report of the US-funded Foundation for Analysis and Social Studies which is chaired by the right-wing former Spanish prime minister José María Aznar. Published in March 2007 the document identified as ‘enemies of the West’ the ‘altermundialistas [“another-world-is-possibilists”] indigenous movements and populists’ and stated that its aim was to ‘dramatically defeat the project of “twenty- first-century socialism”’ (Zibechi 2008: 13). Optimists speculated during the US presidential primary contest in 2008 that the era of neoconservatism might be coming to an end. Bush’s foreign policy was predicated upon the necessity for the USA to achieve global hegemonic power. The neoconservatives argued that global domination was the best form of world government in that it allowed the USA to ensure there was stability and security thus making the world safe for democracy. The disastrous results of their Project for the New American Century can be seen around the world. If the Republicans Conclusion 219 won in November 2008 commentators believed that John McCain would introduce a more pragmatic and less combative approach but the real fascination was what would happen if Barack Obama found himself in the White House. At the start of the primary campaign Obama provoked the ire of right-wing commentators by suggesting he might talk to pariah countries such as Cuba and Iran. by the end of it he was promising the Cuban American National Foundation (the spiritual home of the enemies of socialist Cuba) that he would maintain the embargo almost accused Bush of ‘losing Latin America’ and attacked Iran for its ‘influence’ over Venezuela. With respect to Colombia he supported the Bush administration’s policy and committed himself to supporting ‘Colombia’s right to strike terrorists who seek safe-havens across its borders’ a stance that put him totally out of step with most of Latin America which condemned the Colombian army’s incursion into Ecuador. Finally he endorsed the Merida anti-drugs initiative which was denounced by Amnesty International as applying the ‘Colombia solution’ to Mexico and Central America. An Obama government would provide vast financing to combat drugs and gangs (and we might infer from Colombian experience proponents of social justice) and indeed would seek to ‘press further south as well’ (Grandin 2008: 8). Democratic presidents are known for their pursuit of illiberal foreign policies whether it be Kennedy’s Alliance for Progress which for all the ‘development speak’ was really an all-out effort to prevent structural change and also empowered the military to unleash massive repression in the dark years of dictatorship. or the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba in April 1961. or Jimmy Carter’s refusal to even acknowledge Archbishop Oscar Romero’s plea for the USA to stop selling arms to the Salvadorean military in 1979. So Obama’s window on the world is not an original one and may perpetuate the historical antagonism between the USA and much of Latin America. On the other hand an Obama presidency might break with tradition and attempt to institute a new relationship with Latin America one based on partnership and multilateralism (an aim announced by Bill Clinton at the start of his administration but one which he failed to fulfil). It would be likely that a Democratic president would try to separate centre-left governments such as those of Brazil and Argentina from the more radical bloc around Venezuela. Latin America has developed strong links with other Global South states and is increasingly vocal in international institutions and these initiatives may help to balance although never neutralize the threat of US intervention. Brazil lobbies for more equitable trading arrangements at the World Trade Organization and together with India and South Africa coordinates lobbying on behalf of the world’s poorest nations. It also has strong links with many African countries while Venezuela has extensive trading cultural and diplomatic relations with countries as diverse as China India and Iran. The strengthening of South-to-South networks is imperative if the dominant global structures of power – represented by the USA and institutions such as the IMF and the WTO – are to be challenged. If Latin America is asserting itself it is doing so in the full knowledge that although its attention may sometimes wander Washington is always watching. In this context Rafael Correa’s announcement that he would not renew the soon-to-expire US lease on the Manta airfield in Ecuador the most important airbase in Latin America and Chávez’s call for the creation of a Latin American army and navy are courageous but also realistic. Washington’s reactivation of the US Navy’s South America 4th Fleet created in 1943 for anti-Nazi operations and disbanded in 1950 was widely interpreted as implying a military threat to Venezuela and other ALBA states and prompted adverse reactions by key Mercosur governments including Brazil and Argentina (Chirinos 2008). Regular US armed intervention in Latin America states is not that far in the past (Pearce 1982). US militarization of Colombia and similar ‘national security’ plans for Mexico and Central America demonstrates the possibility of more ‘full spectrum domination’ in the continent. </source> [/INST] <claim>Imperialism is alive and well - Latin American nations have failed to break away from the evil grip of American dominance</claim> <psg>the United States latter’s promotion of neoliberalism and free trade agreements has been challenged by ALBA ALBA also hopes to incorporate into regional development strategy dimensions built ‘from the bottom up . This may sound utopian but it offers a way to open new political avenues Some would argue that the ALBA states have been able to ‘get away’ with an increasing assertiveness because the USA’s attention has been focused upon others areas of the world. A 2008 Council on Foreign Affairs report stated: ‘The era of the United States as the dominant influence in Latin America is over This could not be farther from the truth US policy towards Latin and Central America during the presidency of George W. Bush was as interventionist and imperial as ever in its complicity with the repression unleashed by the Colombian government Washington justifies its activities as promoting democracy and castigates radicals such as Chávez Bush’s foreign policy was predicated upon the necessity for the USA to achieve global hegemonic power The neoconservatives argued that global domination was the best form of world government in that it allowed the USA to ensure there was stability and security thus making the world safe for democracy Latin America has developed strong links with other Global South states and is increasingly vocal in international institutions The strengthening of South-to-South networks is imperative if the dominant global structures of power are to be challenged Regular US armed intervention in Latin America states is not that far in the past US militarization of Colombia and similar ‘national security’ plans for Mexico and Central America demonstrates the possibility of more ‘full spectrum domination’ in the continent.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> For the last 20 years neoliberalism has been dominant globally. Across the world governments of the Right and many nominally of the Left have privatized and deregulated—opening up the state to private sector capital removing regulatory restrictions on firms and increasingly relying on markets for the delivery of social services. Not only has neoliberalism become the orthodoxy of political and economic elites but until recently it was widely held that 'there is no alternative' to this pervasive agenda. In the space of a year the unthinkable occurred. What began as a collapse in one segment of the U.S. housing market has spilled over into a crisis of the global financial system. In response the governments of two of the world's most powerful capitalist nations the U.S. and Britain have nationalized major financial institutions reversing the privatization trend of the last two decades. French President Nicholas Sarkozy proclaimed 'Laissez-faire is finished.' Dominique Strauss-Kahn head of the International Monetary Fund (IMF)—which requires developing nations to impose neoliberal structural adjustment programs on their citizens in order to qualify for loans—laid blame for the crisis on 'not enough regulations or controls.' In light of such events it is tempting to conclude that the neoliberal policy agenda is dead. Some such as British economist Will Hutton argue that the policy responses to the financial crisis marks a return to Keynesian style 'managed capitalism.' His argument reflects the tenor of many leftist interpretations of the current crisis and the policy responses to it: that the crisis demonstrates the failure of neoliberal capitalism and state bailouts of financial markets signal its death. Another extreme perspective is offered by the conservative magazine the Economist which laments that 'economic liberty is under attack and capitalism the system which embodies it is at bay.' Such diagnoses might be welcomed by many on the Left as heralding a new era in which the economy is directed to progressive ends after two decades of neoliberalism feeding corporate profits at the expense of much of humanity. Such diagnoses however rely on a misunderstanding of the nature of neoliberalism and indeed of capitalism. They confuse state regulation of finance with a retreat from capitalism or at least from its latest neoliberal manifestation. Neoliberalism is about more than deregulation and privatization. It is also about the distribution of political and economic power. Moreover the state has been central to the neoliberal project as it has been to the development of capital accumulation. Indeed to identify the implications of the current crisis for neoliberalism it is necessary to distinguish between neoliberal theory and practice and then reflect on how the balance of political forces might shape future policy outcomes. Neoliberalism: Theory and Practice Neoliberal theory draws on the writings of economists such as Milton Friedman and Friedrich von Hayek who advocated a radical winding back of the size and scope of government. According to Friedman and Hayek markets are self-regulating mechanisms which when freed from government 'interference ' are the most efficient and the most moral form of social and economic organization. The welfare state and other forms of 'collectivism' stifle efficiency and stymie individual liberty. Hayek went so far as to argue that all forms of collectivism whether socialism or social democracy inevitably lead to totalitarianism (F.A. Hayek The Road to Serfdom 1944). With these arguments neoliberals justify their calls for cuts to the size of government and the transfer of responsibility for the provision of services from the public to the private sector. While neoliberal ideas had been promoted by the likes of Hayek and Friedman since the 1940s through forums such as the Mont Pelerin Society it wasn't until the 1970s that they began to gain currency among policymakers. This was when global capitalism faced an economic and political crisis. Profit rates were in decline and the power and prerogatives of capital were threatened by a number of social movements. The environmental movement for example called for restrictions on the freedom of businesses to exploit the natural environment. Meanwhile a growing militancy among workers manifested in a wave of official and wildcat strikes throughout the major capitalist nations. This crisis provided a context in which such previously marginal neoliberal ideas enjoyed new legitimacy. Since the 1970s the influence of neoliberal ideas has been evident in the broad policy agendas of most capitalist governments. Despite its 'uneven geographical developments ' neoliberalism has become the dominant logic of policymaking globally. Across the capitalist world restrictions have been removed upon the ability of private firms to operate within and across national economies through processes of deregulation. Assets have been transferred from the state to the private sector through a wave of privatizations and markets have been created for social services formerly monopolized by the state such as health education and welfare. However while a broad correspondence exists between the prescriptions of neoliberal polemicists and the policy agendas of neoliberal governments a closer examination reveals that there is a significant disparity between neoliberal theory and practice. This is particularly so with respect to the role of the state. Rather than withering away as neoliberal theory would have it the state has played an active indeed activist role in the introduction implementation and reproduction of neoliberalism. This activist role of the state was evident from the very first instance of neoliberalism in practice—Chile under the Pinochet dictatorship for example. As Naomi Klein demonstrates in The Shock Doctrine after deposing the elected President Salvador Allende through a military coup in 1973 the new military government led by General Augusto Pinochet engaged in a process of privatization dismantling protectionist barriers and cuts to social expenditure. Concurrently the coercive powers of the state were used to suppress organized labor and other dissenters through the imprisonment torture and murder of left-wing activists. In fact neoliberalism was enabled by the state's ultra-violence. While the case of Chile is an extreme one it highlights the centrality of the state to the project of neoliberalism and the contrast between neoliberal theory and practice. Other pathbreaking neoliberal governments also used authoritarian political strategies to enforce market prerogatives. When federal air traffic controllers took strike action in 1981 the Reagan government confronted their union PATCO sacking striking workers jailing its activists and fining the union. In the mid-1980s the Thatcher government in Britain used the coercive powers of the state including the police and secret services to undermine the powerful National Union of Miners (NUM). Not only did this pave the way for the privatization of coal mines but by defeating the NUM Thatcher also weakened the labor movement paving the way for further neoliberal measures. These trends have been continued by later neoliberal governments. In 2006 for example the conservative coalition government of Australia led by Prime Minister John Howard introduced WorkChoices—a package of changes to industrial relations laws that placed severe restrictions on the ability of unions to organize increased the discretionary powers of government to intervene in industrial disputes and increased the range of industrial actions for which fines and prison terms apply. Nor has the size of the state been reduced. Indeed quite the opposite has occurred. Between 1980 and 1996 government expenditure as a proportion of GDP in the 17 major industrial capitalist economies grew from 43.1 percent to 45.6 percent. While some of this growth is due to a rising tax share of national product (even though marginal income tax rates have generally fallen) some of the growth is also a result of the costs of implementing neoliberalism. The engagement of private sector agents to deliver social services for example has often entailed the socialization of risk—whereby the state underwrites the profitability of firms either through some form of subsidy or by accepting liability for corporate failure or loss of revenue. Extra cost responsibilities for the state also arise due to new layers of bureaucracy created to facilitate deregulated markets. Although paradoxical these features of neoliberalism should not be surprising. Throughout its history the capitalist mode of production has been nurtured reproduced and its reach expanded by the active involvement of the state in the economy and society. For example the state was instrumental in the creation of property-owning and property-less classes in England during the 18th and 19th centuries through the enclosure of common land. As Karl Polanyi demonstrated even 'laissez faire capitalism' in England in the mid-to-late-19th century during which time the market is presumed to have been free of the regulatory involvement of the state entailed 'an enormous increase in continuous centrally organized and controlled interventionism' (Karl Polynai The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time 2001). Viewed in this context while contravening the central tenets of neoliberal theory state economic and social regulation in the neoliberal era can be understood as the latest example of the pervasive and coercive role of the state under capitalism. Some scholars use the term 'actually existing neoliberalism' to encapsulate these differences between neoliberalism in practice and the fetishistic abstractions of its advocates. Neoliberalism has not led to a withering away of the state but to the creation of new social and economic regulations. It has reconfigured the state's role rather than diminished it. This reconfiguration of the state's role is crucial to an understanding of neoliberalism. The economic freedoms advocated so stridently by neoliberal theorists have been established for the most part only for a small minority of the population and only by an activist state that restrains and suppresses the rights and freedoms of labor as a class. Over a period of three decades actions by the state facilitated greater freedoms for capital the expansion of the sphere of commodification and a weakening of the power of organized labor. All of this granted greater political and economic power to the capitalist class. This rather than the free market is the hallmark of the neoliberal era. </source> [/INST] <claim>Neoliberalism causes the worst form of state violence and actually increases oppressive forms of state control</claim> <psg>neoliberalism has been dominant globally governments of the Right Not only has neoliberalism become the orthodoxy of political and economic elites it was widely held that 'there is no alternative' to this pervasive agenda policy responses to the financial crisis marks a return to Keynesian style 'managed capitalism Another extreme perspective is offered by Economist which laments that 'economic liberty is under attack Such diagnoses however rely on a misunderstanding of the nature of neoliberalism They confuse state regulation of finance with a retreat from capitalism Neoliberalism is about more than deregulation and privatization. It is also about the distribution of political and economic power the influence of neoliberal ideas has been evident in the broad policy agendas of most capitalist governments neoliberalism has become the dominant logic of policymaking globally a closer examination reveals that there is a significant disparity between neoliberal theory and practice Augusto Pinochet engaged in a process of privatization the coercive powers of the state were used to suppress organized labor and other dissenters through the imprisonment torture and murder of left-wing activists neoliberalism was enabled by the state's ultra-violence pathbreaking neoliberal governments also used authoritarian political strategies to enforce market prerogatives Reagan government confronted their union PATCO sacking striking workers jailing its activists and fining the union Nor has the size of the state been reduced government expenditure as a proportion of GDP in the 17 major industrial capitalist economies Although paradoxical these features of neoliberalism should not be surprising the capitalist mode of production has been nurtured reproduced and its reach expanded by the active involvement of the state in the economy and society Neoliberalism has not led to a withering away of the state but to the creation of new social and economic regulations The economic freedoms advocated so stridently by neoliberal theorists have been established for the most part only for a small minority of the population and only by an activist state that restrains and suppresses the rights and freedoms of labor as a class. This rather than the free market is the hallmark of the neoliberal era.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Generally speaking Latin America has shown economic growth although the social structure imposed colonialism has been perpetuated. The region is extremely unequal with one of the worst income distributions of the world. The explanation for this is that the initial degree of inequality initiated with the long process of fragmentation of local pre-capitalist and autonomous societies followed by the enslavement of traditional indigenous populations the transference of African slaves to the continent and finally the hyper-exploitation of the free (or recently liberated) working class is still affecting the actual development. The legacy of the colonial times - the concentration of power wealth and land - led to a stratified society with an extreme inequality. The discrimination and oppression present in those hierarchical societies are the main inheritance of the former colonies and are a persistent tragedy being part of the unsolved questions of the recent past. Conclusions The argument that colonialism as an external imposition is the only determinant for the actual socioeconomic situation in former colonies is certainly not convincing: we have to take in account the role of local elites who have benefited from those exploitative relations. Colonialism is part of the historical process and formation of these countries. The contemporary economies are debilitated for the following main reasons: a) The agro-export oriented economies gave the general contours to the colonized production forestalling attempts at industrialization and import substitution. b) The agrarian structure excluded a majority from the access to the land and privileged a non-intensive production. c) Concentration of income poverty and inequality impeded the creation of internal consumption. d) the internal dynamics of the ruling classes haven't facilitated savings (re)investments and innovation in the national economy. Finally the geography (or how it was appropriated by the colonial powers) gave an incentive for easy exploitation of natural resources (a necessary input to production) shaping the patterns of occupation and de-population of the colony. The actual development policy of Latin American countries has focused on the exportation of agricultural products repeating old economic patterns. The monoculture is mystified under the label of diversification of products. The impacts are more environmental destruction and (re)concentration of land in favor of big and old landowners. Low cost labor is once more a comparative advantage in international trade now called 'competitive' costs in the globalized world. Years of development studies demonstrated that there is not a model or 'recipe' for progress and modernization. A diversity of development policies are needed in order to face these structural problems. The developmentalists in Latin America are ignoring a very basic premise: any real attempt of development must focus on the rupture of the old colonial legacy. Otherwise social change will purely constitute a perpetuation of actual unequal conditions. </source> [/INST] <claim>Colonialist structures perpetuate inequality and have created a highly stratified society in Latin America – focusing on these must come first </claim> <psg>the social structure imposed colonialism has been perpetuated The region is extremely unequal that the initial degree of inequality the hyper-exploitation of the free (or recently liberated) working class is still affecting the actual development The legacy of the colonial times - the concentration of power wealth and land - led to a stratified society with an extreme inequality The argument that colonialism as an external imposition is the only determinant for the actual socioeconomic situation in former colonies is certainly not convincing The contemporary economies are debilitated The agro-export oriented economies gave the general contours to the colonized production the geography gave an incentive for easy exploitation of natural resources The actual development policy of Latin American countries has focused on repeating old economic patterns Years of development studies demonstrated that there is not a model or 'recipe' for progress and modernization. A diversity of development policies are needed The developmentalists in Latin America are ignoring a very basic premise any real attempt of development must focus on the rupture of the old colonial legacy. Otherwise social change will purely constitute a perpetuation of actual unequal conditions.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> The Current Crisis Predictions that policy responses to the current crisis mark the end of neoliberalism are typically ignorant of such arguments. For example Will Hutton's contention that the world may be returning to a system of 'managed capitalism ' like that which underpinned the post-war boom ignores that neoliberalism is itself a form of managed capitalism. While recent bank nationalizations signal a retreat from neoliberalism on one front many other aspects of the neoliberal order remain intact. This is true even in the financial sector of the economy. Nationalizations aside the dominant regulatory solution to the current crisis has been the injection of liquidity into financial markets. Bailouts have been preferred to significant restrictions on the freedoms gained by financial capital during the neoliberal era. (Rather than protecting working class living standards the state has acted to protect the viability of the system of capital accumulation.) While such actions certainly contravene the letter of neoliberal theory similar activities have been a persistent feature of 'actually existing neoliberalism.' Throughout the history of neoliberalism there are numerous instances of the state acting to underwrite the profitability of corporations and the viability of markets—a recent example is the opening up of the U.S. war machine and the Iraqi state to private capital in the Iraq war. As Naomi Klein writes 'U.S. corporations that were in Iraq to take advantage of the reconstruction were part of a vast protectionist racket whereby the U.S. government had created their markets with war barred their competitors from even entering the race then paid them to do the work while guaranteeing them a profit to boot—all at taxpayer expense.' The capitalist state tends to privilege the interests of the dominant economic class. Under neoliberalism this has become much more pronounced. Despite the crisis there is as yet no sign of a broad-based commitment by policymakers to dismantling the political and economic power gained for capital through neoliberalization. Indeed in other areas of the economy neoliberalism is alive and well. Nonetheless the current accumulation crisis may well undermine the legitimacy of neoliberalism. Actually existing neoliberalism is inherently contradictory. One such contradiction now being felt is that neoliberalism fed both the expansion of the financial sector of the economy and the development and spread of speculative financial instruments that ultimately led to the current economic crisis. On the one hand financial deregulation removed restrictions on the movement of money and on the activities of financial institutions. On the other hand the financial sector provided an outlet for the profits generated through the neoliberal assault on labor in turn generating further profits. This led to the speculative bubble that burst when the sub-prime market crashed in 2007. Thus the contradictions of neoliberalism created some of the conditions for the accumulation crisis that now besets the world capitalist economy. For this reason the crisis of the global financial system is also a crisis of neoliberalism. However there is no guarantee that this crisis will result in the death of neoliberalism nor if it does that the alternative will be more democratic or socially protective. The rise of neoliberalism was not inevitable. It occurred through political conflict among state elites labor and capital over economic priorities. The outcome of this process was as Mark Berger argues an 'historic victory of capital over labor.' The future of neoliberalism and the future of global economic regulation are also likely to be significantly determined by political conflict. In such conflicts the state will not be a neutral player. In The Fiscal Crisis of the State James O'Connor offers a useful framework for understanding the state's current predicament. O'Connor argues that the state is governed by the twin sometimes contradictory imperatives of securing conditions for capital accumulation and legitimization or of social harmony. This is precisely what has happened in recent months. States across the globe have acted to shore up the viability of capital accumulation and the legitimacy of the capitalist system. They have acted to restore trust in money as a store of value and a unit of exchange among financial market participants by substituting private sector money for state money. States have done this not only because powerful interests are threatened in the current crisis but also because the erosion of trust in money threatens the viability of the capitalist system itself. When banks stop lending because they do not trust that others will repay their loans the credit that lubricates the system of capital accumulation dries up. Investment in productive capacity slows. Businesses are unable to pay their staff. Workers are laid off. When the paper assets held by corporations become worthless such as occurred to those holding sub-prime mortgage backed securities other tangible assets are sold off. Prices fall and more job losses follow. The crisis of the financial sector of the economy spills over into the rest of the economy directly affecting the lives of people with no direct interest in share markets or derivatives. This is what has happened in the global economy to date and it could quickly turn into a general crisis of political and economic legitimacy if people come to feel that the political and economic systems are not able to deliver basic needs such as a living wage. It is for these reasons rather than because they have been converted to the virtues of social democracy that state elites have intervened in financial markets. Material rather than ideological factors have been most important. History demonstrates it is possible to have capital accumulation alongside forms of albeit limited social protections. However there are strong forces mobilized against states moving in such a direction. The 'historic victory of capital over labor ' identified by Berger as an outcome of neoliberalism has a three-fold significance in the current context. First it has weakened the power of organized labor and granted enormous political power to capital. Second it has facilitated greater freedoms for capital. Third in extending the sphere of capital accumulation and the extent of commodification it has created greater market dependence. That is ordinary people have a greater dependence on markets to secure their everyday necessities than was the case prior to the neoliberal era. The first of these factors means that capital as a class has enormous influence over the direction of state policy making. The second and third factors mean capital is likely to oppose attempts to wind back the transformations to capital accumulation facilitated by neoliberalism even if the specific regulatory modes by which this occurred are altered. Capital is likely to oppose for example moves to quarantine workers from the market. The political power of capital would make it difficult for state elites to pursue such an agenda. In any case the neoliberal common sense that still dominates state elites means that socially protective proposals are unlikely to arise from current capitalist governments or opposition parties. Furthermore even if governments do move away from neoliberal forms of regulation in some areas of the economy other aspects of neoliberal regulation—for example those pertaining to industrial relations—may well remain. This is not to suggest that a retreat from neoliberalism is impossible. The example of the Chavez government in Venezuela demonstrates that neoliberalism can be dismantled but that it takes more than deteriorating economic conditions for this to occur. In Venezuela and other Latin American countries neoliberalism has been wound back as a result of a political mobilization by the working and peasant classes of society. Because the forces and structures supportive of neoliberalism remain strong globally it is likely that a popular political mobilization would also be necessary in other countries to wind back neoliberalism even given the current financial crisis and the obvious failures of the neoliberal model. Neoliberalism is not inevitable but a new politics is required to impose democratic and socially protective alternatives upon both capital and the state. </source> [/INST] <claim>Economic crises are rooted in faulty neoliberal logic that exacerbate the worst forms of capitalism – only new forms of political thought can move away from the system </claim> <psg>The Current Crisis Predictions that policy responses to the current crisis mark the end of neoliberalism are typically ignorant of such arguments While recent bank nationalizations signal a retreat from neoliberalism on one front many other aspects of the neoliberal order remain intact Bailouts have been preferred to significant restrictions on the freedoms gained by financial capital during the neoliberal era .' Throughout the history of neoliberalism there are numerous instances of the state acting to underwrite the profitability of corporations and the viability of markets U.S. corporations that were in Iraq to take advantage of the reconstruction were part of a vast protectionist racket The capitalist state tends to privilege the interests of the dominant economic class Under neoliberalism this has become much more pronounced neoliberalism is alive and well that neoliberalism fed both the expansion of the financial sector of the economy and the development and spread of speculative financial instruments that ultimately led to the current economic crisis the financial sector provided an outlet for the profits generated through the neoliberal assault on labor in turn generating further profits the crisis of the global financial system is also a crisis of neoliberalism The rise of neoliberalism was not inevitable. It occurred through political conflict among state elites labor and capital over economic priorities States across the globe have acted to shore up the viability of capital accumulation and the legitimacy of the capitalist system. States have done this not only because powerful interests are threatened in the current crisis but also because the erosion of trust in money threatens the viability of the capitalist system itself the credit that lubricates the system of capital accumulation dries up. Investment in productive capacity slows. Businesses are unable to pay their staff. Workers are laid off The crisis of the financial sector of the economy spills over into the rest of the economy directly affecting the lives of people with no direct interest in share markets or derivatives The 'historic victory of capital over labor ' identified by Berger as an outcome of neoliberalism has a three-fold significance in the current context has weakened the power of organized labor and granted enormous political power to capit it has facilitated greater freedoms for capital has created greater market dependence ordinary people have a greater dependence on markets to secure their everyday necessities than was the case prior to the neoliberal era the neoliberal common sense that still dominates state elites means that socially protective proposals are unlikely to arise from current capitalist governments or opposition parties This is not to suggest that a retreat from neoliberalism is impossible In Venezuela and other Latin American countries neoliberalism has been wound back as a result of a political mobilization by the working and peasant classes of society it is likely that a popular political mobilization would also be necessary in other countries to wind back neoliberalism Neoliberalism is not inevitable but a new politics is required to impose democratic and socially protective alternatives upon both capital and the state.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Mexico’s collapse of 1982 and the radical policy response of the US and IMF marked the birth of an elite consensus that continues to haunt Europe today. As Nick Dearden Director of the Jubilee Campaign for debt cancellation just wrote for the New Statesman this week marks the “anniversary of an event of great resonance”. For this week it is exactly 30 years ago that Mexico temporarily suspended its debt payments to foreign creditors thereby marking the beginning of what would eventually escalate into the first international debt crisis of the neoliberal era. Things would never be the same again. What ensued was not only a tragic collapse of living standards throughout the developing world and a lost decade for Mexicans and millions of poor people in the Global South – most notably in Latin America Eastern Europe and Africa — but also a historic shift in power relations between debtors and creditors in the emerging global political economy. Indeed 1982 marked the global ascendance of Wall Street. As the famous geographer David Harvey put it: What the Mexico case demonstrated was one key difference between liberalism and neo-liberalism: under the former lenders take the losses that arise from bad investment decisions while under the latter the borrowers are forced by state and international powers to take on board the cost of debt repayment no matter what the consequences for the livelihood and well-being of the local population. In the lead-up to the 1980s debt crisis Wall Street banks had lent lavishly to developing country governments. The oil crisis of the 1970s had led to huge capital surpluses in oil-producing countries which subsequently reinvested those surpluses through US banks. As a wall of liquidity flooded international capital markets interest rates fell precipitously. Countries like Mexico went on a borrowing spree. And the banks were only all too happy about the arrangement. After all as Citicorp CEO Walter Wriston put it “countries don’t go bust.” All the while the US government stood by passively as American banks lent billions of dollars mostly to Latin American governments. When the US was finally faced with an economic crisis of its own induced partly by the oil crisis of the 1970s but more importantly by the long-term decline in the rate of profit of its own industrial sector the Chairman of the Fed Paul Volcker decided to dramatically raise interest rates to put an end to stagflation and break the economic consensus (the so-called Keynesian compound of embedded liberalism) that had reigned supreme since WWII. This in turn immediately pushed developing countries into fiscal trouble. Because most of the loans these countries had taken on were denominated in dollars the hike in US interest rates — which became known as the Volcker Shock — immediately raised interest payments for these governments. Mexico was only the first country that found itself incapable of servicing its debt. In the years to come many dozens more would follow in its wake. But the US government desperate to avoid losses for Wall Street rapidly mobilized the IMF and World Bank to disburse large bailouts for developing country governments around the world. Starting with the $4 billion bailout of Mexico the IMF and World Bank rapidly saw their international leverage increase. Unsurprisingly they were immediately accused of fending for the large banks — not for the poor countries they purported to “bail out”. After all one of the first things the “troika” of the US Treasury Fed and IMF made sure to do was to impose dramatic conditions on its loans to developing countries. Not only were Mexico Brazil Argentina Poland Egypt and dozens of other countries forced to immediately impose draconian austerity measures. they were also expected to don what Thomas Friedman would later call the “Golden Straitjacket” of neoliberal free-market ideology. The year 1982 thus marked the emergence of what became known as the “Washington Consensus“. This term coined by US economist John Williamson referred to a list of policy prescriptions developed by US officials in collaboration with technocrats at the IMF and World Bank and quickly gained notoriety throughout the developing world. As Harvard economist Dani Rodrik wrote “stabilization liberalization and privatization became the mantra of a generation of technocrats who cut their teeth in the developing world and of the political leaders they counselled.” The result of this new neoliberal elite consensus — that free capital flows a deregulated financial sector and powerful private banks were good for the economy — were catastrophic for Mexico. As Dearden writes “the economy collapsed and stagnated many industries shut down with the loss of at least 800 000 workers altogether. By 1989 the Mexican economy was still 11% smaller than in 1981. Meanwhile the debt doubled from 30% of GDP in 1982 to 60% by 1987.” As World Bank Chief Economist Joseph Stiglitz would later put it during the Asian Crisis of 1997-’98 the “medicine” actually killed the patient. In one of her seminal books Mad Money the British political economist Susan Strange was no less sanguine about who was to blame for the Mexican crisis and who eventually paid for it. “On balance ” she wrote “the banks had been helped out with public money ” while “the governments had had to give in to the market.” Indeed “the United States had arranged a rescue package [but] it was the Mexican economy and the Mexican people that suffered most.” “The same story ” Dearden continues “was repeated across Latin America. In 1990 Latin American economies were on average 8% smaller than they had been in 1980 and the number of people living in poverty increased from 144 million to 211 million. Former Colombian Finance Minister Jose Antonio Ocampo calls the bail-out responses ‘an excellent way to deal with the US banking crisis and an awful way to deal with the Latin American debt crisis’.” All in all it took the international community (read: the US government) an astonishing seven years to realize that some form of debt restructuring was necessary. Finally in 1989 a blueprint plan was set up to reduce Mexico’s debt — one that would later be repeated across the developing world. Largely initiated by Wall Street bankers themselves but named in true Orwellian fashion after the US Treasury Secretary at the time the so-called Brady Bonds were supposed to help alleviate the intolerable debt load of developing countries. In reality they were just a way for Wall Street banks to bring order to their books while reaping windfall profits from a situation that should for both practical and moral reasons have seen them go bankrupt. As economic historian Harold James pointed out in an IMF-commissioned study the Brady Bonds deal only reduced Mexico’s debt by a negligible 2.7% of GDP. While this restored confidence to financial markets it barely helped Mexico. In 1990 the New York Times wrote that “the jury is now in on the 1989 debt restructuring agreement between Mexico and the international financial community. Unfortunately the deal is a bad one for Mexico.” Similarly economist Michael Dooley wrote that “the banks were the clear winners of the game because the expected bailout was forthcoming … while the debtor countries embarked on reform programs in the narrow interest of the banks.” As Lee Buchheit a world-renowned lawyer known as the “philosopher-king of sovereign debt” explained it “while the terms of the packages should be beneficial to the debtor country the US government will not support a package that would compel US banks to recognize losses which could undermine the financial integrity of the banking system.” In other words “too big to fail” was already a problem back in the 1980s and the Mexicans know all about it. Ironically what happened in Latin America Africa and Eastern Europe during the 1980s would later be repeated in near-identical fashion in South-East Asia. Even though it wasn’t Asian governments that had indebted themselves but Asian firms the US Treasury and IMF responded in similarly aggressive fashion prompting free-market economist Jagdish Bhagwati to refer to a Wall Street-Treasury complex dominating the US foreign policy agenda (political economist Robert Wade my Professor at the LSE would later add the IMF to that list). Now the observing reader will already have noticed where this story is inevitably headed… As Larry Elliot economics editor of the Guardian just summarized it “for Mexico read Greece.” After all there are not only similarities in the deep cause of both crises (systematically over-leveraged banks of the core recycling capital surpluses through peripheral countries) but as Elliot points out “the policy response to the crisis has also been identical”: In 1982 Latin American governments were lent money by the International Monetary Fund so that they could pay back the banks that were threatened with going bust as a result of their stupidity. As in Greece today the money was given with one hand and taken away again with the other. In the end it seems that Hegel was right to point out that history repeats itself. But it took Marx to point out that it does so first as tragedy and then as farce. What is happening in Europe today is an almost identical reflection of what happened in Mexico in the 1980s — only the banks are even more powerful. Greece as a member of the eurozone is even more systematically stuck in its Golden Straitjacket. and the eventual collapse will be even more dramatic. In Mexico the 1980s tragically became known as la decada perdida – the lost decade. Millions of lives were ruined as the Mexican economy was decimated. If Mexico and Latin America have one lesson to teach to Greece and Europe it would therefore be this: if you don’t break the bank the bank will break you. Either the people of Europe topple their own states and the Troika or the states and the Troika will topple the people. What will it be? </source> [/INST] <claim>The global neoliberal system creates debt cycles that make developing countries dependent on oppressive institutions like the IMF and the US – leads to state instability and the degradation of millions worldwide</claim> <psg>Mexico’s collapse of 1982 and the radical policy response of the US and IMF marked the birth of an elite consensus it is exactly 30 years ago that Mexico temporarily suspended its debt payments to foreign creditors marking the beginning of the first international debt crisis of the neoliberal era Things would never be the same again What ensued was not only a tragic collapse of living standards throughout the developing world and a lost decade for Mexicans and millions of poor people in the Global South but also a historic shift in power relations between debtors and creditors in the emerging global political economy What the Mexico case demonstrated was one key difference between liberalism and neo-liberalism under the former lenders take the losses that arise from bad investment decisions under the latter the borrowers are forced by state and international powers to take on board the cost of debt repayment no matter what the consequences As a wall of liquidity flooded international capital markets interest rates fell precipitously the US government stood by passively as American banks lent billions of dollars mostly to Latin American governments Paul Volcker decided to dramatically raise interest rates to put an end to stagflation and break the economic consensus This in turn immediately pushed developing countries into fiscal trouble Mexico was only the first country that found itself incapable of servicing its debt After all one of the first things the “troika” of the US Treasury Fed and IMF made sure to do was to impose dramatic conditions on its loans to developing countrie liberalization and privatization became the mantra of a generation of technocrats who cut their teeth in the developing world and of the political leaders they counselled the United States had arranged a rescue package [but] it was the Mexican economy and the Mexican people that suffered most took the international community (read: the US government) an astonishing seven years to realize that some form of debt restructuring was necessary the banks were the clear winners of the game because the expected bailout was forthcoming government will not support a package that would compel US banks to recognize losses too big to fail” was already a problem back in the 1980s and the Mexicans know all about it what happened in Latin America Africa and Eastern Europe during the 1980s would later be repeated in near-identical fashion in South-East Asia the US Treasury and IMF responded in similarly aggressive fashion tin American governments were lent money by the International Monetary Fund the money was given with one hand and taken away again with the other. In the end it seems that Hegel was right to point out that history repeats itself. Millions of lives were ruined as the Mexican economy was decimated. you don’t break the bank the bank will break you Either the people of Europe topple their own states and the Troika or the states and the Troika will topple the people</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Representatives of the established order were unprepared for the massive 1999 demonstrations in Seattle against the World Trade Organziation (WTO) and remain on the defensive in the face of the internationally coordinated actions against neoliberal globalization that have followed. On an ideological level they have responded by seeking to undermine the legitimacy of antiglobalization activists especially those in the developed capitalist world by claiming that these activists oppose the very policies and institutions that are in the best interest of the poor in the third world. One example: the former head of the WTO Mike Moore declared that “The people that stand outside and say they work in the interests of the poorest people...they make me want to vomit. Because the poorest people on our planet they are ones that need us the most.”1¶ For the past two decades neoliberal advocates defended their policies by arguing that they were responsible for East Asia’s rapid and sustained economic growth. They did so even though most East Asian countries followed policies radically different from those advocated by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank. Then came the 1997–1998 crisis. Almost overnight these advocates disowned their former star performers blaming their economic problems on the fact that their economies were hopelessly distorted by cronyism and in need of a good application of neoliberalism. While this shameless about-face allowed the defenders of neoliberal orthodoxy to avoid a critical self-evaluation it also left them in search of new success stories.¶ Mexico is the heir apparent to the former model economies of East Asia. Although not long ago Mexico was encouraged to learn from East Asia it is easy to see why neoliberals now celebrate Mexico. Recent Mexican presidents have enthusiastically embraced globalization and the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) initiative. In addition Mexico “enjoyed” five successive years of growth from 1996–2000 a period when most third world countries suffered from stagnation or outright recession.¶ Key to this performance has been the restructuring of the Mexican economy best symbolized by the establishment of a new growth core rooted in the production and export of manufactures. For example exports as a percentage of GDP rose from 15 percent in 1993 to 33.5 percent in 1999 and the share of manufactures in total exports soared from 28 percent to 85 percent over the same period.¶ Mexico’s “forward” looking free-trade policies are said to be one of the most important reasons for this successful restructuring. Equally important according to its supporters has been Mexico’s commitment to internal reform which enabled the country to take advantage of its new trade opportunities. In the words of Jose Angel Gurria Mexico’s Secretary of Finance and Public Credit:¶ The reforms—which have included trade and capital account liberalization increased private sector participation in key sectors of the economy tax reforms changes in labor market structure capital market liberalization and pension system reforms—have transformed a closed heavily regulated economy with high government intervention into an open market-driven economy.2¶ While it is true that the Mexican economy has undergone a significant restructuring proponents of neoliberalism have tended to be highly selective in their representation of the Mexican experience (as has the Mexican government). In fact as I argue below the result of this restructuring has been immiserating international competitiveness not development. Moreover even this gain appears endangered. The 2001 U.S. recession brought Mexican growth to a halt and foreign investors have begun moving production to lower cost locations in Asia. Thus correctly understood the Mexican experience actually undermines the mainstream defense of neoliberal globalization. </source> [/INST] <claim>The idea that neoliberalism has improved living conditions in places like Mexico is an elitist myth – it has hurt the competitiveness of developing countries</claim> <psg>Representatives of the established order remain on the defensive in the face of the internationally coordinated actions against neoliberal globalization they have responded by seeking to undermine the legitimacy of antiglobalization neoliberal advocates defended their policies by arguing that they were responsible for East Asia’s rapid and sustained economic growth these advocates disowned their former star performers Mexico is the heir apparent to the former model economies of East Asia Mexico was encouraged to learn from East Asia it is easy to see why neoliberals now celebrate Mexico Mexico “enjoyed” five successive years of growth from 1996–2000 Key to this performance has been the restructuring of the Mexican economy Mexico’s “forward” looking free-trade policies are said to be one of the most important reasons for this successful restructuring the result of this restructuring has been immiserating international competitiveness not development even this gain appears endangered the Mexican experience actually undermines the mainstream defense of neoliberal globalization</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> The Rise and Fall of State-Directed Industrialization¶ Mexico’s recent embrace of neoliberalism ended a fifty-year experience with state-directed industrialization dating back to the 1930s. Responding to decades of foreign domination and peasant uprisings President Lazaro Cardenas (1934–1940) promoted land reform nationalized key foreign assets (most importantly the railway system and the petroleum sector) and used state resources to encourage private investment in an effort to secure Mexico’s independence and modernization.¶ The economic role of the state continued to expand during the 1940s and 1950s.3 The Second World War and the Korean War boosted the demand for Mexico’s agricultural and mining products and the state used its new earnings to advance a wide-ranging import-substitution-industrialization strategy. However the end of the Korean War brought lower commodity prices and rates of growth. The economy floundered for the rest of the decade falling into outright recession in 1958–1959.¶ The next twelve years (from 1959 to 1970) represented the high point in Mexico’s industrial experience. This resurgence was led by a reinvigorated state effort to promote manufacturing. Using borrowed money (largely from foreign sources) the state subsidized loans. it provided the private sector with below cost state produced industrial inputs (including petroleum lumber and mining products electricity transportation cement and steel) and established new parastatal firms producing products such as auto parts and machine tools. It also protected the new manufacturing activity with high tariffs.¶ Despite its many accomplishments the state’s postwar economic strategy was not sustainable. Because the state had sought to promote modernization in alliance with the Mexican business elite and within terms acceptable to U.S. political leaders it refrained from taking actions that limited private sector profitability. As a result it never developed a secure and stable source of revenue to fund its activities. More critically it never developed a strategy to deal with the country’s worsening balance of payments situation.¶ Industrial production was increasingly directed towards the protected domestic market. Moreover it remained heavily dependent on foreign technology and inputs. At the same time the largely ignored agricultural sector was unable to generate the foreign exchange needed to cover the growing imports of consumer durables and capital goods.¶ The Mexican economic miracle finally came to an end in the 1970s. Balance of payments problems forced the government to recess the economy in 1971–1972 and then again in 1975–1976. But hoping to overcome structural weaknesses and restore past growth rates the state continued to expand its activities including the number of parastatal firms.¶ Despite their previous gains from state activity business leaders had grown uneasy about the steady growth of state power seeing it as a potential threat to their independence. They also feared the growing labor movement that had gained strength from the long expansion. By the mid-1970s their unease with state policy turned into opposition. They wanted the state to reduce its direct role in the economy as well as maintain slower growth in order to weaken labor activism. Angered by the state’s refusal they “deserted” the economy. Capital flight intensified over the decade but the government took no steps to stop it. A rapid rise in oil prices beginning in the late 1970s allowed the state to temporarily sustain its strategy and underwrite a new period of growth that lasted from 1978 to 1981. However U.S. government attempts to stabilize the dollar pushed up world interest rates and triggered a global economic slowdown. The combination threw Mexico into an even more serious balance of payments crisis. In February 1982 the government was forced to devalue the peso by 78 percent. In August it was forced to declare a temporary suspension of debt payments and ask the U.S. government for emergency assistance. It then devalued the peso again this time by 60 percent.¶ Perhaps the last straw for Mexico’s business leaders came on September 1 1982. President Lopez Portillo in his final speech to the nation announced the nationalization of Mexico’s banks in an effort to control capital flight. The fact that the state was willing and able to pursue stabilization at the expense of private property rights intensified business determination to pursue a new economic strategy based on neoliberal principles.¶ The U.S. government taking advantage of Mexico’s request for financial assistance demanded that the Mexican government reduce its spending privatize state firms and open domestic markets to foreign trade and investment. And for reasons noted above the Mexican elite supported the demand. Having run out of room to maneuver the state agreed to comply. Thus it was both internal and external dynamics that led the government to break with the past and adopt a new economic strategy.¶ The Neoliberal Transformation¶ The government’s first step in the process of neoliberalization was to slash public spending which pushed the economy into recession in 1982 1983 and 1986. The economic contraction succeeded in generating the large trade surpluses needed to make debt payments.¶ Next the government launched a major privatization program. In 1984 the state controlled 1 212 firms and entities. By December 1988 the number had been reduced to 448.¶ In the middle of the decade the government began dropping trade restrictions in order to cheapen imported inputs and promote export-oriented growth. It also joined the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). As tariffs were reduced and import licenses were eliminated many manufacturing firms (especially domestically oriented ones) were driven into bankruptcy.¶ In 1989 still in need of foreign exchange and hoping to finalize yet another U.S-led financial bailout the government initiated a sweeping liberalization of its foreign investment regulations. It revoked measures that had blocked majority foreign ownership and opened areas that had previously been off-limits to foreign investors.¶ Finally in 1990 Mexican President Carlos Salinas sought and won U.S. President George Bush’s support for an agreement to promote Mexican-U.S. economic integration. The result was the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Both U.S. and Mexican business leaders celebrated NAFTA for much the same reason: they saw it “locking in” the neoliberal policy transformation of the previous decade.¶ Mexican workers paid a heavy price for their government’s embrace of neoliberalism. Real wages fell by approximately 30 percent over the decade of the 1980s. The same cannot be said of Mexico’s elite who enjoyed many opportunities to benefit from the new policies. Thanks to Mexico’s currency devaluations they were able to make a financial killing by repatriating their funds. They also benefited from the government’s privatization program in which state firms were offered to them at attractive prices.¶ The Neoliberal Era¶ Given the extent of Mexico’s neoliberal economic transformation it is easy to see why neoliberal advocates were quick to take credit for the country’s growth over the years 1989 to 1994. In point of fact this growth was largely fueled by a massive inflow of money from outside the country and came to a sudden halt when the process reversed.¶ Between 1990 and 1993 approximately $91 billion flowed into Mexico a total equal to almost one fifth of all net inflows to developing countries. Significantly even with this massive inflow the country’s growth began slowing in 1992. Ominously trade and current account deficits ballooned despite the slowdown in economic activity. The trade deficit rose from $0.9 billion in 1990 to $18.5 billion in 1994. The current account deficit grew from 2.8 percent of GDP to 7 percent over the same period. The rapid growth in and size of these deficits is largely explained by the destructive impact of the past decade’s neoliberal policies on Mexico’s national economic base.¶ Mainstream economists largely dismissed concerns about Mexico’s increasing dependence on foreign funds but they were wrong to do so. In response to a rise in U.S. interest rates and Mexican political instability (which was intensified by the Zapatista struggle) foreign investors began pulling their money out of the country in early 1994. The Mexican government tried to stem the outflow by selling dollar denominated bonds and raising interest rates but its efforts were unsuccessful. Nearly out of reserves the government was forced to let the peso float in late December. Its rapid fall only intensified the ongoing capital flight. The economy collapsed in 1995: GDP fell by 6.2 percent and wages fell by 25 percent.¶ This collapse had a major impact on the ownership and productive structure of the Mexican economy. Mexican businesses had borrowed heavily to purchase newly privatized banks mines the telephone company and other enterprises. But with interest rates rising to more than 100 percent in early 1995 many companies found it impossible to survive. Most reluctantly sold off large shares of their operations to eager foreign buyers. The devaluation and low wages in concert with NAFTA also encouraged many foreign firms especially from the United States to undertake new export-oriented investments.¶ Altogether foreign direct investment in Mexico exploded from a level of approximately $2–3 billion a year in the 1980s to an average of almost $11 billion a year from 1994 to 1999. As a result not only did the economy become more export oriented it also became increasingly dominated by U.S. foreign capital. The percentage of exports produced by multinationals rose from 56.5 in 1993 to 64.2 in 1998 and the percentage of exports sold to the U.S. rose from 79.3 to 88.2 over the same period.¶ It is this “new ” export oriented multinational dominated economy and its post-1995 growth record that mainstream economists celebrate when they argue for the superiority of neoliberal globalization. However a more critical examination of the Mexican experience highlights the fact that this new regime has generated few benefits for working people in Mexico.¶ Trends in manufacturing value added provide one indicator of this sad reality. Despite Mexico’s rapid growth in the production of manufactured exports the country’s manufacturing value added has remained generally unchanged over the decade of the 1990s. The reason is that the government’s neoliberal policies have largely hollowed out the country’s domestic industrial base and the new exports are heavily and increasingly dependent on manufactured imports.¶ Labor market trends highlight the human costs of this outcome. From 1991–1998 the percentage of urban workers employed for wages fell from 73.9 to 61.2. Over the same period the percentage of unpaid workers rose from 4.6 to 12 and the percentage of self-employed increased from 16.6 to 22.8. Moreover over the same period wage workers and self-employed workers suffered massive declines in average hourly income 26.6 percent and 49.6 percent respectively. While wages did rise in 1999 and 2000 average earnings still remained below 1994 levels. And because of Mexico’s recession these wages once again began falling in 2001.¶ The Mexican Experience Revisited¶ The best way to understand why Mexico’s working people have not benefited from their country’s recent growth is to study the operation of the country’s most dynamic exporters. These include the maquiladoras foreign export platforms and large private national exporters.¶ Maquiladoras: Maquiladoras are registered foreign-owned manufacturing firms (most of which operate along the U.S.-Mexican border) that are allowed to import inputs duty free because they export their entire output. In line with Mexico’s changing economic strategy maquiladoras became increasingly central to the Mexican economy. Their exports grew by 17–20 percent a year from 1990 to 1997 with their share of total exports rising from 33.1 percent to 40.9 percent. Their share of total foreign direct investment rose from 6 percent in 1994 to 26 percent in 1999. By 2000 they were producing 47 percent of all exports and 54 percent of all manufactured exports.¶ This increase in economic activity was accompanied by a rapid increase in maquiladora employment from 420 000 in 1990 to 1.3 million in 2000. This growth has taken place in the context of an overall decline in non-maquiladora manufacturing employment. Reflecting the austerity and market openings of the 1980s and mid-1990s non-maquiladora manufacturing employment fell from 2.6 million in 1981 to 2.2 million in 1997.¶ While the maquiladoras have been celebrated by mainstream economists for anchoring Mexico’s economic transformation Mexican workers have not benefited from the accompanying shift away from non-maquiladora production. Maquiladora workers receive wages considerably below those paid to non-maquiladora manufacturing workers. In 1994 average maquiladora wages were only 47 percent of non-maquiladora manufacturing wages. While the gap narrowed over the remainder of the decade closing to approximately 80 percent this trend did not represent an improvement for maquiladora workers. Rather it was caused by non-maquiladora manufacturing wages falling at a faster rate than maquila wages.¶ Maquiladora working conditions also remain poor. Turnover rates average between 15 percent and 25 percent of the labor force per month. The average work-life of a maquila worker is only ten years because of injuries health problems and the firing of women workers who become pregnant.¶ The problems with the maquiladora-based development process extend beyond wages and working conditions. As the New York Times explained:¶ All along the border the land the water and the air are thick with industrial and human waste. The National Water Commission reports that the towns and cities strapped for funds can adequately treat less than 35 percent of the sewage generated daily. About 12 percent of the people living on the border have no reliable access to clean water. Nearly a third live in homes that are not connected to sewage systems. Only about half the streets are paved.4¶ Moreover the maquiladoras continue to function as an enclave with few connections to the broader Mexican economy. Over 97 percent of their nonlabor inputs are imported from outside Mexico.¶ Foreign Export Platforms: Many foreign producers of manufactured exports did not go through the legal procedures required to register as maquiladoras. In most cases their original investments were oriented towards the domestic market and/or their operations made significant use of local inputs. However as a result of NAFTA and declines in the peso and Mexican wages they have found it profitable to convert their operations into export platforms. While these foreign owned export platforms trail the maquiladoras in overall dollar value of exports their share of total exports rose from 19 percent in 1993 to 26 percent in 1996.¶ Five foreign auto producers (GM Ford VW Daimler-Chrysler and Nissan) dominate this group. By the mid-1990s they accounted for some 80 percent of foreign platform exports. In fact the Mexican subsidiaries of GM Ford VW and Daimler-Chrysler are the leading export companies in the country.¶ There are those who argue that the growth of the auto sector represents the leading edge of Mexico’s transformation into a high-value-added producer of internationally competitive products. Some of the auto plants established in Mexico are indeed state of the art. However there is little evidence that these plants have made any significant contribution to worker well-being or the industrial upgrading of the Mexican economy.¶ Despite the fact the many of these modern auto plants have productivity levels comparable with those in the United States or Japan Mexican workers receive wages far below their American and Japanese counterparts. In 1994 for example General Motors paid its U.S. workers $19 an hour and its Mexican workers $1.54. Moreover while productivity in the Mexican auto sector rose by 10.3 percent from 1994 to 1999 auto sector wages fell by 20 percent.¶ Although low wages led to numerous strike actions corporations have resisted any improvements. In fact according to a senior level manager at a U.S.-owned Mexican assembly and stamping plant “It is the policy [of the parent company] and I guess of most every other company that does multinational business to pay only at the prevailing wage of the area that they are in.”5 This statement is especially revealing since most state of the art plants were deliberately located in agricultural areas where wages were low.¶ Broader technological gains have also been limited. For example the United Nations Economic Commission on Latin America and the Caribbean reports that the “Mexican automotive industry is focused essentially on the North American market is dominated by foreign companies and has limited national linkages”6¶ National Exporters: A number of Mexican-owned manufacturing firms primarily the largest have also become increasingly export oriented. And like the foreign export platforms their export orientation was largely motivated by Mexico’s post-1994 peso and wage collapse. Thus the top thirty-four exporters increased their foreign-to-total sales ratio from an average of 12 percent over the years 1990–1994 to an average of 24.7 percent over the years 1995–1997.¶ Mexico’s dominant national exporters have also established few linkages with other domestic firms. According to one scholar:¶ It is true that the major Mexican private exporters are still in the process of productive restructuring and have not yet reached a level of exports sufficient to offset the avalanche of imports that came with the economic opening. It is nevertheless troubling that the more than 13 years of decrees and programs designed to stimulate exports have not produced productive-export linkages sufficient to integrate many smaller firms into the new conditions of national and international competition.7¶ And as these firms consolidate their export orientation and relationships with foreign producers they are becoming increasingly hostile to national initiatives designed to boost the health of the broader national economy including wages.¶ Export production by the maquiladoras foreign export platforms and large national exporters has brought few if any benefits to Mexican workers because as noted above their operations have been promoted and sustained at the expense of the broader national economy. Even the World Bank has been forced to acknowledge that the Mexican growth strategy has produced a divided and disarticulated economy:¶ The productive sector continues to be characterized by a dual structure that seems to have become increasingly differentiated in the wake of trade liberalization and the banking crisis of the 1990s. On the one side is a dynamic export sector made up of internationally competitive firms including the maquiladoras and on the other is a less efficient domestic-market-oriented sector dominated by microenterprises and small- and medium-scale firms.8¶ This outcome has been actively encouraged by government policy. First the government has done little to force or encourage exporters to create “productive linkages” with domestic firms. This is not accidental. Mexican policy makers seek to attract foreign export producers by giving them maximum freedom to organize production as they see fit.¶ Second the low wages paid to export workers especially by the maquiladoras continues to undermine domestic purchasing power and ensure that domestically oriented producers face limited markets. Again these low wages are not an unintended consequence of government policy. the government has pursued a low wage policy precisely to ensure the profitability and expansion of the export sector.¶ Third the collapse of the Mexican banking system has effectively limited the ability of domestically oriented producers especially small and medium sized ones to obtain needed funds for investment. The re-privatization of Mexico’s banks in 1991–1992 left the system under the control of leading Mexican business groups who engaged in a reckless funding of highly speculative and unstable activities. The 1994–1995 crisis brought an end to this activity but left the Mexican banking system with a number of serious problems including a “bad loan” portfolio equal to approximately 20 percent of the country’s GDP. The result according to the World Bank is that ¶ bank lending to the private sector has fallen since 1994 by about 40 percent in real terms consumer credit by private banks all but disappeared...and the productive private sector itself became bifurcated between large export-oriented corporations that can access foreign finance and cash-constrained relatively smaller firms catering to the domestic market.9¶ Foreign capital was quick to take advantage of Mexico’s banking crisis. With the Mexican government’s encouragement foreign investors began taking over Mexico’s main banks. By mid-2001 foreign-owned banks controlled more than 70 percent of the assets in Mexico’s banking system. It is highly doubtful that this foreign takeover will lead to new lending policies promoting the interests of domestically oriented producers.¶ Finally even if one were willing to overlook the high cost and imbalances associated with Mexico’s export strategy there is reason to question whether it can be sustained. As a result of the U.S. downturn the Mexican economy contracted by 1.4 percent in 2001. Maquiladora production fell by 9.2 percent and maquila employment declined by some 20 percent. These declines have been widespread. even high-tech border production has suffered.¶ More importantly many business analysts predict that Mexico’s maquiladora sector will not regain its past dynamism even when the American economy recovers. According to Business Week although Mexican wages “fell sharply in the age of the 1994 peso devaluation wages in Mexico have been rising faster than inflation for the past two years. And since the peso has strengthened almost 5% against the dollar since January [2001] Mexico-based exporters are seeing local production costs increase.”10¶ Growing numbers of these exporters have responded to this situation by shifting their production to Asia and especially China. As The Economist explains “While the average labor cost for assembly plants in Mexico is now around $2 an hour China’s figure is 22 cents. Although plants in Mexico are more sophisticated the country has failed to develop a network of local suppliers that would make it hard for manufacturers to leave as the Chinese catch up.”11¶ So even though Mexican wages still remain below their 1994 level businesses in Mexico see the recent wage increase as unacceptable because there are other countries where workers will work for lower wages. This is a no-win situation for workers in Mexico as well as in Asia. It also makes crystal clear that neoliberalism is much more an ideological cover for a competitive race to the bottom than it is an economic approach capable of advancing a process of human development.¶ Alternatives to Neoliberalism¶ Progressive economists in Mexico are well aware that neoliberalism has been a disaster for Mexico. However for many their rejection of neoliberalism has not been extended to a rejection of capitalism. In other words they believe that there are capitalist alternatives to neoliberalism that are capable of promoting Mexican development.¶ To a large extent such thinking represents a continuing belief in the legacy of the Mexican revolution and the 1930s Cardenas government. This belief in the viability of state-directed capitalist development has been sustained despite its failure in Mexico in large part because of the past successes of East Asian countries especially South Korea and Taiwan.¶ For example Alejandro Nadal the director of the Science Technology and Development Program at El Colegio de Mexico notes that:¶ Mexico has adopted policies that do not guarantee increasing competitiveness through a stronger technological base. Rapidly and indiscriminately liberalizing trade running balanced budgets that restrict investment in education and R&D privatizing strategic industries (such as petrochemicals) and getting rid of policy instruments such as the use of the federal government’s purchasing power and performance requirements which build backward and forward linkages does not appear to be the best strategy to develop a healthy competitive base. The experience of countries like Taiwan and the Republic of Korea is almost 100 percent counter to this set of policies. Or to put it in other terms Mexico is following exactly the opposite strategy these countries implemented in the last 40 years.12¶ While this criticism of Mexico’s past economic policies is sound the implied conclusion that Mexico could achieve development by adopting the South Korean or Taiwanese state-directed growth strategy is seriously flawed.13 First one cannot simply replicate another country’s experience. State power in South Korea and Taiwan came out of a complex history not a set of agreed upon policies.¶ Second East Asian growth came at high expense in terms of civil liberties human and workplace rights and the environment. The East Asian experience while demonstrating that neoliberalism has little to offer third world countries should not be romanticized. it offers no models.¶ Third the East Asian strategy is itself in crisis. This strategy worked well when states dominated their respective national political economies there were few international competitors and U.S. and Japanese government policies were supportive. Eventually labor resistance regional overproduction and a change in U.S. and Japanese policies undermined it leading to the crisis of 1997–1998.¶ Taking advantage of this crisis the U.S. government with the assistance of the IMF and in some cases East Asian capitalists has been increasingly successful in weakening the power of East Asian states and forcing open East Asian markets to foreign trade and investment. Ironically in light of the true nature of the Mexican experience this process is defended by mainstream economists who argue that since neoliberal policies benefited Mexican workers they can also be expected to benefit East Asian workers.¶ As the Bush administration seeks to win popular support for the Free Trade Area of the Americas and new WTO initiatives we can expect to hear more about the Mexican “success” story (or perhaps that of some other newly chosen “miracle” country if conditions get bad enough in Mexico). One way to blunt this offensive is to help people see through the distortions and lies surrounding such claims.¶ At the same time we must also help people see that the answer to contemporary development problems is not the revitalization of the state-directed growth strategies of the past. These strategies whether in Mexico or East Asia suffered from their own serious contradictions that helped pave the way for current globalization dynamics. The major obstacle to development is capitalism itself and our efforts must be directed towards advancing new visions of democratic and sustainable development. </source> [/INST] <claim>Neoliberal policies have empirically failed in Mexico</claim> <psg>Directed Industrialization Mexico’s recent embrace of neoliberalism ended a fifty-year experience with state Cardenas promoted land reform nationalized key foreign assets and used state resources to encourage private investment the end of the Korean War brought lower commodity prices and rates of growth the state subsidized loans. it provided the private sector with below cost state produced industrial inputs the state’s postwar economic strategy was not sustainable it refrained from taking actions that limited private sector profitability The Mexican economic miracle finally came to an end in the 1970s Despite their previous gains from state activity business leaders had grown uneasy about the steady growth of state power seeing it as a potential threat to their independence Capital flight intensified over the decade but the government took no steps to stop it U.S. government attempts to stabilize the dollar pushed up world interest rates and triggered a global economic slowdown The U.S. government demanded that the Mexican government reduce its spending privatize state firms and open domestic markets to foreign trade and investment The government’s first step in the process of neoliberalization was to slash public spending which pushed the economy into recession in 1982 1983 and 1986 Mexican President Carlos Salinas sought and won U.S. President George Bush’s support for an agreement to promote Mexican-U.S. economic integration Both U.S. and Mexican business leaders celebrated NAFTA for much the same reason: they saw it “locking in” the neoliberal policy transformation of the previous decade a more critical examination of the Mexican experience highlights the fact that this new regime has generated few benefits for working people in Mexico The reason is that the government’s neoliberal policies have largely hollowed out the country’s domestic industrial base and the new exports are heavily and increasingly dependent on manufactured imports Mexican workers have not benefited from the accompanying shift away from non-maquiladora production it was caused by non-maquiladora manufacturing wages falling at a faster rate than maquila wages Mexican automotive industry is focused essentially on the North American market is dominated by foreign companies and has limited national linkages Even the World Bank has been forced to acknowledge that the Mexican growth strategy has produced a divided and disarticulated economy Mexican policy makers seek to attract foreign export producers by giving them maximum freedom to organize production as they see fit the U.S. government has been increasingly successful in weakening the power of East Asian states and forcing open East Asian markets to foreign trade and investment we can expect to hear more about the Mexican “success” story These strategies in Mexico suffered from their own serious contradictions that helped pave the way for current globalization dynamics. The major obstacle to development is capitalism itself and our efforts must be directed towards advancing new visions of democratic and sustainable development</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Based on recent research there appears to be a link between the ideals of neoliberalism and increasing rates of inequality. Navarro (1998) argues for instance that neoliberal policies have contributed to growing inequalities around the globe and to worsening living conditions for the majority of the world’s people. For her part George (1999) agrees and blames increasing inequality on the common neoliberal practices of placing public wealth into private hands approving tax cuts for the wealthy and pushing wages down for the non-elite. And unfortunately evidence suggests that inequality may mediate the relationship between neoliberalism and a third variable: interpersonal violence. In this regard Krug et al. (2002:1086) write that “economic conditions [i.e. inequality] are both the causes and the effects of violence” with those on the poorer end of the spectrum experiencing the most violence. Other scholars too have found that inequality is positively correlated with violent crime rates (see Fajnzylber Lederman and Loayza 2002). Considering these findings it appears that as neoliberalism becomes more prominent in a country it can be expected that inequality and as a result interpersonal violence within that country will increase. In an attempt to demonstrate this argument I will review these relationships before providing a brief case study to demonstrate how these variables may be interrelated.¶ The relationship between neoliberalism and inequality has been a contentious issue. Advocates of neoliberalism often argue that their ideology has been helpful in that it has reduced absolute inequality. While this may be somewhat true this view is challenged by those who point out that relative inequality has increased alongside the supposed decrease in absolute inequality (Uvin 2003). Buttressing this claim Coburn (2004) argues that neoliberalism itself is either unconcerned with or may actually endorse inequality. In a similar vein Harvey (2003 2005) blames the capitalist nature of neoliberalism for rising inequality. In particular he writes of capitalism’s inequality-inducing penchant for “accumulation by dispossession” via suppressing the rights of the commons commodifying labor power suppressing all non-capitalist forms of production and consumption appropriating assets monetizing exchange and taxation and initiating credit systems. Through these processes Harvey writes that neoliberalism engenders inequality through the uneven development of states and through the restructuring of class power in favor of the elites. Wade (2004) concurs and argues that inequality both within and between countries has widened since about 1980 the time that neoliberalism really began to take off under Reagan Thatcher and Kohl. In spite of this world leaders often defend this ideology and the inequality that it creates. Thatcher once quipped for example that “It is our job to glory in inequality and see that talents and abilities are given vent and expression for the benefit of us all” (Lean and Cooper 1996:52). By such statements leaders not only recognize the link between neoliberalism and inequality they also legitimize it and present it as being both universal and normative.¶ Somewhat expectantly then research suggests that growing inequality brings about many social maladies. One of these more serious problems is interpersonal violence. In an analysis of the link between income inequality and violence Fajnzylber Lederman and Loayza (2002) examined the relationship between a country’s inequality and its violent crime rate. Their results indicated that there is as a positive correlation both within countries and between countries when it comes to the association between inequality and violence. By controlling for other crime determinants the researchers declared that there exists a causal link between inequality and crime. Despite Neumayer’s (2005) critiques of Fajnzylber et al.’s study other researchers have also found a positive correlation between inequality and violence. Bourguignon (2001) for instance contends that violence is often a byproduct of irregular or uneven economic development in developing countries. An increase in a developing country’s income inequality he writes tends to increase the criminality of its people. In a more specific explanation Wade (2004) suggests that inequality leads to violence as unskilled men in unequal societies become increasingly aggressive in response to their frustration. Their social capital and trust hitting low levels these frustrations can then boil over and result in violence.¶ In an attempt to demonstrate the relationships among neoliberalism inequality and violence consider the case of Brazil. In the early 1990s this country increasingly embraced the ideas of neoliberalism. Import tariffs were lessened most non-tariff barriers were abolished privatization was increased and investments were liberalized (Amann and Baer 2002). Yet despite these pro-capitalist changes and drastic improvements in inflation rates Amann and Baer contend that Brazil’s neoliberal regime did not improve income inequality a problem which has haunted the country for decades. In fact the gap between the richest 10 percent of income groups and the poorest 40 percent of income groups has continued to increase since the introduction of neoliberal policies. Amann and Baer blame part of this widening gap on the reduction of employment opportunities in the industrial sector that occurred as a result of policies that favored privatization technological advances and consequently mass layoffs. As could probably be expected urban violence rose dramatically in places like Rio de Janeiro and Sao Paulo during this time period. Similarly Gawryszewski and Costa (2005) found that homicide rates were highest in the areas of Sao Paulo with the highest rates of socioeconomic disparities. In response to such problems Amann and Baer conclude that Brazil needs the state to reemerge as a promoter of equality.¶ Considering this brief case review it is hopefully easier to understand how neoliberalism directly contributes to inequality and may indirectly contribute to violence. By promoting inequality and disregarding the poor (Coburn 2004) neoliberalism increases the amount of social inequality found both within and across countries (Harvey 2003 2005. Wade 2004). This inequality research has shown can then manifest itself in aggression frustration and ultimately violence (Bourguignon 2001. Fajnzylber Lederman and Loayza 2002. Wade 2004) just as it has done in Brazil. In an effort to dismantle this relationship Krug et al. (2002:1086) write that “comprehensive approaches to violence prevention should include efforts to promote positive economic development especially in ways that seek to reduce inequalities.” Yet as of now such a restructuring does not appear to be on the horizon. This of course suggests that inequality and violence may very well increase in the decades to come. </source> [/INST] <claim>It’s the root cause of inequality and causes interpersonal violence</claim> <psg>there appears to be a link between the ideals of neoliberalism and increasing rates of inequality neoliberal policies have contributed to growing inequalities around the globe and to worsening living conditions for the majority of the world’s people George (1999) agrees and blames increasing inequality on the common neoliberal practices of placing public wealth into private evidence suggests that inequality may mediate the relationship between neoliberalism and a third variable: interpersonal violence it appears that as neoliberalism becomes more prominent in a country it can be expected that inequality and as a result interpersonal violence within that country will increase The relationship between neoliberalism and inequality has been a contentious issue neoliberalism itself is either unconcerned with or may actually endorse inequality processes Harvey writes that neoliberalism engenders inequality through the uneven development of states and through the restructuring of class power in favor of the elite An increase in a developing country’s income inequality he writes tends to increase the criminality of its people consider the case of Brazil increasingly embraced the ideas of neoliberalism Yet despite these pro-capitalist changes and drastic improvements in inflation rates Amann and Baer contend that Brazil’s neoliberal regime did not improve income inequality a problem which has haunted the country for decades widening gap on the reduction of employment opportunities in the industrial sector that occurred as a result of policies that favored privatization technological advances and consequently mass layoffs comprehensive approaches to violence prevention should include efforts to promote positive economic development especially in ways that seek to reduce inequalities such a restructuring does not appear to be on the horizon. This of course suggests that inequality and violence may very well increase in the decades to com</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> I would like to add one last optimistic reflection which will put an end to my contribution. According to what I tried to show before the ideas and the different interests of a whole people generally join in a sanguinary struggle for life. This “ideology” should be taken serious because actually with the appearance of the human consciousness of what is good and what is evil the structure of our socio-cultural environment based on the finality of peace and non-violence is no longer a utopian dream but also a necessary objective both essential for all the Latin-Americans and the whole humanity. If this utopia determines the discussions of a group it is not only an ideological unit but also a mentality or a structure which organizes the dominant ideas – a transcendent ideal and the rebellion of an oppressed class. The positive function of a utopia is thus to explore what is feasible and to exploit the possibilities reality offers. Without closing too quickly I would say that the significance of ideology and utopia enables us to illustrate the two sides of the dynamics between power and imagination. The problem of power and imagination remains for me the most attractive structure of existence. To open ourselves to the imaginary unexpected and unforeseen belongs to our identity. The identity of the Latin-American people and communities is also an unsettled prospective identity. This also applies to the structure of identity as a symbolic structure which constitutes imagination and which is reflected not only as ideology and utopia but also as reality and fiction. My conviction is that we are always captured in this oscillation between ideology and utopia. Those who have neither projects nor objectives do not have anything to describe. Neo-liberalism It is necessary to mention some elements in this context. In Latin America we find a concentration of wealth with a small minority which is the highest in comparison to the rest of the planet. 230 million Latin-Americans – i.e. 44% of the population – live below the poverty line. The Gini coefficient which measures the degree of inequality reached the record of 0.57 (compared with 0.29 in Europe and 0.34 in the United States). This extraordinary social inequality whose first victims are the natives regardless of the country adds to the weariness and frustration resulting from a strictly formal democratization of the states in the region. According to an extended study of the UN Development Program (UNDP) carried out in 2004 more than half of the Latin-Americans would be willing to give up democracy and accept an authoritative government if it proved to be able to solve their socio-economic problems. As far as the penetration of multinational corporations beyond the old sectoral and geographical borders of capitalism is concerned as well as the opportunities offered by the development of communications they will play in full support of the self-assertiveness of these marginalized populations and the articulation of their organizations and claims. On the internal level these incipient mobilizations will gain new strength at the same time from the specific dynamics caused by modernization (generation gap emergence of young innovative elites rupture of traditional values …) of the rural communities from which they result. They will also gain strength from the multiple cultural and political influences which the proponents have experienced in the last few decades. They are on the religious level being inspired by theories of liberation theology or on a more socio-political level by rural organizations trade unions or even revolutionary organizations. Multiculturalism Multiculturalism just like its terminological substitutes is a term whose usage varies according to the places the historical and national contexts and the approaches epistemological or ideological. In addition there is a basic difference in meaning and use of this term among the countries to which people immigrate – where multiculturalism results in the integration (or assimilation) of the representatives of foreign cultures – on the one hand. On the other hand there are the post-colonized countries where multiculturalism results in a relationship between the autochthonous populations (fourth-world groups) and the national society managed and set up according to euro-modernistic principles. In this respect another differentiation of multiculturalism applies in the post-colonized countries. It is the differentiation between the countries which the colonizers left (all while leaving euro-modernistic structures there as in Africa or Asia) and those countries where the colonizers and their descendants settled and thus currently make up a sector of the national society. The texts which compose this issue of the Alhim Books (Alhim – Amérique Latine Histoire et Mémoire) have revealed this last case i.e. the countries of Latin America with their component of indigenous or non-indigenous populations having been involved in multicultural relations for more than five centuries. The sovereignty of the people As a whole the unexpected survival of the social and popular movements during the last twenty years of serious conflicts and multiple forms of violence is nothing less than extraordinary. They continue to exist whereas a big number of parties and political groups which were founded at the same time according to the traditional rules of an organization quickly disappeared. In spite of the breaches the inevitable tensions and internal imbalances and in spite of the assassinations the imprisonments and torture these movements have continued to exist and have developed to the point that they now include whole socio-geographic areas with the help of existing networks and mechanisms of coordination (e.g. the unification of local councils local voluntary working groups cooperatives of low-rent apartments or slums campaigns for public education). Thus linked they continue to resist every attempt to be instrumentalized by groups of the radicalized left and the offensives to be taken over and subordinated which are directed against them and their leaders by the resident parties and governments. It is true that these movements knew some desertions and that specific political operations have been revealed. However given the enormous discredit of many official organizations people do no longer think that adhering to the latter or resuming to their reactionary and immoral practices or their unspecified reinforcement are of advantage to those engaged in social movements. Many dominant institutions such as the traditional parties lost their legitimacy in the eyes of the people partly because they are no longer able to intervene or support the interests of defenseless or persecuted groups and partly because they let the decline infiltrate the social structure of which the situation of violence in Colombia gives evidence. </source> [/INST] <claim>Imagining a better alternative for Latin America allows for a new collective identity for marginalized populations that can break down the oppressive structures of neoliberalism</claim> <psg>would like to add one last optimistic reflection which will put an end to my contribution This “ideology” should be taken serious because actually with the appearance of the human consciousness of what is good and what is evil the structure of our socio-cultural environment based on the finality of peace and non-violence is no longer a utopian dream but also a necessary objective essential for all the Latin-Americans The positive function of a utopia is thus to explore what is feasible I would say that the significance of ideology and utopia enables us to illustrate the two sides of the dynamics between power and imagination The identity of the Latin-American people and communities is also an unsettled prospective identity My conviction is that we are always captured in this oscillation between ideology and utopi It is necessary to mention some elements in this context these incipient mobilizations will gain new strength at the same time from the specific dynamics caused by modernization They will also gain strength from the multiple cultural and political influences which the proponents have experienced in the last few decades there are the post-colonized countries where multiculturalism results in a relationship between the autochthonous populations unexpected survival of the social and popular movements during the last twenty years of serious conflicts and multiple forms of violence is nothing less than extraordinary they continue to resist every attempt to be instrumentalized by groups of the radicalized left and the offensives to be taken over and subordinated which are directed against them and their leaders by the resident parties and government</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Interest in socialism is rising in Latin America. Polls in Venezuela and Brazil show that more than half the population of these countries supports socialism – a figure unheard of in Chile and Mexico. However there is a growing debate about the question which kind of socialism is desirable. There is a process under way beginning what could be called “two three many forms of socialism” starting from the Cuban revolution of 1959. As the famous Peruvian Marxist José Carlos Mariategui who died in 1930 wrote Latin America does not want to be a copy of European socialism but socialism based on its own in the case of Peru indigenous reality. Hence socialism in Cuba is expressly Cuban. in Venezuela it has its roots in the ideas of Simón Bolívar2 and Bolivian socialism is based on indigenous traditions while the indigenous leader of Ecuador Blanca Chancoso suggests a “multinational and multicultural state which we can build together”. The Zapatistas not speaking of socialism make the case for a system where all power comes from the basis as in their “councils of good government” in Chiapas. The debate shows the various socialist perspectives of Latin America which have four things in common: 1. They are led by human values trying to overcome patriarchy racism sexism the exploitation of classes and genocide. they are based on values like love (like in the works of Che Guevara and José Martí) respect for other persons and social justice. 2. Socialism is participative without Stalinist authoritarianism but with a decentralized planning of companies controlled by the workers and with “politics instead of governing with dirty tricks and compromises” (according to Fidel Castro) all rooted in a state practice and the participation of the people from the bottom to the top instead of some party rule or an “avant-garde”. 3. Internationalism planning of national and international markets protection of peoples from neo-liberalism and from imperialist interventions the foundation of an international organization without veto rights would promote peace and human rights. 4. The sovereignty of national states the defense of the principle of non-interference non-aggression and self-determination including the right to found new states which combine several peoples (e.g. Bolivia and Venezuela) or the states striving for “national independence” through an affiliation in a Latin American state or a confederation of states (as described in the concepts “Our America” by José Marti and “Grand Fatherland” by Bolívar). The socialist “Left” searching for a better world I do not have a formula and there are people more competent than me to answer the question for a better world. I would simply say that for a start all medium and long term efforts to redistribute wealth need to be supported and encouraged. This redistribution should be economically manageable and based on a well organized institutional infrastructure and not only on the illusions of prestidigitators in a pensioner’s mentality style. At first I will mention two examples: Real democratization is currently taking shape in the tax reform of Ecuador and the restructuring of the Brazilian public health system. Nobody is talking about these two examples although they seem to me much more important than all those short-lived oil presents to the thankful Bolivarian masses. Secondly it is important to continue fighting all aspects of racism and discrimination and to de-colonialize imagination and the institutions in order to overcome 500 years of mental and material suppression. However one should not fall for the ridiculous idea that what happens today – or should be happening – in Latin America was some new model of “white Christian capitalist Western civilization.” In fact there is no such thing as a “white Christian capitalist Western civilization.” It is nothing else than the fallacious and outdated pretext of colonial domination and the imaginary European racist. Of course further integration of the South American continent has to be enforced and its pro-active international role as a bloc has to be encouraged and not only in symbolic but practical suggestions that is. These should aim at effective coalitions and an alternative consensus for substantial and profound reformation of international relations. Moreover it seems entirely useless to me for the Latin American Left to continue arguing on the basis of a never-ending confrontation with the United States cultivating a victim’s rhetoric especially in a time of melting polar ice and Andean glaciers with the rising Asian giants ravaging both regional economies. The latter have no reason to give presents to South America. One only has to see the cynical commercial pragmatism of Beijing and its contribution to a “dependent” re-privatization of South American countries. Fifteen presidential elections Latin America entered a period of political change at the end of 2005 culminating in 13 presidential elections. This period started in Honduras in November 2005 and was to finish in December 2006 when the Venezuelan people were asked to decide in favour or against a continuation of the “revolution” of Hugo Chavez. Change in Central America • Costa Rica found her political leader when Oscar Aria who was awarded the Peace Nobel Prize for his role in the Central American peace process of the late 1980s declared he would run for presidency in July 2005. The government programme of Mr Aria confirms Costa Rica’s strong democratic tradition and innovation since it encourages democracy the peace process and a change in social relationships based on sustainable and just development in the Central American region. • In Honduras the interplay between the two traditional political powers goes on. There is certain balance between the two big parties the nationals and the liberals. Regardless of who is going to be the next president no change is likely. • In Nicaragua two men from the same party are competing: rival of Daniel Ortega is Herty Lewites currently mayor of Managua and former chairman of the Sandinist National Liberation Front from which Daniel Ortega its first chairman had him expelled. • El Salvador is also going through a change right now. The current president of El Slavador Mr Funes (of social democratic orientation) former TV journalist at channel 12 – and correspondent of the Spanish CNN studio before – did not participate in the armed struggle. His Vice President Salvador Sanchez Cerén on the other hand is a former guerrilla commander. The victory of the Frente Farabundo Marti para la Liberación Nacional (FMLN) finished 20 years of hegemony of the Nationalist Republican Alliance (ARENA). While it was originally founded by the “damned soul” of the death squadrons Roberto d’Aubuisson this party has step by step moved out of the right-extremist spectre and left its demonic past behind. Nevertheless it still represents the hard right wing. In an attempt to stop the Left the other two conservative political bodies – the National Reconciliation Party (PCN) as the representation of the military governments 1961-1976 and the Christian Democratic Party (in power 1984-1989) – abstained from presidential candidates of their own and formed an alliance with “Arena”. Latin America conveys hope Latin America is on the move. She conveys hope once again. Fifteen years ago Clinton ended his first presidential term without crossing the Rio Grande he did not even bother to travel to Mexico to sign the NAFTA agreement. Latin America was well-behaved from a US perspective. Ten years later the Bush administration could not get any support for the invasion into Iraq from one single Latin America country not even Mexico their closest ally. The favourite US strategic project for the region the so-called ZLEA (a free-trade zone for America in Spanish ALCA) is dead. After having served as a world laboratory for neoliberal experiments – and exactly for that reason – Latin America has become the weakest link in the neoliberal chain in the world. One could say in a simple but exact manner that today’s world is dominated by three powers three big monopolies: the weapon monopoly the money monopoly and the language monopoly. Latin America has profound experience in fighting the first two monopolies in order to create a multi-polar world: The majority of its governments today concentrate on regional integration projects like Mercosur Alba Bank of the South and continental gas pipelines instead of the freetrade agreements proposed by the US. From this point of view the US have just one major ally – Columbia where one of the endless wars of the Empire has taken place. The government is isolated in the region though. The US military base in Ecuador will be closed down. For this reason the presidential election in Paraguay next April is of great importance. By the way the US have stationed a lot of troops in a region where their interests are challenged. So Latin America plays a positive role in the fight against a unipolar world. This is an important precondition to break the power of weapons once and for all. In Latin America ideas rooted in folk traditions mingle with selective constraints and certainties to form a bloody struggle for survival. From the beginning of this world there has been knowledge and the quest for truth and that means that non-violent cultural development is not only a dream although we can never know for sure. As for the power of money – pushed by the neoliberal model – Latin America makes its contribution too however a less important one than in the cultural field. Governments like those of Brazil Argentina Uruguay and Nicaragua may privilege the process of regional integration but they have not escaped the neoliberal model. Still they are different from their predecessor governments. In some cases one could detect a certain flexibility of the model. An effective social policy develops regarding the re-distribution of incomes. Moreover these governments are implement ing an independent foreign policy. However they remain controversial since they restore the hegemony of the financial capital the power of big land owners to export natural resources and the politics of freetrade. Initiatives In this context a number of extraordinary initiatives are currently evolving. I do not have enough time here to mention all of them. Still I do mention the Bank of the South which also represents countries not organized in the economic area of ALBA like Brazil Argentina and Uruguay. This bank promotes the plan of a new financial architecture. that way the countries of the region can finance their own projects – an alternative to the policy of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Another example is the initiative Operación Milagro (Operation Miracle) launched in Cuba which gives a new perspective to thousands of mainly poor people. This initiative has been expanded to Venezuela and Bolivia now. In this context the first generation of medical doctors from lower social class background developed who were trained in Latin American medical schools in Cuba and Venezuela. According to UNESCO in this co-operation illiteracy has already been eliminated in Venezuela and 60% of illiterates have been educated in Bolivia. Bolivia and without doubt Nicaragua too may be able to announce this year that together with Cuba and Venezuela they are the only countries in Latin America without illiterates. All this became possible by means of non-commercial relations not aiming at cost calculations profit and its maximization but at a process trying to move away from traditional trade (de-merchandisation). Democratization in the age of neo-liberal hegemony means getting rid of old-style trading (“de-merchandisation”). As they say in France “the essential has no prize.” And the essential issues are peoples’ rights and not the merchandise. A different world is possible and not utopian Building a different world can only succeed by political means involving states and their governments – new states anti-neoliberal governments but also governments not entirely anti-neoliberal. In a different world social movements must not replace the productive field. Social movements have to engage in a new dialogue with politics. With a false understanding of this dialogue the social movements would exclude themselves from political processes of profound economic social political and cultural change. In Bolivia Venezuela Ecuador and some other countries the social movements might get into opposition that way and hold their corporative positions against the development of political alternatives. (I am not talking about non-government organizations a much more severe case.) In the name of the “autonomy of the social movements” which has developed into a fundamental issue in some cases they exclude themselves from building a different possible world. If it is about the question of maintaining autonomy against the subordination of popular interests there is no problem. But if social movements and the political level oppose each other we fall back on corporatist positions – supposedly in the name of the ‘civil society’ – with the risk to give up the political struggle with the traditional forces which reproduce the dominating system. This autonomy can be good to resist neo-liberalism but it is an absolute obstacle if we want to build another possible world and not only claim it to be possible. The best way to talk about it is to build it and that will be impossible without a new hegemonic model – economic social political and cultural a new type of power a new society a new world in all its globality. Resuming the political struggle in a new manner means for the World Social Forum of Porto Alegre to focus on the fight against war above all. Moreover it means to seriously take into account the new possible world which has started to be built in Latin America. Neo-liberalism tries to discourage any form of regulation by the state and to discredit the role of the policy and of all forms of government in favor of an expanded market. The quest for a different political practice is thus part of the struggle for another possible world and Venezuela Bolivia Ecuador show that is at the same time possible and essential for the construction of a new type of society. </source> [/INST] <claim>The movement is rising- social movements in Latin America against neoliberalist governments are growing and need to be supported now- the alt is critical to breaking down neoliberalism as a whole</claim> <psg>Interest in socialism is rising in Latin America various socialist perspectives of Latin America which have four things in common They are led by human values trying to overcome patriarchy racism sexism the exploitation of classes and genocide they are based on values like Socialism is participative without Stalinist authoritarianism nternationalism do not have a formula and there are people more competent than me to answer the question for a better world I would simply say that for a start This redistribution should be economically manageable and based on a well organized institutional infrastructure Real democratization is currently taking shape in the tax reform of Ecuador Secondly it is important to continue fighting all aspects of racism and discrimination and to de-colonialize imagination and the institutions in order to overcome 500 years of mental and material suppression there is no such thing as a “white Christian capitalist Western civilization It is nothing else than the fallacious and outdated pretext of colonial domination and the imaginary European racist it seems entirely useless to me for the Latin American Left to continue arguing on the basis of a never-ending confrontation with the United States So Latin America plays a positive role in the fight against a unipolar world. This is an important precondition to break the power of weapons once and for all In Latin America ideas rooted in folk traditions mingle with selective constraints and certainties to form a bloody struggle for survival This autonomy can be good to resist neo-liberalism but it is an absolute obstacle if we want to build another possible world and not only claim it to be possible. Neo-liberalism tries to discourage any form of regulation by the state and to discredit the role of the policy quest for a different political practice is thus part of the struggle for another possible world</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> After more than two decades of research on the implementation of economic reforms in Latin America our knowledge of the role of ideas in the reforms is still limited largely because debate about their ideational underpinnings was lacking for more than a decade. The reforms were eventually contested but only after some of their most negative impact on societies was evident did the discussion of alternatives emerge. Scholars are today trying to analyze a vast sea change that is connected to core issues in social science such as the relationship between patterns of economic development and democracy. Positive analysis is taking place in a context of heated normative debates about the impacts of neoliberal reform. The Polanyi-Hayek debate about the proper role of states and markets has become more complex as it has become intertwined with related disagreements about the capacity and proper role of nation-states in the world economy. In this respect the current debate can be seen as part of the cyclical history of development studies which have historically swung between market-centered and state-centered paradigms. The so-called Washington Consensus of the 1980s and 1990s was appealing because it was a simple and straightforward set of tools offered in a time of cri sis. The influence of transnational technocratic elites and international institutions was crucial to the advancement of policy innovations. Creating a new consensus for current problems based on different principles may prove much more difficult today given the resilience of the neoliberal programs the absence of concrete alternative proposals the complexity of contemporary problems the apparent lack of a common crisis across countries and the skepticism of Latin American publics. The endurance of the Washington Consensus was based on its capacity to adapt some general policy instruments to specific contexts while preserving the free-market orientation. However it failed to address the needs of broad majorities did not facilitate political compromises and never generated the sense of a collective project. Mainstream academic production and practices usually tend to reflect and help support a broader intellectual consensus-the conventional wisdom of the time. It is our responsibility to spell out the underlying normative preferences of that consensus and promote a vibrant debate on their validity for Latin American societies. This may well be the next stage of the crisis of the Washington Consensus. Just as neoliberalism changed the terms of the discussion about development worldwide in the 1980s the elaboration of alternatives to neoliberalism must involve another similarly substantial revision of our theoretical concepts and approaches. The contested character of the processes analyzed here demands just such an effort. </source> [/INST] <claim>Debate about the validity of new alternatives to neoliberalism specifically in the context of Latin America is good and necessary to the creation of successful policies in the region this card will destroy them…</claim> <psg>After more than two decades of research on the implementation of economic reforms in Latin America our knowledge of the role of ideas in the reforms is still limited largely because debate about their ideational underpinnings was lacking for more than a decade Scholars are today trying to analyze a vast sea change that is connected to core issues in social science such as the relationship between patterns of economic development and democracy The Polanyi-Hayek debate about the proper role of states and markets has become more complex as it has become intertwined with related disagreements . Creating a new consensus for current problems based on different principles may prove much more difficult today it failed to address the needs of broad majorities did not facilitate political compromises and never generated the sense of a collective project It is our responsibility to spell out the underlying normative preferences of that consensus and promote a vibrant debate on their validity for Latin American societies Just as neoliberalism changed the terms of the discussion about development worldwide in the 1980s the elaboration of alternatives to neoliberalism must involve another similarly substantial revision of our theoretical concepts and approaches</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Issues of capitalist development and imperialism have been overshadowed in the last two decades by an all too prevalent discourse on 'globalization'. The Left has generally bought into the discourse tacitly accepting its inevitability and that in many ways it is progressive needing only for the corporate agenda regarding its neoliberal form to be derailed. This is certainly although not particularly the case in Latin America where the Left has focused its concern almost exclusively on 'neoliberalism' with reference to the agenda pursued and package of policy reforms that have been implemented by virtually every government in the region by the force or dint of ideology if not the demands of global capital or political opportunism. In this concern imperialism and capitalist development per se as opposed to its neoliberal form have been pushed off the agenda and as a result the project of building socialism has disappeared as an object of theory and practice. In this paper we would like to contribute towards turning this around -to help resurrect the socialist project. One way of doing this is to cut through the nonsensical theoretical and political discourse on 'neoliberal globalization': to deconstruct this discourse in terms of the ideology embedded in it and reconstruct the actual dynamics of capitalist development and to do so in its diverse contexts. This is a major task requiring collaborative research and a closer look at the issues involved. The modest contribution of this paper is to reconstruct in outline form the imperialist dynamics of capitalist development as they relate to Latin America. To this end we briefly present an analytical framework for an analysis of the dynamics of capitalist development and imperialism. We then describe and briefly review these dynamics in the Latin American context. Our central argument is that the dynamics of capitalist development and imperialism have both an objective-structural and a subjective-political dimension and that a class analysis of these dynamics should include both in its scope. This means that it is not enough to establish the workings of capitalism and imperialism in terms of their objectively given conditions that affect people and countries according to their class location in this system. We need to establish and analyze the political dynamics of popular and working class responses to these conditipns-to neoliberal policies of structural adjustment to the purported requirements of the new world order. The politics of the Left might then be better informed. </source> [/INST] <claim>An in depth analysis of neoliberalism in Latin American proletariat is critical to the development of new reform and change?</claim> <psg>Issues of capitalist development and imperialism have been overshadowed in the last two decades The Left has tacitly accepting its inevitability This is certainly although not particularly the case in Latin America where the Left has focused its concern almost exclusively on 'neoliberalism' imperialism and capitalist development per se as opposed to its neoliberal form have been pushed off the agenda and as a result the project of building socialism has disappeared we would like to contribute towards turning this around -to help resurrect the socialist project. to deconstruct this discourse in terms of the ideology embedded in it and reconstruct the actual dynamics of capitalist development to reconstruct in outline form the imperialist dynamics of capitalist development as they relate to Latin America Our central argument is that the dynamics of capitalist development and imperialism have both an objective-structural and a subjective-political dimension it is not enough to establish the workings of capitalism and imperialism in terms of their objectively given conditions that affect people We need to establish and analyze the political dynamics of popular and working class responses to these conditipns-to neoliberal policies</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Last week I asked a friend of mine if he could recommend a good white noise machine. “Why don’t you ” he responded “download an iPhone app instead?” I did and the app works just fine. That got me thinking: what other gadgets do I no longer have or could do without thanks to my iPhone? I put together a short list and asked Lauren Kessler from Cato’s art department to create the lovely graphic below. Of course “dematerialization ” or using less material and energy to produce more goods is not new. As Ron Bailey writes in Reason Jesse Ausubel director of the Program for the Human Environment at Rockefeller University and Paul Waggoner at the Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station show that the world economy is increasingly using less to produce more. They call this process “dematerialization.” By dematerialization they mean declining consumption of energy or goods per unit of GDP. In a 2008 article in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Ausubel and Waggoner using data from 1980 to 2005 show that the world is on a dematerialization binge wringing ever more value from less material. No I am not claiming that because of the iPhone all the gadgets that I have listed below will totally “disappear.” People will still prefer to have their weddings shot by a professional photographer using sophisticated camera equipment. Many people however will never need to buy a camera or video camera (especially as the iPhone and similar products become better at taking pictures and videos) and that will save resources. Dematerialization in other words should be welcome news for those who worry about the ostensible conflict between the growing world population on the one hand and availability of natural resources on the other hand. While opinions regarding scarcity of resources in the future differ dematerialization will better enable our species to go on enjoying material comforts and be good stewards of our planet at the same time. That is particularly important with regard to the people in developing countries who ought to have a chance to experience material plenty in an age of rising environmental concerns. Maybe I am too much of an optimist but dematerialization could also lead to a greater appreciation of capitalism. Namely the “profit motive” can be good for the environment. No I am not talking about dumping toxic chemicals into our rivers which is illegal and should be prosecuted. Rather I am talking about the natural propensity of firms to minimize inputs and maximize outputs. Take the humble soda can. According to the Aluminum Association “In 1972… a pound of aluminum yielded 21.75 cans. Today as a result of can-makers’ use of less metal per unit one pound of aluminum can produce 33 cans. </source> [/INST] <claim>Neoliberalism is sustainable-dematerialization means that resource wars and environmental collapse aren’t inevitable</claim> <psg>Last week I asked a friend of mine if he could recommend a good white noise machine. “Why don’t you ” he responded “download an iPhone app instead?” I did and the app works just fine. That got me thinking: what other gadgets do I no longer have or could do without thanks to my iPhone? I put together a short list and asked Lauren Kessler from Cato’s art department to create the lovely graphic below. Of course “dematerialization ” or using less material and energy to produce more goods is not new. As Ron Bailey writes in Reason Jesse Ausubel director of the Program for the Human Environment at Rockefeller University and Paul Waggoner at the Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station show that the world economy is increasingly using less to produce more. They call this process “dematerialization.” By dematerialization they mean declining consumption of energy or goods per unit of GDP. In a 2008 article in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Ausubel and Waggoner using data from 1980 to 2005 show that the world is on a dematerialization binge wringing ever more value from less material. No I am not claiming that because of the iPhone all the gadgets that I have listed below will totally “disappear.” People will still prefer to have their weddings shot by a professional photographer using sophisticated camera equipment. Many people however will never need to buy a camera or video camera (especially as the iPhone and similar products become better at taking pictures and videos) and that will save resources. Dematerialization should be welcome news for those who worry about the ostensible conflict between the growing world population on the one hand and availability of natural resources dematerialization will better enable our species to go on enjoying material comforts and be good stewards of our planet at the same time Maybe I am too much of an optimist but dematerialization could also lead to a greater appreciation of capitalism. Namely the “profit motive” can be good for the environment I am talking about the natural propensity of firms to minimize inputs and maximize outputs. Take the humble soda can as a result of can-makers’ use of less metal per unit</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Of the estimated 1 billion people who will observe Earth Day worldwide this year few will know about the progress that has been made. Fewer still will know how it was made. The media uninterested in looking at the real story will simply credit the environmental movement for the improvements. We won’t discount the movement’s contribution. Four decades ago it helped show the world the value of global stewardship. But that movement is no longer interested in a cleaner world. Filled with extremists and anti-capitalist crusaders its primary goals have changed. Topping the agenda of today’s environmentalist groups is the pulling down of market economies the raising up of central planning for egalitarian goals forced lifestyle changes and the vilification — in hopes of the elimination — of signs of wealth. None of these advance the planet’s environmental health. But capitalism has. Through wealth generated by the free market we have enough resources to move beyond the subsistence economies that damage the environment enough disposable income to fund clean-up programs enough wealth to scrub and polish industry. Only in advanced economies can the technology needed to recycle hazardous waste or to replace dirty coal-fired power plants with cleaner gas or nuclear plants be developed. That technology cannot be produced in centrally planned economies where the profit motive is squelched and lives are marshalled by the state. There’s nothing wrong with setting aside a day to honor the Earth. In fairness though it should be complemented by Capitalism Day. It’s important that the world be reminded of what has driven the environmental improvements since Earth Day began in 1970. </source> [/INST] <claim>Capitalism is the only system in which we can resolve the environment-only a profit based economy allows for tech development</claim> <psg>Of the estimated 1 billion people who will observe Earth Day worldwide this year few will know about the progress that has been made We won’t discount the movement’s contribution Filled with extremists and anti-capitalist crusaders its primary goals have changed. Topping the agenda of today’s environmentalist groups is the pulling down of market economies None of these advance the planet’s environmental health. But capitalism has. Through wealth generated by the free market we have enough resources to move beyond the subsistence economies that damage the environment enough disposable income to fund clean-up programs enough wealth to scrub and polish industry. Only in advanced economies can the technology needed to recycle hazardous waste or to replace dirty coal-fired power plants with cleaner gas or nuclear plants be developed. There’s nothing wrong with setting aside a day to honor the Earth. In fairness though it should be complemented by Capitalism Day</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> In the March 2004 issue of Scientific American National Aeronautics and Space Administration global-warming expert James Hansen notes that greenhouse gas emissions and global-warming projections are 'consistently pessimistic.' Hansen suggests that projections do not take into account the lower carbon dioxide and methane emissions that have resulted from technological advancements. He explains that the lower carbon dioxide emissions result from increased energy efficiency following the energy crisis in the 1970s and the lower methane emissions from technological changes in agriculture. Hansen's essay concludes on an optimistic note saying 'the main elements [new technologies] required to halt climate change have come into being with remarkable rapidity.' This statement would not have surprised economist Julian Simon. He saw the 'ultimate resource' to be the human mind and believed it to be best motivated by market forces. Because of a combination of market forces and technological innovations we are not running out of natural resources. As a resource becomes more scarce prices increase thus encouraging development of cheaper alternatives and technological innovations. Just as fossil fuel replaced scarce whale oil its use will be reduced by new technology and alternative fuel sources. Market forces also cause economic growth which in turn leads to environmental improvements. Put simply poor people are willing to sacrifice clean water and air healthy forests and wildlife habitat for economic growth. But as their incomes rise above subsistence 'economic growth helps to undo the damage done in earlier years ' says economist Bruce Yandle. 'If economic growth is good for the environment policies that stimulate growth ought to be good for the environment.' The link between greenhouse gas emissions and economic prosperity is no different. Using data from the United States Professor Robert McCormick finds that 'higher GDP reduces total net [greenhouse gas] emissions.' He goes a step further by performing the complex task of estimating net U.S. carbon emissions. This requires subtracting carbon sequestration (long-term storage of carbon in soil and water) from carbon emissions. Think of it this way: When you build a house the wood in it stores carbon. In a poor country that wood would have been burned to cook supper or to provide heat thus releasing carbon into the atmosphere. McCormick shows that economic growth in the United States has increased carbon sequestration in many ways including improved methods of storing waste increased forest coverage and greater agricultural productivity that reduces the acreage of cultivated land. Because rich economies sequester more carbon than poor ones stored carbon must be subtracted from emissions to determine an economy's net addition to greenhouse gas emissions. McCormick's data show that 'rich countries take more carbon out of the air than poorer ones' and that 'the growth rate of net carbon emission per person will soon be negative in the United States.' Put differently—richer may well be cooler. Global-warming policy analysts agree that greenhouse gas regulations such as those proposed at Kyoto would have negative impacts on the economy. Therefore as McCormick warns we should take great care that regulations in the name of global warming 'not kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.' </source> [/INST] <claim>Growth of the market economy is net better for the environment and warming-development of technology and carbon sequestration allow us to solve back for the K’s impacts</claim> <psg>greenhouse gas emissions and global-warming projections are 'consistently pessimistic.' Hansen suggests that projections do not take into account the lower carbon dioxide and methane emissions that have resulted from technological advancements lower carbon dioxide emissions result from increased energy efficiency and the lower methane emissions from technological changes in agriculture the main elements [new technologies] required to halt climate change have come into being with remarkable rapidity the 'ultimate resource' to be the human mind and believed it to be best motivated by market forces Because of a combination of market forces and technological innovations we are not running out of natural resources. As a resource becomes more scarce prices increase thus encouraging development of cheaper alternatives and technological innovations Market forces also cause economic growth which in turn leads to environmental improvements economic growth helps to undo the damage done in earlier years If economic growth is good for the environment policies that stimulate growth ought to be good for the environment Professor McCormick finds that 'higher GDP reduces total net [greenhouse gas] emissions economic growth in the United States has increased carbon sequestration in many ways 'rich countries take more carbon out of the air than poorer ones' and that 'the growth rate of net carbon emission per person will soon be negative in the United States . Global-warming policy analysts agree that greenhouse gas regulations such as those proposed at Kyoto would have negative impacts on the economy we should take great care that regulations in the name of global warming 'not kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.'</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Earth Day is traditionally a day for the Left -- a celebration of government's ability to deliver the environmental goods and for threats about the parade of horribles that will descend upon us lest we rededicate ourselves to federal regulators and public land managers. This is unfortunate because it's businessmen -- not bureaucrats or environmental activists -- who deserve most of the credit for the environmental gains over the past century and who represent the best hope for a Greener tomorrow. Indeed we wouldn't even have environmentalists in our midst were it not for capitalism. Environmental amenities after all are luxury goods. America -- like much of the Third World today -- had no environmental movement to speak of until living standards rose sufficiently so that we could turn our attention from simply providing for food shelter and a reasonable education to higher 'quality of life' issues. The richer you are the more likely you are to be an environmentalist. And people wouldn't be rich without capitalism. Wealth not only breeds environmentalists it begets environmental quality. There are dozens of studies showing that as per capita income initially rises from subsistence levels air and water pollution increases correspondingly. But once per capita income hits between $3 500 and $15 000 (dependent upon the pollutant) the ambient concentration of pollutants begins to decline just as rapidly as it had previously increased. This relationship is found for virtually every significant pollutant in every single region of the planet. It is an iron law. Given that wealthier societies use more resources than poorer societies such findings are indeed counterintuitive. But the data don't lie. How do we explain this? The obvious answer -- that wealthier societies are willing to trade-off the economic costs of government regulation for environmental improvements and that poorer societies are not -- is only partially correct. In the [US] United States pollution declines generally predated the passage of laws mandating pollution controls. In fact for most pollutants declines were greater before the federal government passed its panoply of environmental regulations than after the EPA came upon the scene. Much of this had to do with individual demands for environmental quality. People who could afford cleaner-burning furnaces for instance bought them. People who wanted recreational services spent their money accordingly creating profit opportunities for the provision of untrammeled nature. Property values rose in cleaner areas and declined in more polluted areas shifting capital from Brown to Green investments. Market agents will supply whatever it is that people are willing to spend money on. And when people are willing to spend money on environmental quality the market will provide it. </source> [/INST] <claim>Capitalism is key to the environment turns the impact to the kritik</claim> <psg>it's businessmen -- not bureaucrats or environmental activists -- who deserve most of the credit for the environmental gains over the past century and who represent the best hope for a Greener tomorrow we wouldn't even have environmentalists in our midst were it not for capitalism Wealth not only breeds environmentalists it begets environmental quality. There are dozens of studies showing that once per capita income hits between $3 500 and $15 000 the ambient concentration of pollutants begins to decline just as rapidly as it had previously increased This relationship is found for virtually every significant pollutant in every single region of the planet. It is an iron law the data don't lie. How do we explain this? wealthier societies are willing to trade-off the economic costs of government regulation for environmental improvements most pollutants declines were greater before the federal government passed its panoply of environmental regulations than after the EPA . Much of this had to do with individual demands for environmental quality Market agents will supply whatever it is that people are willing to spend money on. And when people are willing to spend money on environmental quality the market will provide it.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> One can identify with the picture of Latin American society offered by Gustavo Gutierrez. He describes it as 'a social order fashioned economically politically and ideologically by a for their own benefit.'32 Given the problems of rent-seeking barriers to occupational entry and other institutional restrictions on enterprise such a description surely applies. The Latin American economies are characterized by a myriad of legal hurdles blocking access to land ownership and business ownership concentrated political power in some cases) and markets that throttled through price controls and trade restrictions. But these are not the institutional features of capitalism. Certainly poor are oppressed by the state and kept from access to the means by which they might solve their own economic problems. And thus Gutierrez rightly notes that the marginalized sectors of society are speaking out in opposition to this system: The lower classes of the populace forced to live on the margins of society and oppressed since time immemorial are beginning to speak for themselves more and more rather than relying on intermediaries. . . They want to be the active subjects of their own own history and to forge a radically different society.33 In the economic realm the Latin American desire for a different order is well-grounded. Adam Smith author of the well-known treatise which expounded the desirable features of the economic “system of natural liberty ” 34 observed that 'No society can surely be flourishing and happy of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable.” 35 Certainly the Christian economist finds that one of the central aspects of his calling is to pursue methods and recommend institutional changes which can truly liberate the poor from economic oppression. Historically it has been private initiative and market-based economic reforms which have lifted the living standards of the great majority of low-income persons. One study found that market-oriented economies have experienced 'substantial improvements in life expectancy and health and substantial reductions in the incidence of hunger and illiteracy since the end of the Second World War.' By comparison the performance of state-owned and directed economies has been 'systematically inferior.'36 For Latin America to move in the direction of greater state control of the economy as a remedy to poverty would mean the adoption of 'a cure that would only deepen the current disease.'37 While it is understandable that Latin Americans are hostile toward their current economic institutions the needed changes to lift the living standards of the impoverished may very well involve more true capitalism not less. In Mexico there are some hopeful signs in the measures taken Salinas since his presidency began in 1988. A leading element in his program has been privatization of state-run industry. Over last year Mexico has divested a major share of its stake in the country's leading air carriers as well as major parts of its telephone steel and banking industries. By means of a host of inefficiencies these industries were losing millions of dollars annually and wasting precious resources. However as the 'Third World Survey' in The Economist observes privatization that occurs in the context of protected markets and price distortions is often insufficient. Previous experience with privatization in developing countries has shown that it must 'take the form of allowing private business to compete on equal terms with what was formerly a state monopoly supplier.'38 In this regard it is significant that Salinas has been lifting price controls in some parts of the economy. He actively sought a trade agreement with the United States in which both countries make drastic reductions in the tariffs placed on imports. In order for these economic policy changes to produce lasting benefits they must be followed up by viable competition in the political sphere as well. Political reform in the direction of eliminating the lack of credible political parties has to be implemented. In sum diffusion of political and economic power well defined property rights and a reasonable rule of law truly free enterprise and markets and free trade are all critical features of capitalism that are sorely missing in most Latin American societies. Surely the addition of these features would not cure all of the problems of these societies but the societies of the world that are succeeding by most measures generally are characterized by large doses of them. </source> [/INST] <claim>The problem is not that we have capitalism in Latin America but that it’s overregulated and corrupted by the state – people in Latin America want more neoliberalism and not the other way around</claim> <psg>a social order fashioned economically politically and ideologically for their own benefit. The Latin American economies are characterized by a myriad of legal hurdles blocking access to land ownership and business ownership these are not the institutional features of capitalism Certainly poor are oppressed by the state and kept from access to the means by which they might solve their own economic problems marginalized sectors of society are speaking out in opposition to this system They want to be the active subjects of their own own history and to forge a radically different society the Latin American desire for a different order is well-grounded No society can surely be flourishing and happy of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable it has been private initiative and market-based economic reforms which have lifted the living standards of the great majority of low-income persons market-oriented economies have experienced 'substantial improvements in life expectancy and health the needed changes to lift the living standards of the impoverished may very well involve more true capitalism not less diffusion of political and economic power well defined property rights and a reasonable rule of law truly free enterprise and markets and free trade are all critical features of capitalism that are sorely missing in most Latin American societies the societies of the world that are succeeding by most measures generally are characterized by large doses of them</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Venezuela is a country of mining and extractive industry economy whose model development has been based on the exploitation of oil and other non renewable natural resources that causes strong impacts on the environment. More than a decade some researchers (Garcia Guadilla et al 1997) strongly questioned the sustainability of development models in the nineties under the presidencies of C. A. Perez and R. Caldera. In the decade 1999-2009 the government has blamed the “savage capitalism and neoliberal policies” and consequently property and private exploitation of resources for the environmental problems despite that current exploitation of these resources and the design of economic policies that support the so-called Bolivarian Development Model reproduce these practices labelled as “neoliberal or savage capitalism” causing negative environmental impacts same strong or higher than in the past. In the decade 1999-2009 the conflicts and protests for environmental post materialistic and materialistic demands have had as main actors environmental organizations indigenous communities public sectors and even human rights organizations. basing its struggle on the 1999 Constitution approved by a Constituent Process that did incorporate participatory democracy and environmental rights both socio-cultural and indigenous among others (García Guadilla 2001). Many of these rights have been violated and participatory democracy has not resulted in an environmental democracy when resolving such conflicts which in fact have been multiplied since Hugo Chavez became President of the Republic. Memorial of grievances Some of the most significant socio-environmental conflicts of this decade in Venezuela have to do with the negative impacts of oil exploitation and mining and the potential impacts associated with energy mega-projects proposed both nationally and internationally to supposedly reduce the U.S. dependence and achieving the integration of Latin America and the Caribbean by the now called Bolivarian Alliance for Our Americas People (ALBA). The Bolivarian Development Model has been defined discursively by Government spokesmen including President Chavez as “sustainable endogenous equitable and participatory” (Fergusson undated. Francia 2007 Perez undated. Velasco 2005.2007. Ministery of Science and Technology undated). The electoral tender made in 1998 by the then presidential candidate Hugo Chavez to support the struggles that environmentalists and indigenous were doing at the time around their conflicts along with his environmental sustainability speech and criticism of the “neo-liberalism and wild capitalism “ created an expectation among the social movements that if he became president would set a vision more consonant with environmental sustainable development. However these expectations were frustrated because according to the announcement made in 2005 by President Chavez it is contemplated to double the oil production for 2012 through the exploitation of 500 000 km2 of marine platform and over 500 000 km2 in mainland plus the construction of new refineries and a gas complex in the Gulf of Paria. Other activities included in those development plans are mining extractions in the Imataca Forest Reserve the substantial increase in coal mining in the Sierra de Perija and increased hydropower production for export to Brazil through electric power lines. The economic crisis along with the government inefficiency have delayed or halted those plans but if they ever settle it will affect almost the entire territory including areas that are now environmentally protected by the laws and Constitution such as Canaima National Park where the Gran Sabana is placed Imataca Forest Reserve and the basins of the country main rivers. These plans reflect continuity with the policies of previous governments branded by President Chavez as “neoliberals capitalists and predators of the environment.” chavez cartoonAs for the Caribbean and South America Venezuela is one of the twelve member countries of the Initiative for the Integration of South American Regional Infrastructure (IIRSA) which provides 507 projects with high environmental and socio-cultural impacts spread over ten areas of development involving construction of major works infrastructure (communication and transport roads dams gas pipelines and waterways) to the length and breadth of South America (AMIGRANSA 2005). The mega-plan Great Southern Gas Pipeline one of the most important plans to achieve energy integration between Venezuela Brazil and Argentina among other countries and base of the ALBA project requires cross 8000 kilometres so it would affect extremely fragile and bio diverse areas which according with some researchers are the latest environmental reserves that exist in Latin America. As in the previous case these mega-plans are paralyzed or delayed due to the economic crisis but if they’re activated the impacts on the environment could be compared with the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) ideological mother of the ALBA. Resistance beyond rhetoric discourses The development model based in the exploitation of hydrocarbons that the Venezuelan government has proposed on a national level for countries part of the ALBA and the South American and Caribbean region that participates in the IIRSA has been strongly questioned by the environmental indigenous and human rights movements due to the large scale environmental and socio-cultural impacts that will generate. In various discussions on the subject made in the World Social Forum carried out in Caracas in January 2006 indigenous social movements and environmentalists of Venezuela and the world expressed strong criticism against the negative effects of oil exploitation being the largest mobilization of the Forum the march against exploitation and expansion of coal developments in the Sierra de Perija in support of life environment cultural identity and in general rights sanctioned in the Bolivarian Constitution of 1999 (Soberania.org.ve 2006). Currently there are frequent protests against negative effects of oil and gas in Ecuador and Venezuela and questioning via national and international digital environmental networks such as oilwatch.org maippa.org soberanía.org and amigransa.blogia.com. because these spaces are privileged and globalized electronic networks of resistance against the negative impacts of oil and gas exploitation in tropical countries. In Venezuela as in the whole globalized world the logic behind social movements is to face “neoliberal policy” whether the government has a “anti-neoliberal discourse” which means that the Bolivarian Development Model like the other governments that are called left can generate resistance and mobilization on the part of those movements which demand not only materialistic values but also respect for human rights own culture gender equity and a healthy environment.Therefore this can not be understood solely with the logic of neoliberalism or anti- neoliberalism because both can go against the promotion of these values. In the case of Venezuela such resistance movements and proposals can come both from within and outside Chavez circles because of the big ideological heterogeneity of the groups supporting the president. and given the lack of a shared and clear ideological project within the Chavez movement environmental policies strategies can be woven that do not necessarily have a reference in the anti-neoliberalism or neoliberalism. This could be the case of Venezuelans environmental and indigenous social movements that while by definition are anti-neoliberal and many of its members support the president Chavez transcend this dichotomy questioning the model of “civilization” and demand a transformation on the political cultural gender social and environmental rationality. So far the great ideological heterogeneity and class differences between environmentalists has hampered the formulation of collective proposals and has contributed to the estrangement between different social movements that in the past were articulated around strategic alliances of environmentalists. All this seems to affect the expanded environmental movement the indigenous and human rights organizations that has lost their power as a result. (García Guadilla & Lagorio 2006): the missing of an objective reading on the socio-environmental crisis and the lack of a joint strategy about alternative collective proposals related with their identity and constitutionally support have contributed to this weakening. While ideological alliances become unrealistic given the large heterogeneity and polarization the protests against a predator model that cause big impacts on the environment and the proposals to “build the new meanings languages and symbols “of the new model of civilization could be channelled through mobilizations virtual or real and new forms of resistance in communities. </source> [/INST] <claim>The alternative is no better for the environment – Venezuela is proof</claim> <psg>Venezuela is a country of mining and extractive industry economy some researchers strongly questioned the sustainability of development models the government has blamed the “savage capitalism and neoliberal policies property and private exploitation of resources for the environmental problems reproduce these practices labelled as “neoliberal or savage capitalism” causing negative environmental impacts same strong or higher than in the past Many of these rights have been violated and participatory democracy has not resulted in an environmental democracy</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Bad news: The free market has been tried in South America -- and it doesn't work. After two decades of experimenting with capitalistic reforms voters are fed up with the lack of positive results and socialism is on the rise (again) in that region of the world according to a February 8 article in USA Today.¶ In recent years six Latin American countries have elected leaders who are either self-declared socialists or leftists. In Venezuela President Hugo Chavez vows to implement '21st-century socialism.' In Bolivia President Evo Morales a leader of the Movement towards Socialism (MAS) promises to 'renationalize' the country's natural resources. In Paraguay President Nicanor Duarte Frutos declares that 'human beings are more than a market.' In Brazil Chile and Argentina voters also returned socialists or leftists to power.¶ What do those six countries have in common? Politicians in each have announced that the free market has failed. 'Savage capitalism ' they declare has not ended poverty. the free market has not created enough new jobs. and privatizing government-owned businesses has not resulted in lower prices or greater prosperity. Liberty has been tried in South America critics say. It has failed.¶ Or has it? The answer seems to depend on your definition of the 'free market.' USA Today paints a picture of 'free-market' reforms that seem suspiciously like well more big government.¶ For example countries like Mexico Brazil and Argentina took certain steps in a free-market direction at the instigation of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). In return the IMF the U.S. government and the World Bank lent Latin American governments 'tens of billions of dollars to spur development ' reports USA Today. Hmm.... Massive loans from governments (and quasi-governmental entities) to other governments. That doesn't sound like the free market.¶ Many Latin American politicians also protected favored local industries from foreign competition with laws and steep tariffs. 'Local manufacturers remain insulated from the full effects of foreign competition ' reports USA Today. So businesses remain inefficient and prices remain high. That doesn't sound like the free market.¶ Then there's corruption. Those IMF and World Bank loans that South American governments received were -- surprise! -- frequently doled out 'according to payoffs or political influence rather than economic efficiency ' reports USA Today. The same thing happened when many state-owned businesses were privatized. Privatization often consisted of 'sweetheart deals for insiders ' according to USA Today. So the politically connected rich got richer and the poor remained poor. That doesn't sound like the free market.¶ Did South America really give the free market a chance? Here's one more piece of evidence. Every year the Heritage Foundation and the Wall Street Journal publish an Index of Economic Freedom. The Index measures the economic freedom of nations around the globe based on factors like trade policy tax burdens property rights regulation and so on. Countries are given a score from 1 to 5 with 1 being completely free and 5 being economically repressed.¶ The six Latin American countries that recently re-embraced socialism -- Venezuela Bolivia Paraguay Brazil Chile and Argentina -- earned in 1995 an average score of 3.04 ('Mostly Unfree'). That's a year when these countries were allegedly in the midst of a free-market revolution. Now in 2006 these six nations have an average score of 3.11. That's slightly worse than Qatar (3.04) and slightly better than Tanzania (3.20) -- two nations that rarely come to mind when discussing capitalistic success stories. The bottom line is that much of South America is still 'Mostly Unfree' economically -- and moving further in the wrong direction.¶ The free market did not fail in South America. What did fail is what always fails -- government intervention in the economy in the form of widespread protectionism politically motivated loans and massive political corruption. The only difference is that in Latin America this government intervention masqueraded as free-market 'reforms.' And voters deluded by opportunistic politicians decided that the solution to too much government was more government. Sadly those South American voters will probably pay the price for that mistake for years to come. </source> [/INST] <claim>Reform in Latin America works – the problem is government intervention</claim> <psg>The free market in South America doesn't work according to a February 8 article in USA Today In Venezuela President Hugo Chavez vows to implement '21st-century socialism Politicians have announced that the free market has failed. 'Savage capitalism ' they declare has not ended poverty. privatizing government-owned businesses has not resulted in lower prices or greater prosperi USA Today paints a picture of 'free-market' reforms that seem suspiciously like well more big government. countries like Mexico Brazil and Argentina took certain steps in a free-market direction at the instigation of the International Monetary Fund Massive loans from governments doesn't sound like the free market The free market did not fail in South America. What did fail is what always fails -- government intervention in the economy in the form of widespread protectionism politically motivated loans and massive political corruption The only difference is that in Latin America this government intervention masqueraded as free-market 'reforms voters deluded by opportunistic politicians decided that the solution to too much government was more government those South American voters will probably pay the price for that mistake for years to come.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> What impact might Latin American developments have in the world at large? We could examine the question with regard to three great pillars of contemporary power: the power of arms the power of money and the power of words. Clearly Latin America can have little impact on the global economic situation beyond the alliances with India China Russia and South Africa which Brazil in particular has forged. The growth of South–South exchanges ensuing from regional integration—chiefly with China and India but also with Iran—are steps toward a different mode of international trade relations in which the weight of the US counts less than before except for the countries that have signed bilateral FTAs. Similarly on the question of arms it seems unlikely that Latin America could do more than play a passive role refusing to back the military expansionist plans of the US empire as it did when Washington failed to drum up a single vote on the UN Security Council in support of the invasion of Iraq—not even from its close economic allies Mexico and Chile. The isolation of Colombia the epicentre of US influence became very clear when its recent incursion into Ecuadorian territory was roundly condemned by every other nation as well as by the OAS. The regional integration projects unique to Latin America offer a path to relative independence from the US combined with an alternative to the free-trade agreements peddled by Washington. Here too are found some of the very few governments in the world that openly defy North American imperial hegemony: Cuba Venezuela Bolivia Ecuador. None of this of course suffices to build a political and military counterweight to the US. At best the continent is resisting and working on its own forms of integration in a region whose economic clout has been much diminished by the de-industrializing effects of the economic opening-up enforced by neoliberalism. The founding in May 2008 of Unasur a project for the integration of all the countries of South America and the proposal for a South American Defence Council—both initiatives US-free—point toward a new space and model for continental integration. though Colombia’s formal participation complicates matters since Uribe has decided to allow the US to establish a military base on its territory. </source> [/INST] <claim>No alt spillover- even if regional movements work they can’t change the global neoliberal hold</claim> <psg>What impact might Latin American developments have in the world at large Clearly Latin America can have little impact on the global economic situation on the question of arms it seems unlikely that Latin America could do more than play a passive role refusing to back the military expansionist plans of the US empire The isolation of Colombia the epicentre of US influence became very clear when its recent incursion into Ecuadorian territory was roundly condemned by every other nation as well as by the OAS. None of this of course suffices to build a political and military counterweight to the US At best the continent is resisting and working on its own forms of integration in a region whose economic clout has been much diminished by the de-industrializing effects of the economic opening-up enforced by neoliberalism since Uribe has decided to allow the US to establish a military base</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> If 'post-colonial' theory has sought to challenge the grand march of western historicism with its entourage of binaries (self-other metropolis- colony center-periphery etc.) the term 'post-colonialism' nonetheless re-orients the globe once more around a single binary opposition: colo- nial/ post-colonial. Moreover theory is thereby shifted from the binary axis of power (colonizer/colonized - itself inadequately nuanced as in the case of women) to the binary axis of time an axis even less productive of political nuance since it does not distinguish between the beneficiaries 85 Pitfalls of the Term 'Post-Colonialism' of colonialism (the ex-colonizers) and the casualties of colonialism (the ex-colonized). The 'post-colonial scene' occurs in an entranced suspen- sion of history as if the definitive historical events have preceded us and are not now in the making. If the theory promises a decentering of history in hybridity syncreticism multi-dimensional time and so forth the sin- gularity of the term effects a re-centering of global history around the single rubric of European time. Colonialism returns at the moment of its disappearance. The word 'post ' moreover reduces the cultures of peoples beyond colonialism to prepositional time. The term confers on colonialism the prestige of history proper. colonialism is the determining marker of his- tory. Other cultures share only a chronological prepositional relation to a Euro-centered epoch that is over (post-) or not yet begun (pre-). In other words the world's multitudinous cultures are marked not positively by what distinguishes them but by a subordinate retrospective relation to linear European time. The term also signals a reluctance to surrender the privilege of seeing the world in terms of a singular and ahistorical abstraction. Rifling through the recent flurry of articles and books on 'post-colonialism ' I am struck by how seldom the term is used to denote multiplicity. The following proliferate: 'the post-colonial condition ' the post-colonial scene ' 'the post-colonial intellectual ' 'the emerging disciplinary space of post-colonialism ' 'post-coloniality ' 'the post-colonial situation ' 'post-colonial space ' 'the practice of postcoloniality ' 'post-colonial discourse served by inscribing history as a single issue. Just as the singular category 'Woman' has been discredited as a bogus universal for feminism incapable of distinguishing between the varied histories and imbalances ' and that most tedious generic hold-all: 'the post-colonial Other.' I am not convinced that one of the most important emerging areas of intellectual and political enquiry is best in power among women so the singu- lar category 'post-colonial' may license too readily a panoptic tendency to view the globe within generic abstractions voided of political nuance. The arcing panorama of the horizon becomes thereby so expansive that international imbalances in power remain effectively blurred. Historically voided categories such as 'the other ' 'the signifier ' 'the signified ' 'the subject ' 'the phallus ' 'the postcolonial ' while having academic clout and professional marketability run the risk of telescoping crucial geo-po- litical distinctions into invisibility </source> [/INST] <claim>Post-colonialism is reductionist and reduces history to a singular abstraction – reject it </claim> <psg>the term 'post-colonialism' nonetheless re-orients the globe once more around a single binary opposition: colo- nial/ post-colonial. theory is thereby shifted from the binary axis of power The 'post-colonial scene' occurs in an entranced suspen- sion of history as if the definitive historical events have preceded us The word 'post ' moreover reduces the cultures of peoples beyond colonialism to prepositional time Other cultures share only a chronological prepositional relation to a Euro-centered epoch that is over The term also signals a reluctance to surrender the privilege of seeing the world in terms of a singular and ahistorical abstraction am struck by how seldom the term is used to denote multiplicity. The following proliferate: 'the post-colonial condition ' the post-colonial scene I am not convinced that one of the most important emerging areas of intellectual and political enquiry is best in power among women The arcing panorama of the horizon becomes thereby so expansive that international imbalances in power remain effectively blurred</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Contrary to the received wisdom neoliberalism did not destroy democracy in Latin America. the available evidence suggests that it actually helped to guarantee the maintenance of democracy. Why did competi- tive civilian rule in most cases survive the enactment of drastic costly and risky market reforms? Perhaps the most crucial reason for democracy's surprising resilience was that most Latin American countries enacted neoliberalism only when they faced dramatic crises and the population was therefore prepared to swallow the bitter pill of tough stabilization. In particular structural adjustment often was a last-ditch response to hyperinflation-that is to price rises above 50 percent per month. The tremendous costs of exploding inflation commonly induce large segments of the population to support tough risky stabilization plans that hold the uncertain prospect of overcoming the crisis. When facing the danger of a catastrophe many people are willing to shoulder considerable short-term losses in the hope of receiving payoffs from restored stability and renewed growth in the medium and long run. Thus in crisis situations people do not dig in their heels and strenuously defend their immediate material well-being. instead they are willing to make sacrifices and trust their leaders' plans for straightening out the economy. They are willing to accept substantial risks by supporting adjustment plans that promise to turn the country around but that-for economic and especially political reasons-have uncertain prospects of success. Thus people's economic calculations are much more com- plicated and sophisticated-and more susceptible to persuasion and leadership-than the literature used to assume (see Stokes 2001b. Graham and Pettinato 2002. Weyland 2002). As a result governments that combated profound crises often managed to muster sufficient polit- ical backing to enact bold painful market reforms under democracy (Armijo and Faucher 2002). Democracy therefore survived neoliberalism in many Latin American countries such as Argentina Brazil and Bolivia that had unstable civil- ian regimes when they initiated market reform. Even in Peru where Pres- ident Alberto Fujimori governed in an autocratic fashion these deviations from democratic norms and principles were not directly caused by or 'required for' the enactment of neoliberalism (McClintock 1994). Instead the longstanding postponement of determined adjustment combined with large-scale guerrilla insurgencies and terrorism had discredited the country's 'political class ' and Fujimori took advantage of this opportunity to concentrate power and disrespect liberal-democratic safeguards. Thus market reform as such did not destroy democracy in Latin America. </source> [/INST] <claim>Neoliberal reform supports Latin American democracy and improves economic growth </claim> <psg> neoliberalism did not destroy democracy in Latin America. it helped to guarantee the maintenance of democracy ? Perhaps the most crucial reason for democracy's surprising resilience was that most Latin American countries enacted neoliberalism only when they faced dramatic crises and the population was therefore prepared to swallow the bitter pill of tough stabilization crisis. When facing the danger of a catastrophe many people are willing to shoulder considerable short-term losses in the hope of receiving payoffs from restored stability and renewed growth in the medium and long run. Thus in crisis situations people do not dig in their heels and strenuously defend their immediate material well-being. instead they are willing to make sacrifices and trust their leaders' plans for straightening out the economy many Latin American countries regimes when they initiated market reform. Even in Peru where Pres- ident Alberto Fujimori governed in an autocratic fashion these deviations from democratic norms and principles were not directly caused by or 'required for' the enactment of neoliberalism</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Both announcements were a great exaggeration and were really not taking seriously the texture and the granularity that Latin America has as a region. The Washington consensus for those of you who may not remember what it was was the name that was given to the economic reforms that started being implemented in Latin America at the end of the 1980s. The term has become extremely popular among the media and in particular among the critics of the reforms. John Williamson coined this phrase because he was putting together the introduction to a volume that had a number of papers that had been presented at a conference that he had organized. There were a group of us including myself having a beer at some bar in Washington and John said well I'll call this the Washington consensus since the conference was in Washington. And then on a napkin he wrote down the ten particular commandments as it came to be known. But basically the ten most important characteristics of the Washington consensus.¶ And from there on this notion acquired a life of its own. The economic reforms in Latin America were implemented during the late 1980s in some countries and throughout the first three quarters of the 1990s throughout all of the region. These were economic reforms that moved Latin America toward capitalism and a market orientation and globalization. And the notion that followed the reforms was that behind the Washington consensus was that these reforms had been dictated from Washington that they had been thought up and were the brainchild of the multilateral institutions: the International Monetary Fund the World Bank and the U.S. Treasury. It was believed that these three institutions had imposed these reforms on the Latin American countries. Anyone who knows anything about Latin America or about economic reform or about the multilateral institutions or about the bureaucracy or about Washington knows that that is not true. It is the greatest simplification that we have seen in the history of ideas on economic reform in emerging markets in the last I would say twenty to thirty years.¶ The reforms in Latin America were the brainchild of Latin American economists. They were designed in some countries implemented at a speed that astounded the bureaucrats in Washington and in many cases they were implemented in spite of the strong opposition of the World Bank the IMF and the U.S. Treasury. </source> [/INST] <claim>Economic reforms in Latin America are not based in American dominant thought but rather are based in a new way of thinking unique to Latin America</claim> <psg>The Washington consensus was the name given to the economic reforms that started being implemented in Latin America during the late 1980s in some countries These were economic reforms that moved Latin America toward capitalism and a market orientation and globalization the notion that followed the reforms was that these reforms had been dictated from Washington that they had been thought up and were the brainchild of the multilateral institutions Anyone who knows anything about Latin America knows that that is not true It is the greatest simplification that we have seen in the history of ideas on economic reform The reforms in Latin America were the brainchild of Latin American economists in many cases they were implemented in spite of the strong opposition of the World Bank the IMF and the U.S. Treasury</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Let me move now to the third part. I want to talk about the current situation in Latin America and what to expect about the future. I want to focus on four or five points very quickly. The first one is that there is deep pessimism with respect to Latin America and it comes from every side. There is pessimism that comes from the critics that say this is a disaster. There is deep criticism that comes from the official sector. In Milan at the Inter-American Development Bank meetings maybe a month and a half ago every single official speech was what a disaster what did we do wrong? Why is god against Latin America? What can we do to really get over it? Very very pessimistic. And there is also pessimism among the private sector in the rest of the world despite the fact that Latin American debt has been the asset class that has had the highest rate of return during the last year.¶ Yesterday there was an op ed column by Desmond Lachman until a week or two ago the chief strategist for emerging markets for Salomon Brothers saying it is a speculative bubble in particular being very critical of Latin America saying that there are no fundamentals behind this rally of Latin American debt.¶ This pessimism I think is unwarranted. It is unwarranted because it is generalized. It doesn't make the obvious point that there are too many countries in Latin America for you to think that all of the region is going to go down the drain. There are countries that are doing poorly. there are countries that are doing quite well thank you.¶ The second point is that much of this criticism says that populism is back. And populism means disregard for macroeconomic policy disregard for the constraints of the public sector disregard for the central bank disregard for efficiency and productivity. There are people who think that populism is back and when it comes back there is going to be wholesale backtracking of the reforms. Latin America is going to move away from these reforms that may or may not have worked but re-adopting populism that is the same thing plus 30 000 percent inflation. So that is worse.¶ I think again that this is unfounded. The reason is that Latin American politicians even I hope Mr. Kirchner who is going to take over the presidency in Argentina have learned that populism doesn't work. My view is that throughout most of Latin America the doctrinaire type of populism the populism of President Alan Garcia in Peru during the first half of the 1980s the populism that said inflation is good for you the populism that said we have to close our economies and we don't have to compete with the rest of the world the populism that said we should not be integrated to the world global and financial market we should have a regional barter system between Brazil and Argentina that type of populism in my view is dead. It doesn't exist any longer.¶ Maybe it exists in Venezuela in President Chavez's head but the greatest two proofs that it doesn't exist as a doctrine is President Lula of Brazil and President Lucio Gutierrez of Ecuador. President Lula has been extremely careful in maintaining the macroeconomic equilibrium and in being absolutely sure that Brazil is going to retain its place in the world. President Gutierrez of Ecuador appeared to be another Chavez a former military officer who had been involved in a coup attempt who had been sent to jail for that reason for making an attempt against the institutions of the democratic regime who ran on the basis of a populist or semipopulist discourse. The first thing that he has done is try to maintain a basic order in Ecuador and to move the country towards greater efficiency and greater productivity. So I think that the notion that populism is going to take over Latin America is greatly exaggerated and I would put it aside. </source> [/INST] <claim>No movement away from neoliberalism in the status quo</claim> <psg>there is deep pessimism with respect to Latin America and it comes from every side . There is deep criticism very pessimistic This pessimism is unwarranted because it is generalized It doesn't make the obvious point that there are too many countries in Latin America for you to think that all of the region is going to go down the drain There are countries that are doing poorly. there are countries that are doing quite well The second point is that much of this criticism says that populism is back when it comes back there is going to be wholesale backtracking of the reform re-adopting populism that is the same thing plus 30 000 percent inflation populism in my view is dead It doesn't exist any longer the notion that populism is going to take over Latin America is greatly exaggerated</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Hugo Chavez came to power in 1998 promising a change in the way government was run with the plight of the poor and a war against corruption as the centerpiece of his campaign platform. More than 10 years and $200 billion in oil revenue later there is little perceptible change in the effectiveness of social spending in Venezuela and corruption is arguably as bad or worse than it was prior to his election. Yet Chavez remains in power with ambition to stay there indefinitely and his brand of 21st century socialism has been exported throughout Latin America. This article examines whether positive economic change has occurred in the Latin American countries that have embraced Chavez's political model. Real GDP growth has traditionally gyrated - sometimes wildly - in Latin America. Since Chavez was first elected real GDP has mostly declined in Venezuela apart from a short period in 2004. Since Morales was elected in 2005 in Bolivia real GDP has remained steady. Since Correa took office in 2007 Ecuador's real GDP briefly rose before getting caught up in the global recession. Nicaragua's real GDP has mostly consistently under-performed against the region and the world average was below zero from 1984-1994 and has been in steady decline since 2004. Non-socialist countries in Latin America have generally performed better. Although Argentina Brazil Chile and Colombia's real GDP growth all gyrated - sometimes wildly - between 1980 and 2008 in general their rates of growth were higher than the 21st century socialist countries. Like Bolivia Ecuador and Venezuela Argentina Brazil Chile and Colombia are all resource rich. The primary difference is how they transitioned from military to democratic governments and how each government managed or mismanaged its fiscal resources. The level of direct investment in the economy in Bolivia El Salvador Honduras and Venezuela from 1980 to 2008 is mixed. The worst performer by far is Venezuela which declined from nearly $6 billion in 1998 to less than $1 billion by 2008. Part of this is due to the anti-foreign investment laws that were passed since Chavez came to power nationalizations in key sectors and a reliance on more indigenous forms of investment. In Bolivia the initial decline in FDI leveled off since Morales modified his nationalization program in the power sector but investment levels remain depressed compared with levels in the late 1990s. Although investment levels have slowly risen in Honduras since 2002 this trend is likely to be reversed based on the political change that occurred in the country earlier this year. Investment levels in Ecuador have been declining since 2004 and like Nicaragua and Bolivia have always been under $1 billion per annum. By contrast average direct investment levels have risen considerably since the mid-1990s in Argentina Brazil Chile and Colombia. Brazil's investment levels has been at least 10 percent since 1996 and even at their low points since that time the other countries' investment levels has not dropped below $1 billion. Inflation rates gyrated wildly in Venezuela and Ecuador in the 1980s and 1990s reaching as high as 100% in Venezuela in 1996 and Ecuador in 2000. It is on the rise again in Venezuela and is projected by the IMF to approach 50% next year. After reaching incredible highs of more than 11 000 percent in Bolivia and more than 12 000 percent in Nicaragua in the 1980s inflation has been at more manageable levels since the 1990s and remains under control in Honduras. Although Argentina and Brazil experienced periods of hyper-inflation inflation has been under control in Argentina since 1992 and in Brazil since 1996 and in Chile and Colombia throughout the reporting period. Unemployment remains a persistent problem in most of Latin America with a contributing factor being high birth rates. As is the case with so many other statistics for the referenced countries the unemployment rates have tended to lack consistency. Since Chavez came to power the unemployment rate has been cut in half from 15% to 7.5% due largely to the swelling ranks of public employees. Ecuador's unemployment rate has been roughly halved as well from a high of 14% in 1999 to roughly 7% in 2008. IMF statistics for Bolivia and Nicaragua are incomplete but the trend lines were rising in both countries in the middle of this decade. Unemployment remains an issue in Argentina Brazil Chile and Colombia. The unemployment rate in Argentina reached as high as 18% in the early part of this decade and was reduced to 7.5% in 2008. The worst affected of the four non-socialist countries has been Colombia whose unemployment rate reached 20% in 2000 but had been reduced to 11% by 2008. Brazil's rate was as high as 10% and Chile's 8% earlier this decade but were both 7.5% in 2008. Of all of the statistics measured in this study unemployed poses the most persistent challenge. In terms of exports it is no surprise that Venezuela's statistics are quite favorable given Chavez's emphasis on revitalization of the oil sector. Export income has more than tripled since Chavez came to power. A similar story in Ecuador where the maturation of the oil sector has resulted in a doubling of export income since 2001. Bolivia's statistics might have been even more favorable if it were not for the nationalizations since 2005. Both Bolivia's and Nicaragua's export statistics are unimpressive being nearly flat from 1980 to 2003. The non-socialist countries being used in this study were certainly not flat since 1986. In the case of Brazil export income has risen ten-fold to approximately $200 billion since that time. Argentina's Chile's and Colombia's export income all rose dramatically during the period. This coincided with a generally more liberalized trade regime along with enlightened policy decisions on the part of the region's governments. Venezuela's jump in exports has been matched by a concurrent rise in imports due to a corresponding rise in foreign exchange levels and domestic demand. The same is true in Bolivia Ecuador and Nicaragua. That is sustainable as long as export income and consumption levels rise. What countries like Bolivia Ecuador and Venezuela must address is how rising import levels can be sustained when oil export revenue falls as has been the case in the past year. In Venezuela's case expectation levels among the general populace have risen in accordance with oil revenue generation. Chavez has his hands full in managing those expectations since the price of oil was halved a year ago. Although the cost of a barrel of oil rose nearly 15-fold between 1998 and 2008 Latin America's socialist petro states generally tended not to benefit from a meaningful rise in foreign exchange reserves until well into the current decade. The additional revenue generated for national budgets in the interim years appears to have evaporated as the region's petro states squandered much of the wealth that was created. Venezuela's propensity for wild reserve fluctuations persisted for the entire 20-year period being observed - throughout Hugo Chavez's reign as President. For those Latin American countries that do not have petro-based economies such as Nicaragua the chronic foreign exchange deficit has continued unabated. Brazil enjoyed a tremendous rise in its reserve asset position since 2005 largely the result of the spike in oil prices between 2005 and 2008. Its skillful management of its fiscal resources is in stark contrast to Venezuela. The significant new oil discoveries that have been made in the past two years imply that eventually it will become the dominant hydrocarbon supplier in the region and may become the new model for social development in the region. In spite of the avalanche of oil wealth over the past 10 years the region's petro states have generally failed to invest adequately in local infrastructure or keep pace with the rising levels of expectation among their populations. Chronic mismanagement of indigenous infrastructure poor planning and endemic corruption have also contributed to the problem as has frozen tariff levels for water and power providing a disincentive to conserve resources and exacerbating the problem. This has exacerbated the level of frustration among voters and raised question about whether 21st Century Socialism is ultimately any different than any other political movement in terms of rhetoric and deliverables. In Venezuela less than a quarter of the $643 million budgeted for electricity infrastructure projects between 2001 and 2005 was actually spent and less than 10 percent of the additional electricity generating capacity deemed necessary for the country's growing population 10 years ago has been realized. Chavez responded in October 2009 by implementing power and water rationing and blaming El Nino for the problem. The bottom line is that in spite of all his rhetoric and promises Chavez has failed to deliver what he promised to his people. Even when times have been good Latin America's socialist countries have still failed to deliver meaningful political and economic reforms or effective public spending programs. From an economic perspective 21st Century Socialism has failed to deliver a meaningfully improved standard of living for most of the people who have embraced Chavez's credo. The global recession has only served to highlight many of the inherent contradictions in Chavez's 'revolution'. </source> [/INST] <claim>Alternatives are bad for Latin America – causes economic decline</claim> <psg>Hugo Chavez came to power in 1998 promising a change in the way government was run there is little perceptible change in the effectiveness of social spending in Venezuela Chavez remains in power . Real GDP growth has traditionally gyrated - sometimes wildly - in Latin America real GDP has mostly declined in Venezuela Non-socialist countries in Latin America have generally performed better The primary difference is how they transitioned from military to democratic governments and how each government managed or mismanaged its fiscal resources The worst performer by far is Venezuela Part of this is due to the anti-foreign investment laws inflation has been under control the unemployment rates have tended to lack consistency it is no surprise that Venezuela's statistics are quite favorable given Chavez's emphasis on revitalization of the oil sector Latin America's socialist petro states generally tended not to benefit from a meaningful rise in foreign exchange reserves until well into the current decade Chronic mismanagement of indigenous infrastructure poor planning and endemic corruption have also contributed to the problem as has frozen tariff levels for water and power providing a disincentive to conserve resources and exacerbating the problem Chavez has failed to deliver what he promised to his people Latin America's socialist countries have still failed to deliver meaningful political and economic reforms or effective public spending programs The global recession has only served to highlight many of the inherent contradictions in Chavez's 'revolution'</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> On Saturday 39 were killed and more were injured in an explosion at Venezuela’s Paraguaná Refinery one of the largest in the world. This is only the latest in a string of accidents that the state owned oil company Pétroleos de Venezuela (PDVSA) has racked up in past years. The New York Times reports that—once again—faulty state supervision of the facilities is to blame:¶ José Bodas an oil union leader said that the company had failed to invest in maintenance. “This has as a consequence the increase in accidents and tragic deaths like what we are seeing today ” he said in a telephone call to Globovision a television channel associated with the political opposition to President Chávez.¶ It is clear that the Chávez regime has been squeezing every last penny out of the oil sector but despite the “Bolivarian” socialist rhetoric promising equal distribution of this wealth the money hasn’t just been used for social programs but also to fund Venezuela’s expensive foreign policy as well as its efforts to cover up the results of poor policy rampant cronyism and the general mismanagement of the public sector. When things go wrong Venezuelan citizens are the ones who pay the price for the state’s poor choices.¶ Three things seem likely at this juncture: first no one will be able to trust whatever “investigation” the Chavez government undertakes. It will be an obvious whitewash. Second conditions for oil workers are unlikely to improve. Third the usual crew of Chavez defenders in the United States desperate after all these decades of misery and failure to point to some place some where where authoritarian socialism isn’t a dreary charnel house and economic failure zone will struggle to convince themselves that things are just fine in Bolivarian Venezuela. </source> [/INST] <claim>Socialism fails – leads to inefficiency and mismanagement</claim> <psg>39 were killed and more were injured in an explosion at Venezuela’s Paraguaná Refinery one of the largest in the world The New York Times reports that—once again—faulty state supervision of the facilities is to blame This has as a consequence the increase in accidents and tragic deaths like what we are seeing today ” clear that the Chávez regime has been squeezing every last penny out of the oil sector but despite the “Bolivarian” socialist rhetoric promising equal distribution of this wealth the money hasn’t just been used for social programs Venezuelan citizens are the ones who pay the price for the state’s poor choices authoritarian socialism isn’t a dreary charnel house and economic failure zone will struggle to convince themselves that things are just fine in Bolivarian Venezuela.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> It is no accident that in March 2007 during the Inter-American Development Bank’s annual¶ meeting in Guatemala the Bank’s President Luis Alberto Moreno signed an agreement of¶ understanding with Zhou Xiaochuan the head of the People’s Bank of China to formalize¶ talks over Beijing’s request to become a member. In November 2008 China became the¶ third Asian nation to join the bank after South Korea and Japan. Even former U.S.¶ Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson asserts “China obviously is a big player a global¶ economic player and that’s obviously a good thing for Latin America¶ World Bank economists report that the rise of China and India is bestowing substantive net benefits on Latin America through higher commodity prices cheaper industrial inputs and growing capital inflows. Moreover if Latin American governments adopt appropriate¶ investment and trade strategies including negotiating bilateral free-trade agreements Latin American exporters should be able to successfully penetrate the burgeoning Asian commercial markets and better integrate themselves into Asian-linked global production networks. No wonder economists from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and¶ Development (OECD) generally concur with their World Bank counterparts that “as seen¶ through the Latin American lens China is closer to heaven than hell.”37¶ Facing China’s new role in the Western Hemisphere For most of Latin America with the main exceptions of Mexico and Central America ¶ China has been an engine for export growth allowing exporters to diversify away from traditional markets in the north. Beyond the fact that the region’s exports to China are¶ concentrated on commodity products the issue remains that China’s economic and political¶ rise should be a wake-up call for more reforms in the region. </source> [/INST] <claim>The CP solves better because there are comparative benefits to China. </claim> <psg>China is obviously a good thing for Latin America the rise of China and India is bestowing substantive net benefits on Latin America through higher commodity prices cheaper industrial inputs and growing capital inflows. Latin American exporters should be able to successfully penetrate the burgeoning Asian commercial markets and better integrate themselves into Asian-linked global production networks economists concur China is closer to heaven than hell China has been an engine for export growth allowing exporters to diversify away from traditional markets in the north.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Though a recent trip to the region by Vice President Joe Biden seems to run counter to the Pacific Alliance snub China’s President Xi Jinping has also visited recently and likewise met with Latin American leaders illustrating how the two global powers are going after the same prize. Biden traveled to Colombia Trinidad and Tobago and Brazil in May with the last leg of his trip coinciding with the beginning of Xi’s in Trinidad before jumping to Costa Rica and Mexico. Both leaders met with several Latin American presidents and discussed trade and cooperation. The outcomes of their trips were very different however. Xi’s trip was the first visit from a Chinese official to the region in almost a decade. Trinidad and Tobago’s main newspaper Newsday called the visit a “historic occasion” and a “visit from China to a good friend.” Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar said she was committed to boosting relations with China and accepted an invitation to Beijing for November of this year. In Costa Rica Xi signed a $400 million loan to build a cross-country road and reaffirmed relations with its main ally in the region. Costa Rica is the only country in Latin America that sides with China in the mainland-Taiwanese dispute and does not recognize the island as a nation. Even more significant was Xi’s visit to Mexico. President Enrique Peña Nieto welcomed his Chinese counterpart whom he had visited in Beijing in April and made his intentions clear: Mexico wants closer trade relations with China with whom it has a gap of $45 billion in export and import -- an important development considering that Mexico is for now America's biggest trade partner in the world. Biden’s visit was not as successful. His meeting in Trinidad and Tobago was called “brutal and tense” by Persad-Bissessar and Colombian journalist Andrés Oppenheimer deemed the trip a sympathy visit after Secretary John Kerry called Latin America “Washington’s backyard” in a much-berated slip last April. While Biden had pleasant meetings in Rio and Bogotá no agreements were signed during his trip. Perhaps the biggest development in China’s investment in the area is the recent decision by the Nicaraguan congress to allow a Chinese company to build a canal through the country. Although still in the proposal stages the project would bring profound change to the geopolitics of the region -- and even the world. If built the canal could significantly affect commerce through the Panama Canal which though it is now part of Panama's domain was built by the U.S. and remains a symbol of the nation's historical dominance in the region. That dominance is in decline. After decades of uncontested U.S. influence in the region some Latin American leaders have started making decidedly anti-American policies. The most notable was the late Venezuelan Comandante Hugo Chávez who was very vocal about his disdain for the U.S. but he is far from the only one. Bolivia's President Evo Morales for instance kicked out USAID after Kerry's verbal slip and has gone so far as to ban Coca-Cola from the country. But now it's Ecuador bumping heads with its northern neighbor mostly in regard to Ecuador granting entry to NSA-secrets leaker Edward Snowden. President Rafael Correa openly said that they would welcome the whistle-blower because he was a 'free man ' no matter what the U.S. said. Disagreements between the governments have led to the cancellation of a special trade agreement which Ecuador has called 'an instrument of blackmail.' Beyond the lack of understanding with its former main trade partner why is Latin America so smitten with China? Kevin Gallagher a professor of international relations at Boston University says China speaks to the region’s newfound confidence. “China is offering attractive deals to Latin American economies while the United States continues to lecture and dictate ” Gallagher wrote for The Globalist. “For too long the United States has relied on a rather imperial mechanism just telling Latin America what it needs ” he added. “Compare that to China’s approach: It offers Latin America what it wants.” Gallagher argued that the U.S.’ biggest offer to Latin America is the Trans-Pacific Partnership which offers access to the U.S. market on three conditions: deregulate financial markets adopt intellectual property provisions that give preferences to U.S. firms and allow U.S. firms to sue governments for violating any of its conditions. China on the other hand has been providing more financing to Latin America than the World Bank the Inter-American Development Bank and the U.S. Export-Import Bank combined since 2003 with no previous conditions and very few strings attached. “Latin America is very sensitive to any notions of conditionality due to painful past experiences with the IMF and the World Bank ” Gallagher said. “China makes sure that its policy is not based on conditionalities.” Gallagher said the U.S. should awake from its past slumber and stop taking Latin America for granted. Shlomo Ben-Ami vice president of the Toledo International Center for Peace and former Israeli foreign minister takes a different stance. He argues that China's advancement in the region does not automatically equate with American loss of preeminence. U.S. exports to Latin America continue to rise (by 94 percent over the past six years) as do imports (87 percent in the same period) and America continues to be the biggest foreign investor in the area. </source> [/INST] <claim>CP solves the case and avoids the turns – Latin America prefers China and their model of development ensures better stability. </claim> <psg>the two global powers are going after the same prize Xi’s trip was the first visit from a Chinese official to the region in almost a decade Even more significant was Xi’s visit to Mexico Mexico wants closer trade relations with China Biden’s visit was not as successful. His meeting was called “brutal and tense” That dominance is in decline. After decades of uncontested U.S. influence in the region some Latin American leaders have started making decidedly anti-American policies why is Latin America so smitten with China? Gallagher a professor of international rela says China speaks to the region’s newfound confidence. “China is offering attractive deals to Latin American economies while the United States continues to lecture the United States has relied on a rather imperial mechanism Compare that to China’s approach: It offers Latin America what it wants.” China has been providing more financing to Latin America Ben-Ami argues that China's advancement in the region does not automatically equate with American loss of preeminence</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Some scholars believe that a coordinated multilateral approach to China will improve outcomes for Latin American countries. As Enrique Dussel Peters and Jorge Katz (2006) have argued a region-based bilateral dialogue with China could integrate the booming resource industry into a broader more sustainable development plan. The foundations for such a process already exist in common markets such as MERCOSUR in which China holds consultant status. Its members (Argentina Brazil Paraguay Uruguay Venezuela) have demonstrated a commitment to defending the integrity of MERCOSUR and although Paraguay’s continuing support for Taiwan has been an obstacle Chinese investments in Argentina Brazil and Venezuela have created favorable conditions for a MERCOSUR-China FTA. The prospect for greater bilateral cooperation is strengthened by the fact that all three of these countries have used support from China to increase their bargaining power with the United States and to oppose the U.S.-backed Free Trade Area of the Americas. Indeed Venezuela’s 2005 accession to MERCOSUR may further this objective as Hugo Chávez builds linkages with the Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas (ALBA) network (Antigua Bolivia Cuba Dominica Ecuador Nicaragua Saint Vincent and Venezuela) and its associated ‘People’s Trade Agreement’ (TCP). Mexico is well positioned to engage Central and South American countries to stimulate dialogue about the capacity of multilateral collaboration to promote regional interests vis-à-vis China. Membership in NAFTA should not stand in Mexico’s path toward simultaneously developing alternative economic partnerships. As Chile has shown through the concurrent development of FTAs with Canada China Mexico Korea the United States MERCOSUR and the European Union multiple agreements can consolidate overseas business networks and secure broader access to foreign markets. The emergence of China represents more than a temporary problem for Mexico. rather it raises the historically enduring challenge of developing balanced and sustainable international economic relations. The threats associated with this challenge include but extend beyond specific cases of ineffective enforcement of customs regulations unscrupulous profiteering from tariff loopholes and even the encompassing problem of competition for a place in the consumer markets of the Americas. Indeed the threats extend to the global scale in the form of economically and environmentally unsustainable development strategies based on natural resource exports. To overcome the most impending of these threats Mexico could tighten domestic policing of illicit commerce and build knowledge of the emerging Chinese market in order to identify niche areas and develop appropriate strategies for filling them. Tortillas and cement are a good start but there are significant opportunities to expand existing sales of specialized electronics and auto parts synthetic fibers steel and plastic products beer and a range of other items. Opportunities also exist to develop production chains based on assembly of Chinese manufactured components in Mexico and subsequent export throughout the NAFTA zone though this would require careful legal preparation. Expanded production of automobiles heavy industrial equipment and computing equipment would benefit from Mexico’s geographic proximity to the United States sophisticated logistical infrastructure high levels of human capital in technological development and access to U.S. and Canadian markets. Refined educational exchange programs that more strongly encourage face-to-face dialogue with Chinese counterparts and industry professionals would deepen opportunities for collaboration. Indeed Venezuelan scholarship programs in China (mainly in the oil and space satellite industries) demonstrate that the prospects for long-term professional partnerships are enhanced when students are exposed to—and tested on—a broad base of technical linguistic and cultural experience. Mexican educational initiatives in China such as those of the Tecnológico de Monterrey have shown that strategic industrial targeting and flexibility in program design have produced positive outcomes. At the most encompassing level the emergence of China raises questions about the long-term viability of development models based on bilateral free trade particularly in natural resources. Multilateral blocs such as ASEAN the EU and MERCOSUR have shown a historical capacity to represent the interests of member countries through improved harmonization of trade policies. These organizations have historically structured themselves to leverage benefits from trade with the United States providing them with a solid basis for adaptation to the emergence of China. The 21st century may turn out to be the century of regional trade accords and a vigorous exploration of new partnerships will only benefit Mexico. Regional integration has also become more important for Cuba which together with Venezuela and Bolivia has advanced the People’s Trade Agreement (TCP) under the auspices of ALBA. It is worth noting that ALBA’s preference for exchange and bartering of resources (material and human) through state-administrated programs rather than free market commerce is an approach accommodated by China’s economic policy. Indeed even as it pursues integration into the capitalist world market as a WTO member China often pays for Latin American natural resources with trade credits construction equipment infrastructure upgrading and technical training rather than hard currency (Robles 2005). China has not openly endorsed ALBA but its willingness to develop commercial relations within the framework of state-to-state cooperation is an important dimension of its engagement with Latin America. For Cuba this has meant the consolidation of ‘South-South cooperation’ through collaboration in education food security biomedicine (particularly cancer and blood pressure research) solar energy light industry and tourism. Intensifying engagement with China has also produced challenges for Cuba where prior experience with the United States and the Soviet Union has generated acute political sensitivity about excessive foreign influence. Elsewhere I have discussed the key political and economic factors shaping contemporary Sino-Cuban relations (Hearn forthcoming). rather than repeat this discussion the next section draws primarily on ethnographic data gathered in Beijing and Havana to discuss how the Cuban state has incorporated China into its administrative priorities. </source> [/INST] <claim>Chinese trade agreements would solve each of the topic countries</claim> <psg>scholars believe that a coordinated multilateral approach to China will improve outcomes for Latin American countries a region-based bilateral dialogue with China could integrate the booming resource industry into a broader more sustainable development plan. The foundations for such a process already exist in common markets such as MERCOSUR investments in Venezuela have created favorable conditions for a MERCOSUR-China FTA Mexico is well positioned to engage Central and South American countries to stimulate dialogue about the capacity of multilateral collaboration to promote regional interests vis-à-vis China Membership in NAFTA should not stand in Mexico’s path toward simultaneously developing alternative economic partnerships. The emergence of China raises the historically enduring challenge of developing balanced and sustainable international economic relations. Regional integration has also become more important for Cuba which together with Venezuela and Bolivia has advanced the People’s Trade Agreement (TCP) under the auspices of ALBA. China has not openly endorsed ALBA but its willingness to develop commercial relations within the framework of state-to-state cooperation is an important dimension of its engagement with Latin America.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> China's interest in Latin America is significant and expanding. The region has become a vital source of raw materials and foodstuffs for China. In the past six years Chinese imports from Latin America have grown more than sixfold or by nearly 60 percent a year. Beijing also faces a major political challenge in the region: of the 26 countries that recognize Taiwan 12 are in Latin America or the Caribbean. China is intent on reducing that number through aggressive diplomacy and increased trade aid and investment. Bush administration officials have watched China's growing commercial and political engagement in the region closely. Chinese President Hu Jintao traveled to Latin America twice in the past two years spending a total of 16 days there. He received a warm welcome in the five Latin American countries he visited the concessions the host governments offered him (such as the quick granting of 'market economy status' to China) and the enormous expectations his presence created of major Chinese investments in roads ports and other infrastructure. Hu's ¶ trips have been reciprocated by a long series of visits to China by Latin American heads of state economic officials and corporate leaders. Many people in Latin America look to China as an economic and political alternative to U.S. hegemony. Although officials in some of these countries are concerned that China with its lower manufacturing costs will cut into their sales profits and investment others (mainly South America's ¶ food- and mineral-producing nations) largely see China as a major potential partner for new trade and investment. Brazilian ¶ leaders including President Lula have said ¶ they want to establish a strategic relationship with Beijing that might involve ¶ trade in high-tech products mutual support ¶ in international organizations and scientific ¶ and cultural collaboration. Interestingly the ¶ recent advances of China (and India as ¶ well) have prompted some Latin Americans ¶ to examine their own economic and political ¶ development producing a new wave of self criticism about the region's stumbling ¶ performance in recent years and intense ¶ discussion about what can be learned from ¶ the success of some Asian countries. ¶ It is too early to predict what China's longer term influence on Latin America will be. ¶ Chinese trade with Latin America for ¶ instance may be expanding rapidly but it ¶ still amounts to less than ten percent of U.S. ¶ trade with the region. Some of the Latin ¶ American countries that were the most ¶ eager to forge strong links with China are ¶ now having second thoughts. At the time of ¶ Hu's November 2004 visit Argentina and ¶ Brazil forecast huge increases in Chinese ¶ investment in both countries. Less than a ¶ year later the two governments ¶ acknowledged that China's actions had ¶ fallen short of their expectations and said ¶ they were now eager to stem escalating ¶ Chinese imports. Brazil's foreign minister ¶ Celso Amorim complained that their ¶ 'expectations were greater. ... Investment is ¶ coming slowly.' In fact it has barely come at ¶ all. </source> [/INST] <claim>Latin American countries want China over US. </claim> <psg>China's interest in Latin America is significant and expanding. The region has become a vital source of raw materials and foodstuffs for China. Chinese President Hu Jintao received a warm welcome in the five Latin American countries he visited Many people in Latin America look to China as an economic and political alternative to U.S. hegemony. these countries see China as a major potential partner for new trade and investment</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Ramo asserts that the Beijing Consensus represents opposition to the status quo represented by US hegemony. This perhaps explains why China is gaining ground worldwide at the expense of the US as no one seems comfortable with a world with just one superpower.¶ A Chinese scholar drawing lessons from the financial crisis has added beef to Ramo's concept. According to Professor Huang Weidong of the China University of Science and Technology the current crisis was caused by the US' huge current account deficit financed as it was by booming Asian and oil-rich countries.¶ With both US households and government in the red the US has become the world's largest debtor economy. China Japan and other holders of US treasury bills footed the bill for its imprudence.¶ According to Huang China can keep itself intact by drawing seven lessons from the crisis. The more salient ones include upholding self-reliance as the foundation of economic growth. de-emphasizing trade and capital account surpluses. re-focusing on the real side of the economy such as the production of basic necessities. increasing income and employment. and fueling growth via technological advancement and domestic consumption.¶ Huang is not alone in these prescriptions. Akira Kojima a senior fellow at the Japan Center for Economic Research too has urged Japan 'to slow or reduce exports to the US and to expand its domestic demand'.¶ If China manages to emerge from the current financial crisis relatively unscathed the Beijing Consensus might well find favor among developing countries as an alternative approach to economic growth. </source> [/INST] <claim>China offers an alternative to the status quo of the US</claim> <psg>the Beijing Consensus represents opposition to the status quo represented by US hegemony China is gaining ground worldwide at the expense of the US the current crisis was caused by the US' huge current account deficit financed as it was by booming Asian and oil-rich countries the US has become the world's largest debtor China can keep itself intact by drawing seven lessons from the crisis. include upholding self-reliance as the foundation of economic growth. de-emphasizing trade and capital account surpluses. re-focusing on the real side of the economy such as the production of basic necessities. increasing income and employment. and fueling growth via technological advancement and domestic consumption. If China manages to emerge from the current financial crisis relatively unscathed the Beijing Consensus might well find favor among developing countries as an alternative approach to economic growth.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> China is Cuba’s second largest trading partner after Venezuela and Cuba is China’s largest trading partner in the Caribbean with bilateral trade now standing at around $2 billion. Beijing wants to help Cuba push through market-oriented economic reforms knowing from its own experience over the past three decades that private sector entrepreneurial activity can stimulate foreign investment build national capital and promote domestic consumption. To this end China has granted Cuba numerous long-term low or interest-free loans to support development and maintain financial and social stability through the reform process. It has also undertaken significant technology transfers and entered into joint ventures in farming light industry and tourism. Cuba has started the reform process focussed on its biggest export industries. It has for example begun restructuring its ailing sugar industry by abolishing the sugar ministry and creating Azcuba a state holding company consisting of 13 provincial sugar companies that operate 56 sugar mills and 850 sugarcane farms. Azcuba signed foreign investment agreements with companies from Brazil and Britain in 2012 to modernize harvesting equipment and build biomass energy plants. Cuba exports about 400 000 tonnes of sugar annually to China more than half the amount it produces for domestic consumption. </source> [/INST] <claim>China’s involvement helps develop Cuba’s economy and reduces necessity of the US embargo</claim> <psg>Beijing wants to help Cuba push through market-oriented economic reforms private sector entrepreneurial activity can stimulate foreign investment build national capital and promote domestic consumption China has granted long-term low or interest-free loans to support development and maintai stability It has also undertaken significant technology transfers and entered into joint ventures in farming light industry and tourism.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> HAVANA June 8 (Reuters) - China looks ready to play a major role in the development of Cuban oil including the island's soon-to-be explored fields in the Gulf of Mexico after the signing of energy-related accords during a visit this week by Vice President Xi Jinping. </source> [/INST] <claim>China is committed to developing Cuba’s oil industry</claim> <psg>China looks ready to play a major role in the development of Cuban oil including n the Gulf of Mexico</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> PUERTO VALLARTA Mexico April 20 (Reuters) - Mexico said on Friday it had reached an accord with China aimed at promoting fairer bilateral commerce and announced joint business deals and investment worth some $560 million. Mexico's Economy Ministry said the agreement with Beijing would stop 'unfair Chinese practices' in shoemaking one of the main industries in Mexico to complain that China is flooding it with cheap imports. The two signed business deals worth $300 million and agreed on new investments worth $260 million the ministry said. It did not provide further details. 'This new relationship looks to answer the imbalance that affects Mexico and establish a basis for more balanced and sustainable trade in the long term ' the ministry said. China is Mexico's third-biggest export market outside North America and the two nations compete to sell manufactured goods to U.S. consumers. Chinese investment has traditionally been very modest in Mexico but it has picked up this year. The balance of trade between the two developing economies is heavily tilted in favor of the Asian giant which now provides Mexico with roughly 15 percent of its imports. Less than 2 percent of Mexico's exports go to China with nearly 80 percent of them heading to the United States. However Mexico has been moving away from its dependence on the United States in the last few years. 'It's a fact that the most dynamic region on the planet is Asia. That's the reality ' said Francisco de Rosenzweig Mexico's undersecretary for foreign trade. 'Latin American and global businesses with new investments are looking to make the most of the comparative advantages in China.' De Rosenzweig added that a planned Mexican trade mission to China was likely this summer. Mexico's announcement coincided with the close of a trade meeting of the Group of 20 economic powers in the Mexican Pacific resort of Puerto Vallarta where ministers agreed to support open markets and oppose protectionist measures </source> [/INST] <claim>China will not harm the Mexican market</claim> <psg>Mexico reached an accord with China aimed at promoting fairer bilateral commerce and announced joint business deals and investment worth some $560 million the agreement with Beijing would stop 'unfair Chinese practices' . The two signed business deals worth $300 million and agreed on new investments worth $260 million This new relationship looks to answer the imbalance that affects Mexico and establish a basis for more balanced and sustainable trade in the long term Mexico has been moving away from its dependence on the United States in the last few years. Latin American and global businesses with new investments are looking to make the most of the comparative advantages in China</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Mexico respects and admires China's universal inputs. Since the establishment of diplomatic relations in 1972 both nations have forged strong bonds of friendship solidarity and cooperation with enormous potential benefits for both countries. This was recognized by Pena Nieto and President Xi Jinping during their meeting in April as part of the Boao Forum for Asia. They agreed then to raise the relationship to new levels of dialogue and cooperation that correspond to their enormous potential and the role Mexico and China play in the international arena. We share hopes in the international realm and challenges that I am sure we can solve if we bind our ties and exchange experiences. Progressively but surely Mexico will have greater presence in this area of rapid growth global development and innovation that the Asia-Pacific region has become. Mexico and China have the opportunity to consolidate their existing ties in deepening exchanges and making them more and more productive and mutually favorable. Political dialogue trade investment education science technology tourism and culture are priorities in a broad and expanding bilateral agenda. The relationship between Mexico and China has a promising future. We are countries in motion and in constant process of transformation. With the relaunching of our ties we will work to benefit from our coincidences and our complementarities. I am convinced that in this new stage the people of both Mexico and China will benefit from a bilateral relationship sustained on a greater strategic and long-term vision. </source> [/INST] <claim>Better Chinese-Mexican relations leads to enormous benefits</claim> <psg>Mexico respects and admires China's universal inputs both nations have forged strong bonds of friendship solidarity and cooperation with enormous potential benefits for both countries. Mexico and China have the opportunity to consolidate their existing ties in deepening exchanges and making them more and more productive and mutually favorable. . The relationship between Mexico and China has a promising future. the people of both Mexico and China will benefit from a bilateral relationship sustained on a greater strategic and long-term vision.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> So what is the Chinese approach? During his visit to Latin America and the Caribbean President Xi offered more than $5.3 billion in financing with few conditions attached to its newfound Latin American friends. These offers will need to be confirmed but according to media reports during Xi's trip the Chinese signed deals for $3 billion in commitments to Caribbean countries for infrastructure and energy. $1.3 billion in loans and lines of credit to Costa Rica - a $900-million loan from China Development Bank for upgrading a petroleum refinery and a $400-million line of credit from Export-Import Bank of China for road infrastructure. and a $1-billion line of credit from Export-Import Bank of China to Mexico for its state-owned oil company PEMEX. Making available this financing comes on top of the already $86 billion in financing provided by China to Latin American governments since 2003. Granted that the amount - large as it sounds - seems just like another number in today's world. To put it into proper perspective consider this: Since 2003 China's policy banks have provided more finance to Latin American countries than their counterparts at the World Bank the Inter-American Development Bank and the US Export-Import Bank. </source> [/INST] <claim>China has the money to pay for the plan – they give billions. </claim> <psg>During his visit to Latin America and the Caribbean President Xi offered more than $5.3 billion in financing the Chinese signed deals for $3 billion in commitments to Caribbean countries for infrastructure and energy a $900-million loan from China Development Bank for upgrading a petroleum refinery and a $400-million line of credit from Export-Import Bank of China for road infrastructure. and a $1-billion line of credit from Export-Import Bank of China to Mexico for its state-owned oil company PEMEX. Since 2003 China's policy banks have provided more finance to Latin American countries than their counterparts at the World Bank the Inter-American Development Bank and the US Export-Import Bank.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> We expect that China's increasing engagement in the region will lead to increased cooperation between China the United States and other Latin American and Caribbean governments on matters affecting regional stability especially terrorism transnational crime and counternarcotics. We view positively China's participation in the U.N. peacekeeping mission in Haiti in a way that contributes to the mission. China's Role in Narcotics Control Given this subcommittee's interest in narcotics let me elaborate on China's role in narcotics control in the region. China has a large and developed chemical industry and like the U.S. it is one of the world's largest producers of precursor chemicals which have legitimate uses but are also used in the production of cocaine and synthetic drugs. In particular China is the world's leading exporter of bulk ephedrine (used in cold medicines and weight-loss tablets) and a source country for much of the ephedrine and pseudoephedrine imported into Mexico. China notifies the DEA of shipments of precursor chemicals to the U.S. and Mexico so that tracking may be done to prevent diversion of these chemicals for illicit purposes. Nevertheless some precursor chemicals are diverted from legal use to manufacture methamphetamine destined for the United States. To regulate its chemical industry China is a party to the 1988 U.N. Drug Convention and has regulations for record keeping and import/export controls on all chemicals included in the Convention. Several provinces have more stringent controls than called for in the Convention. In the State Department's International Narcotics Control Strategy Report we have noted however that China needs to improve its infrastructure to adequately monitor its large chemical production capacity and international trade in chemicals. U.S. and Chinese cooperation in chemical control and counternarcotics is good and has been steadily improving. This was highlighted by a joint operation involving the DEA and several PRC law enforcement agencies in October 2004 leading to the world's largest seizure of the synthetic drug Mandrax (18 metric tons) and the seizure of 10 tons of pseudoephedine tablets (a key precursor for methamphetamine) in Los Angles in September 2004. While China is a transit country for heroin produced in Southeast Asia to international markets the DEA's Heroin Signature Program indicates less than one percent of heroin seized in the U.S. comes from Southeast Asia. </source> [/INST] <claim>China influence key to counter-narcotics</claim> <psg>We expect that China's increasing engagement in the region will lead to increased cooperation between China the United States and other Latin American governments on regional stability terrorism and counternarcotic hina's role in narcotics control in the region. China has a large and developed chemical industry and like the U.S. it is one of the world's largest producers of precursor chemicals which have legitimate uses but are also used in the production of cocaine and synthetic drugs. U.S. and Chinese cooperation in chemical control and counternarcotics is good and has been steadily improving</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> One area of potential growth and trilateral cooperation is in renewable energy investment. Historically speaking the United States has led the way in renewable energy investment but over the past several years China has made remarkable advances with a surge of new investment in and emphasis on renewable energy technology. Investments in renewable energy reached new heights in 2011 topping $257 billion up from only $39.4 billion in 2004 (552 percent increase in eight years). 29 China has surpassed the US in the volume of renewable energy investment is second behind the EU and is looking to expand its markets for renewable energy. China and other Asian countries have set ambitious targets for renewable energy as part of their primary energy portfolios. Government grants subsidies and other tax incentives have prompted a wave of Chinese manufacturing in wind turbines solar photovoltaic panels and other renewable products. For example Chinese solar panel production has actually outpaced demand globally and the Chinese are aggressively trying to develop Latin America’s market for solar panels. Latin America provides an attractive market for Asia in the renewable sector and there is great potential to foster increased cooperation in the energy security of both regions as they strive to become less dependent on expensive and dwindling hydrocarbons. Alternative energy provides a green platform to promote closer economic ties ultimately helping to mitigate the all - inclusive threat of climate change. </source> [/INST] <claim>China can successfully engage over Renewable Energy </claim> <psg>One area of potential growth and trilateral cooperation is in renewable energy investment. Historically speaking the United States has led the way in renewable energy investment but over the past several years China has made remarkable advances with a surge of new investment in and emphasis on renewable energy technology. Investments in renewable energy reached new heights in 2011 topping $257 billion up from only $39.4 billion in 2004 (552 percent increase in eight years). 29 China has surpassed the US in the volume of renewable energy investment is second behind the EU and is looking to expand its markets for renewable energy. Government grants subsidies and other tax incentives have prompted a wave of Chinese manufacturing in wind turbines solar photovoltaic panels and other renewable products Chinese are aggressively trying to develop Latin America’s market for solar panels great potential to foster increased cooperation in the energy security of both regions as they strive to become less dependent on expensive and dwindling hydrocarbons Alternative energy provides a green platform to promote closer economic ties ultimately helping to mitigate the all - inclusive threat of climate change.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Chinese financial institutions will allocate 5 billion dollars to initiate a China-Latin America cooperation fund for joint investment in cooperation projects in manufacturing high and new technology and sustainable development and the Chinese side will also initiate a 10-billion-dollar special loan to support infrastructure cooperation between the two sides he said. </source> [/INST] <claim>China can successfully engage over agriculture. </claim> <psg>Chinese financial institutions will allocate 5 billion dollars to initiate a China-Latin America cooperation fund for joint investment in cooperation projects in manufacturing high and new technology and sustainable development and the Chinese side will also initiate a 10-billion-dollar special loan to support infrastructure cooperation between the two sides</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Diplomatic Recognition of Taiwan. For the PRC the government of Taiwan represents an important issue of political legitimacy and internal security. Currently 12 of the 23 nations in the world that diplomatically recognize the government of Taiwan are found in Latin America and the Caribbean. Although the People's Republic of China does not publicly threaten to block investment in or loans to countries that do not recognize the PRC China repeatedly emphasizes the issue in its public diplomacy in the region and makes such investments and market access difficult for those countries that do not recognize it while simultaneously nurturing expectations regarding the opport-unities that diplomatically recognizing the PRC could bring. When Costa Rica changed its diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to the PRC in May 2007 for example it received an aid package that included an $83 million soccer stadium the purchase of $300 million in government bonds various highway public works and aid projects and a $1 billion joint venture to expand the country's petroleum refinery as well as PRC aid in facilitating access to Chinese markets by traditional Costa Rican products such as coffee. In part such Chinese generosity was directed toward the other countries in the region that still recognized Taiwan in order to demonstrate the types of benefits that could be made available if they too were to change their diplomatic posture.13 </source> [/INST] <claim>Because it doesn’t have the USFG act…</claim> <psg>Diplomatic Recognition of Taiwan For the PRC Taiwan represents an important issue of political legitimacy and internal security. Currently 12 nations that diplomatically recognize Taiwan are found in Latin America China repeatedly emphasizes the issue in its public diplomacy in the region and makes such investments and market access difficult for those countries that do not recognize it while simultaneously nurturing expectations regarding the opport-unities that diplomatically recognizing the PRC could bring Chinese generosity was directed toward the other countries in the region that still recognized Taiwan in order to demonstrate the types of benefits that could be made available if they too were to change their diplomatic posture</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Since the 1970s the cross-straits relationship has swung drastically in China’s favor. Not only has the Chinese economy boomed since the opening of its markets but the United States has started to abandon Taiwan militarily as well. Now inferior in both economic and military strength Taiwan can only hope for continued de-facto independence. At present the hopes for remaining separate are dwindling. With China gaining prominence in Asia and the global stage Taiwan may not have a choice in the matter. Cultural differences present the greatest challenge to the Chinese assimilation of Taiwan. The distinctiveness of Taiwanese culture has already become quite evident since the Kuomintang escaped to the island decades ago. During his presidency Chen Shui-bian argued frequently that the Taiwanese culture had evolved to be ethnically different and that in consequence Taiwan deserves independence. While this argument is unlikely to hold in China at the present as time passes it will inevitably become reality. However the current Chinese strategy almost completely ignores this barrier. China is preparing Taiwanese society for assimilation. Economically the Chinese are promoting an increase in Taiwanese investment and trade. By offering a profitable economic future the People’s Republic of China (PRC) is luring Taiwanese businessmen and entrepreneurs to the mainland. This has led to integration of some Taiwanese into Chinese society. Not only does this change the Chinese perception of Taiwan but it also affects the Taiwanese perception of China. Opening the two societies to each other makes reunification easier and the Chinese hope to eventually reach a point where unification is smooth for both sides. Economic leverage on politics is also powerful. The strength of Chinese influence and intervention in Taiwanese politics increases substantially from this economic integration. While it is possible for the reverse to happen where Taiwanese influence is exerted on the Chinese political apparatus the fact that China has a fairly closed one-party government makes this rather unlikely. On the contrary the Taiwanese government is much more prone to lobbying and as a result can be subject to more leverage from mainland China. This completely lopsided trade relationship can and likely will be used to China’s favor. Yet despite the potential political and economic connections the social differences between China and Taiwan may simply be too drastic to reconcile. Taiwan’s democratic way of government is something that the Taiwanese people hold on to rather dearly. It is high unlikely if not impossible for the Taiwanese to give that up even in the event of an all-out military conflict. The Chinese solution to this problem may be one that is not a new concept in the country and would call for a “one state two systems” approach. Currently in the PRC both Hong Kong and Macau are Special Administrative Regions with local rule differing judicial systems and influential local governments. Inner Mongolia goes further as an autonomous region of China granted a greater degree of self-rule. This “two systems” doctrine has fallen out of favor in Taiwan recently due to opposition of its current implementation in China but also represents a potential path to unification. All this begs the question of what would occur if Taiwan were to refuse China’s call for unification. Many Taiwanese believe that their rejection of reunification by a possible declaration of independence would trigger Chinese military aggression across the Taiwan Strait. The military hostility between both countries is not new. Throughout the conflict Taiwan has relied on its own military as well as that of the United States as a deterrent to Chinese aggression. On the other hand China has used its military might to ward off any declarations of independence on the part of Taiwan. This impasse has changed as of late since the current pact between the United States and Taiwan does not commit the United States to defend Taiwan. One would assume that in the event of military aggression the United States would hesitate to entering a military conflict with a fellow nuclear power. Recent technological investments in the Chinese military only heighten the stakes of the conflict and make Taiwanese-Mainland reunification a certainty in China with the only uncertainty being the question of whether military conflict will prove necessary to the realization of this goal. If China continues to push for unification unification will most likely occur. Taiwanese resistance is weak without foreign assistance and Taiwan is overpowered economically and militarily. Foreign intervention is fickle and varies with each US administration public support and other international factors thus making both US intervention and Taiwanese independence highly unlikely. </source> [/INST] <claim>b. Peaceful unification of Taiwan depends on China’s economic leverage and growing diplomatic recognition – the alternative is military intervention and nuclear war. </claim> <psg>the United States has started to abandon Taiwan militarily as well Taiwan can only hope for continued de-facto independence. At present the hopes for remaining separate are dwindling. With China gaining prominence in global stage Taiwan may not have a choice in the matter Opening the two societies to each other makes reunification easier and the Chinese hope to eventually reach a point where unification is smooth for both sides. Economic leverage on politics is also powerful. The strength of Chinese influence and intervention in Taiwanese politics increases substantially from this economic integration the Taiwanese government is much more prone to lobbying and as a result can be subject to more leverage from mainland China. This completely lopsided trade relationship can and likely will be used to China’s favor All this begs the question of what would occur if Taiwan were to refuse China’s call for unification their rejection of reunification would trigger Chinese military aggression across the Taiwan Strait. in the event of military aggression the United States would hesitate to entering a military conflict with a fellow nuclear power. Recent technological investments in the Chinese military only heighten the stakes of the conflict and make Taiwanese-Mainland reunification a certainty in China with the only uncertainty being the question of whether military conflict will prove necessary to the realization of this goal. If China continues to push for unification unification will most likely occur. Taiwanese resistance is weak without foreign assistance and Taiwan is overpowered economically</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> When longtime Sandinista leader Daniel Ortega triumphed in Nicaragua's presidential election in November 2006 the shockwaves from his historic victory extended to China and Taiwan. Leaders in the two rival East Asian capitals knew that in 1985 a much younger Ortega had swept into the presidency and unceremoniously broke relations with Taipei in favor of an alliance with the People's Republic of China (PRC). Though Nicaragua's formal diplomatic ties to China ended abruptly when Ortega was voted out of office in 1990 his return to power now represents a fresh opportunity for Beijing to usurp one of Taiwan's precious remaining allies. The re-establishment of a Chinese embassy in Managua could potentially serve as a valuable beachhead for China to facilitate diplomatic inroads into Central American countries that are friendly to Taiwan thereby making Beijing's dream of enforcing global recognition of the 'One China' policy one step closer to reality. While increasing economic and political ties between China and Latin America have attracted significant attention from U.S. policymakers in the past few years the extent to which Beijing's foreign policy is shaped by its desire to isolate Taiwan internationally is often overlooked. Yet this crucial dimension of Chinese foreign policy is indispensable to a full understanding of China's rising influence in the global system and its possible repercussions for U.S. national interests. Today in some of the most remote corners of the world a fierce contest for diplomatic recognition and political influence is being fought between Taiwan and the PRC. In particular Latin America has emerged as the crucial battleground where a dozen struggling nations mainly in Central America and the Caribbean have become ensnared in the cross-strait dispute. The strategically significant 'swing states' among them face growing pressures to abandon their longstanding relationships with Taiwan in favor of cementing diplomatic ties with China. Meanwhile officials in Washington have yet to fully con- sider the possible implications for U.S. policy of this intensifying competition in their own backyard. </source> [/INST] <claim>China influence stops Taiwan recognition. </claim> <psg>The re-establishment of a Chinese embassy in Managua could potentially serve as a valuable beachhead for China to facilitate diplomatic inroads into Central American countries that are friendly to Taiwan thereby making Beijing's dream of enforcing global recognition of the 'One China' policy one step closer to reality. increasing economic ties between China and Latin America have attracted significant attention Beijing's foreign policy is shaped by its desire to isolate Taiwan internationally Today a fierce contest for diplomatic recognition and political influence is being fought between Taiwan and the PRC. Latin America has emerged as the crucial battleground The strategically significant 'swing states' among them face growing pressures to abandon their longstanding relationships with Taiwan in favor of cementing diplomatic ties with China</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> The Taiwan-China struggle in Latin America and the Caribbean will be solved either by an improvement in cross-strait relations or by the economy. As China’s economy and trade flows expand and Taiwan’s decline the gravitational pull of the mainland has grown stronger. </source> [/INST] <claim>Economic engagement improves economic stability and resolves the Taiwan conflict. </claim> <psg>The Taiwan-China struggle in Latin America will be solved either by an improvement in cross-strait relations or by the economy. As China’s economy and trade flows expand and Taiwan’s decline the gravitational pull of the mainland has grown stronger.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> The fact is that “China and India’s growth has not been a zero-sum game for LAC [Latin American and Caribbean] but the potential benefits are not being fully realized. It is crucial that LAC countries take advantage of the growing presence of China and India in world markets by adopting offensive strategies that facilitate both the participation of LAC firms in global production networks and their commercial presence in the two Asian economies’markets.” 39 Since formally becoming a member of the Inter-American Development Bank in 2009 China has already contributed $350 million to sustain regional development. Comparisons of export structure are based on the assumption that similar export structures will suggest the highest potential for competition.40 An OECD study found: “In general terms …. there is no trade competition between China and Latin America. . . . [Moreover] this trade competition is even decreasing rather than increasing over the recent period of time. Not surprisingly countries that export mainly commodities face lower competition . . . Paraguay Venezuela Bolivia and Panama are those exhibiting the lowest figures among 34 selected economies i.e. those are the countries that suffer less from Chinese trade competition. Brazil could be considered as an intermediate case between Mexico and Venezuela.” 41 ¶ Facing China’s new role in the Western Hemisphere Latin American government[s] need to boost general competitiveness by lowering country-cost factors and emphasizing policies that promote innovation that favor the companies of tomorrow. Investment in infrastructure that maximizes export comparative advantages and facilitates deeper and faster regional trade and business integration should be a priority together with funding and support of education and research institutions assimilating the needs and demands of the markets. 42 ¶ For most of Latin America with the main exceptions of Mexico and Central America China has been an engine for export growth allowing exporters to diversify away from traditional markets in the north. Beyond the fact that the region’s exports to China are concentrated on commodity products the issue remains that China’s economic and political rise should be a wake-up call for more reforms in the region. </source> [/INST] <claim>China engagement helps Latin American growth- Aff concerns are myths</claim> <psg>China ’s growth has not been a zero-sum game for LAC [Latin American and Caribbean] but the potential benefits are not being fully realized. It is crucial that LAC countries take advantage of the growing presence of China and India in world markets Since formally becoming a member of the Inter-American Development Bank in 2009 China has already contributed $350 million to sustain regional development. “In general terms …. there is no trade competition between China and Latin America. . . . [Moreover] this trade competition is even decreasing For most of Latin America China has been an engine for export growth allowing exporters to diversify away from traditional markets in the north</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Latin America is now a key region for Chinese foreign policy. However China has maintained a low profile and avoided antagonizing the United States in the region. It is exaggerated to accuse Beijing of challenging Washington’s “Monroe Doctrine” for three main reasons. First both sides find the trade relationship to be largely beneficial. Thus the relation between China and Latin America is characterized far more by expanding trade flows and business connections than by establishing traditional military or political ties. Such an approach would further allow China to side-step Washington’s Monroe Doctrine by pro-actively diffusing any allegations of a Chinese challenge to Washington’s traditional sphere of influence. China supports its trade-oriented goals by behaving as a “responsible stake-holder” in Latin America. Compare with Russia’s “security and military-technical cooperation” with Latin American countries China’s engagements from sending peace- keeping force to Haiti to donating aid to Cuba have been far more constructive. China’s purchase of regional commodities has also been the main factor for Latin America’s economic growth in the last decade. In sum “the expansion of China … seems to be pulling and crowding in growth in the Latin American region.”53 ¶ Second China stands to gain tremendous international prestige by offering an attractive alternative model for Latin American economic development. Beijing’s emergence means that the Washington Consensus is possibly on the wane. As China formally became a member of Inter-American Development Bank in 2009 Beijing now can contribute more to Latin America’s development and thus aid global recovery. ¶ Third Latin American is now the proving ground for a “diplomatic truce” between China and Taiwan. Responding to President Ma Ying-jeou’s diplomacy of “modus vivendi ” Beijing allowed Lien Chan Taiwan’s former vice-President to attend the APEC 2008 in Peru. So long as the “one China” principle remains the political basis for Beijing’s relations with Latin American and Caribbean countries. China is content to share some of the spotlight with Taiwan while reaping the multitudinous benefits of improved relationships. The benefits extend beyond China and Taiwan as the more stable the political relation between Beijing and Taipei the more economic opportunity will be afforded Latin America and the United States. </source> [/INST] <claim>China engagement good for Latin American economies – </claim> <psg>China has maintained a low profile and avoided antagonizing the United States in the region. It is exaggerated to accuse Beijing of challenging Washington’s “Monroe Doctrine” the relation between China and Latin America is characterized far more by expanding trade flows and business connections than by establishing traditional military or political ties China supports its trade-oriented goals by behaving as a “responsible stake-holder” in Latin America China’s engagements from sending peace- keeping force to Haiti to donating aid to Cuba have been far more constructive. China’s purchase of regional commodities has also been the main factor for Latin America’s economic growth in the last decade Beijing now can contribute more to Latin America’s development and thus aid global recovery. . The benefits extend beyond China and Taiwan as the more stable the political relation between Beijing and Taipei the more economic opportunity will be afforded Latin America and the United States. </psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Economists from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) generally concur with their World Bank counterparts: as seen through the Latin American lens China is closer to heaven than hell. Even if China’s export surge and export surplus are 'short-term' problems in the long term Chinese imports will catch up easing pressure on other developing economies. Nevertheless the OECD study warns Chinese manufacturing wages are a mere quarter of the Latin American average and the Chinese labor market is endlessly abundant. To compete Latin America (especially Mexico and Central America) should take advantage of its geographic proximity to the world's largest import market for the relative costs of trade can be more important than relative tariff rates. For example an important complement to the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) would be the construction of the long-awaited Panama-Puebla highway. Happily capital-rich China and Japan may themselves supply financing for such large infrastructure projects. Another upside to the rise of East Asia is the positive 'cognitive effect': Latin Americans recognize the success of 'pragmatic ' export-driven economies. </source> [/INST] <claim>b. Makes Latin American countries believe in themselves.</claim> <psg>as seen through the Latin American lens China is closer to heaven than hell. in the long term Chinese imports will catch up easing pressure on other developing economies. Another upside to the rise of East Asia is the positive 'cognitive effect': Latin Americans recognize the success of 'pragmatic ' export-driven economies.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> According to an Inter-American Development Bank (IADB) study published in 2005 China has become an important import and export market for Latin America over the past 20 years. Latin American countries have addressed the growing import challenge to their domestic production with a number of defensive measures designed to keep China’s products out. However today these policies are aligned with efforts to forge closer economic ties with China so as to benefit from ever-growing Chinese demand. Although Latin American exports to China still consist largely of raw materials and commodities—the Brazilian mining company Cia Vale do Rio Doce (CVRD) exported 36 million tons of iron ore to China in 2005 and Chinese demand for CVRD iron ore is predicted to rise to 50 million tons by 2007 representing 35 percent of global demand for iron ore—China may gradually start absorbing other types of products from agro-industrial to other manufactured goods. At the multilateral level the IADB study highlights that direct competition between China and Latin America in particular Mexico has intensified due to their increasingly similar export baskets especially in various manufacturing industries. In view of China’s expansion of its international production and export base however the challenge to Latin American manufacturers may increasingly be felt across the board. In particular the global textile and apparel sector is expected to undergo changes that are likely to enhance China’s standing relative to Mexican and Central American exporters. Beyond low-skill intensive manufactures China’s leap to production and export of higher value-added manufactured goods means that Latin American countries aiming to export the same goods will face a higher competitive threshold of entry into the global marketplace. </source> [/INST] <claim>c. China will be an import market for LA products.</claim> <psg> China has become an important import and export market for Latin America Although Latin American exports to China still consist largely of raw materials and commodities—the Brazilian mining company Cia Vale do Rio Doce (CVRD) exported 36 million tons of iron ore to China in 2005 and Chinese demand for CVRD iron ore is predicted to rise to 50 million tons by 2007 representing 35 percent of global demand for iron ore—China may gradually start absorbing other types of products from agro-industrial to other manufactured goods</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> The results are quite interesting. Figures are relatively low for all Latin American economies except Mexico. In general terms the results suggest that there is no trade competition between China and Latin America. As shown in Appendix I this trade competition is even decreasing rather than increasing over the recent period of time. Not surprisingly countries that export mainly commodities face lower competition. This is an expected result since China is a net importer of raw materials. Paraguay Venezuela Bolivia and Panama are those that exhibit the lowest figures among 34 selected economies i.e. those are the countries that suffer less from Chinese trade competition. Brazil could be considered as an intermediate case between Mexico and Venezuela. When we compare Latin America to other emerging countries and particularly those located in Asia we observe that Chinese competition is not a problem in general terms. Thus we might conclude that there are few if any short-term trade costs for Latin America if any from the trade point of view. In fact most Latin American countries are witnessing a tremendous increase in their exports to China. Over the past years China has for example become Brazil's fastest-growing export market purchasing 80 per cent more from Brazil in 2003 than in 2002. Bilateral trade has more than quadrupled over the past four years. Five commodities — soybeans iron ore steel soy oil and wood — accounted for 75 per cent of Brazil's exports to China last year. China bought 6.2 per cent of Brazil's $73 billion of exports in 2003 up from a level of 1.4 per cent in 1999. Some big Brazilian companies such as Aracruz Latin America's largest wood pulp maker had more than doubled its sales to China in the past two years to 12 per cent of the company's exports16. Another issue for Brazil is in dynamic terms. China will continue to expand its exports over the next decades gaining market share in third markets in new products. From this perspective as underlined by Brazilian economists (Paiva de Abreu 2005) some Brazilian sectors such as iron and steel products might be affected by Chinese competition in the medium term. In a more long-term perspective the automobile industry may also become an issue. </source> [/INST] <claim>Chinese competition in Latin America is not harmful</claim> <psg>that there is no trade competition between China and Latin America this trade competition is even decreasing rather than increasing over the recent period of time China is a net importer of raw materials Chinese competition is not a problem in general terms. Thus we might conclude that there are few if any short-term trade costs for Latin America if any from the trade point of view. In fact most Latin American countries are witnessing a tremendous increase in their exports to China</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> In some quarters we hear concerns about the so-called “China threat” and “China looting” (that unfair trade practices will undermine local economies). Nothing could be further from the truth: the China–Latin America relationship is normal and founded on mutual respect and interest. China’s growth of investment and trade in Latin America is organized entirely around the principles of cooperation mutual benefit and common development. Some people also claim that the development of China–Latin America relations especially economic and trade relations threatens the interests of other powers in Latin America. I believe the contrary. Our economic and trade relations do not pose any potential threat to the interests of the United States and European countries in Latin America. they will instead help to alleviate the pressure on the U.S. and European countries to provide aid to Latin America. </source> [/INST] <claim>Mutually beneficial and results in more aid & development for Latin America. </claim> <psg>we hear concerns about the so-called “China threat” and “China looting” Nothing could be further from the truth: the China–Latin America relationship is normal and founded on mutual respect Some people also claim that the development of China–Latin America relations especially economic and trade relations threatens the interests of other powers in Latin America. I believe the contrary. Our economic and trade relations do not pose any potential threat to the interests of the United States and European countries in Latin America. they will instead help to alleviate the pressure on the U.S. and European countries to provide aid to Latin America</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> On the good side trade with China has helped spur Latin America’s economic growth. Increased ties with China have played a big part of the strong (by Latin American standards) GDP growth of last decade. Especially for Brazil Argentina and Peru connections to the world’s economic engine were important in wake of the world financial crisis. Comparing Brazil’s and Mexico’s growth rates in 2010 tells that story—and the positive role that China can and does play. China’s trade has also benefited Latin America’s consumers. The big story of the last two decades is the rise of a middle class in many Latin American countries. Achieving a middle class lifestyle relies in part on higher incomes but also on greater purchasing power. Access to more goods of better quality and at lower prices has changed the lives of many. China’s sales of clothing electronics and even cars have benefited those in the middle and lower middle ranks. </source> [/INST] <claim>China EE good for LA economies.</claim> <psg>trade with China has helped spur Latin America’s economic growth. Increased ties with China have played a big part of the strong GDP growth of last decade. Especially for Brazil Argentina and Peru connections to the world’s economic engine were important in wake of the world financial crisis China’s trade has also benefited Latin America’s consumers China’s sales of clothing electronics and even cars have benefited those in the middle and lower middle ranks</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> The Pentagon no doubt is the master of razzmatazz. Leon Panetta set the tone by warning again and again of an impending 'cyber Pearl Harbor.' Just before he left the Pentagon the Defense Science Board delivered a remarkable report Resilient Military Systems and the Advanced Cyber Threat. The paper seemed obsessed with making yet more drastic historical comparisons: 'The cyber threat is serious ' the task force wrote 'with potential consequences similar to the nuclear threat of the Cold War.' The manifestations of an all-out nuclear war would be different from cyberattack the Pentagon scientists helpfully acknowledged. But then they added gravely that 'in the end the existential impact on the United States is the same.' A reminder is in order: The world has yet to witness a single casualty let alone fatality as a result of a computer attack. Such statements are a plain insult to survivors of Hiroshima. Some sections of the Pentagon document offer such eye-wateringly shoddy analysis that they would not have passed as an MA dissertation in a self-respecting political science department. But in the current debate it seemed to make sense. After all a bit of fear helps to claim -- or keep -- scarce resources when austerity and cutting seems out-of-control. The report recommended allocating the stout sum of $2.5 billion for its top two priorities alone protecting nuclear weapons against cyberattacks and determining the mix of weapons necessary to punish all-out cyber-aggressors. Then there are private computer security companies. Such firms naturally are keen to pocket some of the government's money earmarked for cybersecurity. And hype is the means to that end. Mandiant's much-noted report linking a coordinated and coherent campaign of espionage attacks dubbed Advanced Persistent Threat 1 or 'APT1 ' to a unit of the Chinese military is a case in point: The firm offered far more details on attributing attacks to the Chinese than the intelligence community has ever done and the company should be commended for making the report public. But instead of using cocky and over-confident language Mandiant's analysts should have used Words of Estimative Probability as professional intelligence analysts would have done. An example is the report's conclusion which describes APT1's work: 'Although they control systems in dozens of countries their attacks originate from four large networks in Shanghai -- two of which are allocated directly to the Pudong New Area ' the report found. Unit 61398 of the People's Liberation Army is also in Pudong. Therefore Mandiant's computer security specialists concluded the two were identical: 'Given the mission resourcing and location of PLA Unit 61398 we conclude that PLA Unit 61398 is APT1.' But the report conspicuously does not mention that Pudong is not a small neighborhood ('right outside of Unit 61398's gates') but in fact a vast city landscape twice the size of Chicago. Mandiant's report was useful and many attacks indeed originate in China. But the company should have been more careful in its overall assessment of the available evidence as the computer security expert Jeffrey Carr and others have pointed out. The firm made it too easy for Beijing to dismiss the report. My class in cybersecurity at King's College London started poking holes into the report after 15 minutes of red-teaming it -- the New York Times didn't. Which leads to the next point: The media want to sell copy through threat inflation. 'In Cyberspace New Cold War ' the headline writers at the Times intoned in late February. 'The U.S. is not ready for a cyberwar ' shrieked the Washington Post earlier this week. Instead of calling out the above-mentioned Pentagon report the paper actually published two supportive articles on it and pointed out that a major offensive cyber capability now seemed essential 'in a world awash in cyber-espionage theft and disruption.' The Post should have reminded its readers that the only military-style cyberattack that has actually created physical damage -- Stuxnet -- was actually executed by the United States government. The Times likewise should have asked tough questions and pointed to some of the evidential problems in the Mandiant report. instead it published what appeared like an elegant press release for the firm. On issues of cybersecurity the nation's fiercest watchdogs too often look like hand-tame puppies eager to lap up stories from private firms as well as anonymous sources in the security establishment. Finally the intelligence community tags along with the hype because the NSA and CIA are still traumatized by missing 9/11. Missing a 'cyber 9/11' would be truly catastrophic for America's spies so erring on the side of caution seems the rational choice. Yes Director of National Intelligence James Clapper's recent testimony was more nuanced than reported and toned down the threat of a very serious cyberattack. But at the same time America's top spies are not as forthcoming with more detailed information as they could be. We know that the intelligence community especially in the United States has far better information better sources better expertise and better analysts than private companies like Symantec McAfee and Kaspersky Lab. But for a number of reasons they keep their findings and their analysis classified. This means that the quality of the public debate suffers as experts as well as journalists have no choice but to rely on industry reports of sometimes questionable quality or anonymous informants whose veracity is hard to assess. </source> [/INST] <claim>No cyberterror threat – it’s all hype. </claim> <psg>Panetta set the tone by warning again and again of an impending 'cyber Pearl Harbor The world has yet to witness a single casualty let alone fatality as a result of a computer attack. Such statements are a plain insult to survivors of Hiroshima. Some sections of the Pentagon document offer such eye-wateringly shoddy analysis that they would not have passed as an MA dissertation in a self-respecting political science department the company should have been more careful in its overall assessment of the available evidence The media want to sell copy through threat inflation the only military-style cyberattack that has actually created physical damage was executed by the U S On cybersecurity the nation's fiercest watchdogs too often look like hand-tame puppies eager to lap up stories from private firms as well as anonymous sources in the security establishment the intelligence community tags along with the hype because the NSA and CIA are still traumatized by missing 9/11 the intelligence community has far better information than private companies But they keep their findings and their analysis classified the quality of the public debate suffers as experts as well as journalists have no choice but to rely on industry reports of sometimes questionable quality or anonymous informants whose veracity is hard to assess.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> With the United States preoccupied with Iraq and Afghanistan Beijing has obviously been busy carving out a large sphere of influence for itself in Asia Africa and Latin America. With the presence of China being felt everywhere from the backwaters of the Amazon to mines in the Andes U.S. dominance in its own backyard is no longer unquestioned or unrivaled. Opinion is divided on whether China's economic engagement is guided only by commercial interests or is a ruse to divert attention from Beijing's geostrategic goals in the region. Some contend that the Chinese presence in Latin America marks the end of the Monroe Doctrine while others are more skeptical. Over the long term Chinese intentions in Latin America may not be as benign as some China-watchers suggest. Nor can China's expansion be equated with Japan's or Spain's interest in Latin America because of the highly competitive nature of the U.S.-China relationship. Beijing calculates that one of the consequences of the burgeoning Sino-Latin American trade and resource dependency will be a widening of the gap between U.S. and Latin American interests. As U.S. Deputy Assistant Defense Secretary for Western Hemisphere Affairs Roger Pardo-Maurer points out: 'China has its own set of political economic and military interests requiring us to carefully distinguish between legitimate commercial initiatives and the possibility of political or diplomatic efforts to weaken the democratic alliances we have forged.' While Beijing's forays do not indicate a seismic change in the balance of power within Latin America the very presence of China does make U.S. diplomacy difficult. Increasingly 'the China option' affords Latin American countries greater room for maneuver and an additional source of leverage vis-à-vis Washington. While the Chinese may not want to be drawn into Venezuela Brazil or Cuba's problems with the United States that does not mean that these countries will not play 'the China card' in their relations with the United States. Likewise the revival of the old ideological debate over which political system -- Chinese authoritarianism or Western democracy -- delivers more people from poverty and whether wealth or elections are a greater measure of freedom does not bode well for Washington's efforts to promote transparency and democracy. Beijing's strategic interests and unconditional investments prop up many authoritarian regimes thereby undercutting Washington's ability to persuade them to change their behavior. Just as the United States can no longer take the Latin American countries' allegiances for granted its access to the region's resources is also far from assured. Washington is increasingly concerned over Beijing's efforts to 'lock up' oil and mineral supplies with new ventures in Latin America Africa Central Asia and Russia and the Middle East. Hong Kong-based Takungpao News recently quoted General Xiong Guangkai the former PLA deputy chief of staff as saying that 'in the long term the strategic race for the world's energy may result in regional tension and even trigger a military clash.' In particular Beijing's newly cultivated energy alliances with populist left-wing leaders in Latin America have caused alarm in Washington and prompted the dispatch in May 2006 of Thomas A. Shannon Jr. assistant secretary of state for Western Hemisphere affairs to hold first-ever talks with his Chinese counterpart on China's role in a region that some analysts fear could become a site for great power rivalry. </source> [/INST] <claim>Still links to the net-benefits </claim> <psg> U.S. dominance in its own backyard is no longer unquestioned or unrivaled Chinese presence in Latin America marks the end of the Monroe Doctrine while others are more skeptical Over the long term Chinese intentions in Latin America may not be as benign as some China-watchers suggest. Nor can China's expansion be equated with Japan's because of the highly competitive nature of the U.S.-China relationship. Beijing calculates that one of the consequences of the burgeoning Sino-Latin American trade and resource dependency will be a widening of the gap between U.S. and Latin American interests. While Beijing's forays do not indicate a seismic change in the balance of power within Latin America the very presence of China does make U.S. diplomacy difficult. Increasingly 'the China option' affords Latin American countries greater room for maneuver and an additional source of leverage vis-à-vis Washington Beijing's strategic interests and unconditional investments prop up many authoritarian regimes thereby undercutting Washington's ability to persuade them to change their behavior. Just as the United States can no longer take the Latin American countries' allegiances for granted its access to the region's resources is also far from assured</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> But I argue rather at least for the time being that China doesn’t have fully fledged hegemonic intentions in Latin America. Unlike the USSR during the Cold War the Chinese strategy for the LAC region is much more economic than either ideological or geopolitical. By stating this I am not buying the Chinese mantra of a “peaceful rise”. As far as I can see no great power behaves as Saint Francis of Assisi. I therefore subscribe to the neorealist idea that power politics is explained by states’ capabilities and interests. The subjective intentions of political leaders are usually constrained by systemic arrangements in the international arena. </source> [/INST] <claim>China’s involvement is economic not hegemonic. </claim> <psg>China doesn’t have fully fledged hegemonic intentions in Latin America. the Chinese strategy much more economic than either ideological or geopolitical power politics is explained by states’ capabilities and interests. The subjective intentions of political leaders are usually constrained by systemic arrangements in the international arena.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Considerable attention has been devoted to the threat seemingly posed by the growth of China’s power and influence. It seems like every week the country is marking some new “first” in its military modernization program all of which are said to be underwritten by a desire to become the pre-eminent power in Asia. In fact if China threatens international stability it is more likely an economic rather than a military challenge. And the problem is not China’s strength that should be the focus of policymakers but its weaknesses. The unraveling of the Chinese economy would deal a body blow to the global economy and ripple through the region and the world. The China story in modern memory has been its outstanding growth. The country has registered 10 percent growth on average for three decades overtaking Japan to become the world’s second largest economy and the world’s largest exporter of goods. Hundreds of millions of people have been lifted out of poverty and its middle class is now equal to or exceeds in size the entire population of most countries. Its dynamism powered the global economy. Despite the downturn triggered in 2008 China’s economic resilience while the rest of the world flirted with a new depression imbued the country with a status and image that exceeds its actual wealth. In recent months however economists are troubled by the prospect of a “hard landing” as the Chinese economy slows. The country’s manufacturing sector has shrunk for four consecutive months as global demand slows. With a glut of housing — it is estimated that there are 10 million to 65 million unoccupied units nationwide — the average prices for homes have fallen in 100 cities for five consecutive months. Meanwhile consumer goods prices are creeping up with inflation hitting 4.5 percent in January. food prices which make up a third of the consumer index ballooned 10.5 percent in January. Real estate problems are especially worrisome. The real estate sector is said to account for about 20 percent of the Chinese economy. It is the primary asset of many households. a widespread drop in value could stir unrest. But the spillover effects are most troubling. Local governments rely on land sales to raise revenues. in 2011 land sale revenues dropped 13 percent year on year. Banks have considerable exposure to the real estate market. Banks were also the primary vehicle for the massive stimulus program that Beijing implemented after the 2007-08 financial crisis to stave off a downturn. There is little faith that those funds were invested well and there are concerns about a banking crisis when those loans come due. Most economists anticipate a gradual slowing of the Chinese economy a drop from double-digit growth to a more reasonable level. After expanding 9.2 percent in 2011 the World Bank estimated in November that China will register growth in excess of 8 percent in 2012 although some fear that 8 percent could be a ceiling. It is a core belief in China that 8 percent growth is the minimum necessary to absorb new labor market entrants and workers displaced by privatization. Anything less risks social unrest and potential political instability. It is not at all clear how the Beijing government — or the people — will handle a downturn like that which has gripped the advanced economies during the last few years. Will it unleash nationalism? Will China look overseas for scapegoats to distract the public? And how will a downturn impact those economies like Japan’s that have grown on the back of China’s own expansion? Most observers believe that the stakes as too high — especially during a time of political transition — for the economic situation in China to get out of hand. In other words the Chinese government will do whatever is necessary to keep the economy expanding and maintain popular support. </source> [/INST] <claim>China’s rise is peaceful but economic downturn triggers the worst impacts – We have comparative evidence. </claim> <psg>Considerable attention has been devoted to the threat seemingly posed by the growth of China’s power and influence if China threatens international stability it is more likely an economic rather than a military challenge. And the problem is not China’s strength that should be the focus of policymakers but its weaknesses. The unraveling of the Chinese economy would deal a body blow to the global economy and ripple through the region and the world. economists are troubled by the prospect of a “hard landing” as the Chinese economy slows It is a core belief in China that 8 percent growth is the minimum necessary to absorb new labor market entrants and workers displaced by privatization. Anything less risks social unrest and potential political instability. Will it unleash nationalism? And how will a downturn impact those economies like Japan’s the stakes as too high</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> That said Latin American democracies have proved resilient in the face of economic crises and all ideological alternatives to democratic government remain discredited. Fragile democratic institutions in countries such as Ecuador and Paraguay remain under great pressure to respond to legitimate mass needs but few consider military rule a feasible alternative. Latin American militaries know that overt intervention risks international opprobrium and sanctions. They will therefore favor solutions that maintain at least a semblance of constitutional legitimacy. To date popular support has sustained President Chavez's political revolution in Venezuela but the swift dramatic fall of former Peruvian President Fujimori indicates that there are limits to the appeal of populist authoritarians. The OAS-managed hemispheric reaction to suspect elections in Peru in mid-2000 underscored the strength of the prevailing pro-democracy consensus. In none of the other major countries of Latin America-- Argentina Brazil Chile Colombia and Mexico-- is democracy threatened in the short or medium term. Indeed the election of Vicente Fox to the Mexican presidency ending peacefully the long reign of the Institutional Revolutionary Party is a major step forward for democracy in Mexico and throughout the hemisphere. </source> [/INST] <claim>Latin American democracy is resilient</claim> <psg>Latin American democracies have proved resilient in the face of economic crises and all ideological alternatives to democratic government remain discredited. Fragile democratic institutions in countries such as Ecuador and Paraguay remain under great pressure to respond to legitimate mass needs but few consider military rule a feasible alternative. Latin American militaries will favor solutions that maintain at least a semblance of constitutional legitimacy there are limits to the appeal of populist authoritarians. The OAS-managed hemispheric reaction to suspect elections in Peru in mid-2000 underscored the strength of the prevailing pro-democracy consensus. In none of the other major countries of Latin America-- Argentina Brazil Chile Colombia and Mexico-- is democracy threatened in the short or medium term. the election of Fox is a major step forward for democracy in Mexico and throughout the hemisphere.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> The environmental and ethical practices of Chinese companies have drawn unfavourable comment. The first major Chinese mining company in the hemisphere was Shougang Group which began operations in Peru in 1992 with the purchase of the state-owned Hierro Peru for 14 times an independent valuation. Shougang has contributed heavily to the poor reputation of Chinese companies over fines for environmental damage for the contamination of water sup- plies low wages and dangerous working conditions. It has been the object of frequent strikes and protests. Other companies have experienced problems with community relations. After buying the Canadian company Corriente in 2010 Tongling and China Railway Construction Corporation proposed an open-pit mine in the province of Zamora Chinchipe in Ecuador. National protests followed an agreement with the government including a march on the capital by the country’s most powerful Indigenous movement Confederación de Nacionalidades Indígenas del Ecuador (CONAIE). Chinese companies lack experience of compliance with much higher environmental or community relations standards than prevail at home. Some are adapting hiring local managers public relations (PR) and law firms but they are likely to struggle for some time with the cultural gaps and the lack of understanding of local concerns and political considerations. One example of an attempt to meet those concerns is the Chinese mining company Chinalco’s relocation of 5 000 residents of the town of Morococha 150 kilometres east of the Peruvian capital Lima to remove them from an area likely to be contaminated by the new $2.2 million Toro- mocho opencast copper mine. Advised by local managers and PR consultants Chinalco is investing $50 million in an entirely new town nearby a project it describes as “the biggest privately-funded social project in Peru’s history” (http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/ people.cfm?authorID=580). Two-thirds of the residents have moved although the project has also been dogged by complaints about inadequate housing and compensation. Although some dispute the claim that Chinese conduct is worse than U.S. or local equivalents China suffers from widespread negative perceptions and the identification of Chinese companies with the Chinese state. Local labour groups some government officials and many indigenous and social groups in the region make little distinction between private Chinese companies and state-owned enterprises. Local opinion surveys reveal that most companies whether large or small state owned or private suffer from anti- Chinese sentiment and the perception that they put profit above environmental and social concerns. In several African countries Chinese security guards have been deployed to defend companies’ interests and have even on occasion killed Africans. Both the Peruvian president Ollanta Humala and the Bolivian president Evo Morales political allies of China have felt obliged to insist to their electorates that Chinese troops would never be allowed to set foot in their countries. </source> [/INST] <claim>Latin America says ‘No’ to China – no cultural connection. </claim> <psg>The environmental and ethical practices of Chinese companies have drawn unfavourable comment. Chinese companies have experienced problems with community relations. Chinese companies lack experience of compliance with much higher environmental or community relations standards than prevail at home. they are likely to struggle for some time with the cultural gaps and the lack of understanding of local concerns and political considerations China suffers from widespread negative perceptions and the identification of Chinese companies with the Chinese state most companies whether large or small state owned or private suffer from anti- Chinese sentiment and the perception that they put profit above environmental and social concerns . Both the Peruvian president Ollanta Humala and the Bolivian president Evo Morales political allies of China have felt obliged to insist to their electorates that Chinese troops would never be allowed to set foot in their countries.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Since 2000 LAC exports of commodities have constituted 70 percent of export growth. The China - LAC relationship is predominated by natural resource extraction. This has led to near - term ‘boon’ for Latin American countries. foreign currency reserves have increased governments have been far more financially secure and there has been a rise in investment and development. However the long - term projection of this commodity trading is risky. Latin American countries are dependent on sustained commodity prices to uphold an economy that has yet to develop into a more modern dynamic level. If commodity prices fall countries could fall back into chronic debt. Furthermore many Latin American countries have not used the influx of capital from China to invest in manufacturing research and development and other value - added stages of production to elevate the quality of economic output. If these Latin American countries are lulled into ‘Dutch disease’ they run the risk of not advancing socio - economically and putting continued strain on the primary commodity sector to perform year in and year out. This socio - economic concern is of the US national interest as future trade research and development is contingent on </source> [/INST] <claim>China involvement causes Dutch Disease (unstable commodity dependence) </claim> <psg> the long - term projection of this commodity trading is risky. Latin American countries are dependent on sustained commodity prices to uphold an economy that has yet to develop into a more modern dynamic level. If commodity prices fall countries could fall back into chronic debt. Furthermore many Latin American countries have not used the influx of capital from China to invest in manufacturing research and development and other value - added stages of production to elevate the quality of economic output. If these Latin American countries are lulled into ‘Dutch disease’ they run the risk of not advancing socio - economically and putting continued strain on the primary commodity sector to perform year in and year out. This socio - economic concern is of the US national interest as future trade research and development is contingent on</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> At the same time the volume is not oblivious to the threats that China’s economy poses to certain countries and sectors in Latin America. The impact is varied clashing most directly with producers of manufactured goods. Chinese exports directly compete with Mexican textiles electron- ics and telecommunications equipment in third markets notably in the United States. The removal of quotas for textiles and apparel (a change the volume does not fully capture) has hit maquilas in Central America and the Caribbean hard as efficient Chinese firms employing cheap labor seize a greater share of global markets. A particularly interesting and innova- tive chapter by Robert C. Feenstra and Hiau Looi Kee argues that every 1 percent increase in the variety of Chinese exports reduces that of Mexi- can exports by 0.5 percent (table 8.3 258). China’s expansion constrains the dynamic gains that might otherwise be available to Mexico as a result of U.S. tariff liberalization under the North American Free Trade Agree- ment. This adverse impact is of particular concern because the growth of export varieties benefits aggregate productivity in the exporting country. However the dominant constraint on Latin American manufacturing ex- ports comes not from Chinese competition but from domestic shortcom- ings. Examining Argentina Brazil Mexico and Chile Gordon H. Hanson and Raymond Robertson point to local constraints on manufacturing growth such as relatively high energy prices poor telecommunications infrastructure and slow growth in the supply of skilled labor. In response to those problems the editors of China’s and India’s Chal- lenge to Latin America propose a series of policies. Latin American work- ers who lose their jobs to Chinese imports should be retrained and countries should focus on innovation and expanded capabilities in sci- ence and technology—admittedly improvements easier said than done. In this regard cooperation with China might be a good option as the joint Brazilian-Chinese program in satellite development exemplifies. But Latin Americans should eschew protectionism. rather firms should seek integration into global production networks including those that involve Chinese (and Indian) firms. Some countries can concentrate on sectors in which geographical proximity gives them an edge such as tourism and health-care services. In his contribution to China’s Expansion into the Western Hemisphere: Im- plications for Latin America and the United States Robert Devlin accepts that China is more opportunity than threat. nevertheless he is agitated by the threat and daring in the policies that he proposes. The prowess of the Asian giant is a loud wake-up call for the region Devlin warns and a motivation for Latin America to make better and more systematic use of its inherent advantages. A former manager at the Inter-American Development Bank Devlin does not want Latin America to return to heavy-handed statism of the sort that generated gross inefficiencies in the earlier era of import sub- stitution. but he does see an important lesson in the success of East Asia and China: after the market-oriented reforms of the Washington Consen- sus the state should be brought back into development strategy. </source> [/INST] <claim>Chinese presence in Latin America net worse – trades off with local economies</claim> <psg>threats that China’s economy poses to certain countries and sectors in Latin America. The impact is varied clashing most directly with producers of manufactured goods. The removal of quotas for textiles and apparel has hit maquilas in Central America and the Caribbean hard as efficient Chinese firms employing cheap labor seize a greater share of global markets. every 1 percent increase in the variety of Chinese exports reduces that of Mexi- can exports by 0.5 percent China’s expansion constrains the dynamic gains that might otherwise be available to Mexico the growth of export varieties benefits aggregate productivity in the exporting country. The prowess of the Asian giant is a loud wake-up call for the region</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Much of the recent scholarship has concluded that China’s growing economic ties while fairly beneficial to South American countries have been costly—politically and economically—to Mexico and Central America. South America has natural resources that it sells to the Chinese but many Central American countries have suffered retaliation from China because of their recognition of Taiwan. And Mexico’s fewer natural resources not only offer little opportunity for exporting to China but make it more difficult to compete globally with Chinese firms. Meanwhile U.S. observers are increasingly alarmed that South Americans may be creating political alliances with the Chinese. Not all alliances are of concern but loans-for-oil deals with Venezuela and satellite cooperation between Brazil and China have raised eyebrows in some Washington circles. While there is some truth to that overall view this book goes deeper and wider. Economic essays do a nice job of separating some of the benefits and costs of the China–Latin America relationship. For example as Javier Santiso of ESADE Business School and Rolando Avendano of the OECD Development Centre point out China offers a new source of trade and finance for many countries and as the U.S. economy continues to slump this diversified portfolio is a good thing for many Latin Americans. However there are costs as well. Chinese imports are putting pressure on Latin American firms by out-competing them in both world and home markets and Chinese investment in natural resources can exact a heavy environmental and social toll. The combined effect can push up the value of a country’s currency and threaten long-term economic growth. In Brazil for example China has triggered a debate over de-industrialization and the future of economic growth. In the essay “China’s Challenge to Latin American Development” Enrique Dussel Peters of the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México shows how Chinese economic activity is accentuating inequalities and creating new sets of winners and losers across the hemisphere. Dussel shows that despite the increasing exports of primary commodities to China from the region (winners) the region as a whole experiences a significant trade deficit due to the import of light manufactured goods (losers). </source> [/INST] <claim>Chinese economic engagement dampens long-term South American growth</claim> <psg>China’s growing economic ties have been costly—politically and economically—to Mexico and Central America Central American countries have suffered retaliation from China because of their recognition of Taiwan Mexico’s fewer natural resources not only offer little opportunity for exporting to China but make it more difficult to compete globally with Chinese firms. South Americans may be creating political alliances with the Chinese Chinese imports are putting pressure on Latin American firms by out-competing them in both world and home markets and Chinese investment in natural resources can exact a heavy environmental and social toll. The combined effect can threaten long-term economic growth In Brazil Chinese economic activity is accentuating inequalities espite the increasing exports of primary commodities to China from the region the region as a whole experiences a significant trade deficit due to the import of light manufactured goods (</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> The downsides also exist. These same imports that make consumers happy hit the economy at large. They directly compete with Latin American producers both in home markets as well as abroad in the United States and the European Union. Anecdotal evidence points to factories closing and aggregate trade data shows Latin American producers losing world market share to China. Still estimates suggest this head to head competition occurs in roughly 12 percent of exports from Latin America’s biggest economies—significant but not everywhere. The indirect effects of China’s rise have also caused problems—especially through the “Dutch disease.” This occurs when the success of commodity exports raises the currency making it harder for manufacturing companies to compete internationally. Many argue that this has occurred in Brazil (and helps account for the decline in manufacturing production as a percent of exports) it may also be happening in Venezuela Argentina and Peru. The bigger worry for Latin American countries is that they are losing their hard fought gains. Over the last few decades many both successfully opened their economies and diversified their production. Looking at the breakdown of exports one can see a manufacturing surge in Mexico Brazil and Colombia since the 1980s. But China’s pressure on its trading partners threatens to undo these gains. Whether or not Latin America can continue to climb the economic value-added chain matters for the long term. Commodity dependency leaves countries more vulnerable to global commodity price swings and makes it harder to plan and implement long-term policies as a result. It also limits the job opportunities for the growing number of educated urban and ambitious people—the new middle class. </source> [/INST] <claim>China engagement causes “Dutch disease” for Latin America – dooms growth. </claim> <psg>The downsides also exist. These same imports that make consumers happy hit the economy at large. They directly compete with Latin American producers The indirect effects of China’s rise have also caused problems—especially through the “Dutch disease.” This occurs when the success of commodity exports raises the currency making it harder for manufacturing companies to compete internationally The bigger worry for Latin American countries is that they are losing their hard fought gains. Over the last few decades many both successfully opened their economies and diversified their production But China’s pressure on its trading partners threatens to undo these gains. Commodity dependency leaves countries more vulnerable to global commodity price swings and makes it harder to plan and implement long-term policies as a result. It also limits the job opportunities for the growing number of educated urban and ambitious people—the new middle</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> While China’s commodity-based trade structure is currently lucrative it does not encourage diversification of Latin America’s exports into more value-added goods manufactured products and modern services. Economic relations are dependent on often unstable commodity market demands. U.S. investment in the region is far more diversified and spans a range of value-added activities including manufacturing finance telecom retail and other services. Going back to a comparison with the United States while China accounts for 6.7% of the region’s total exports the United States continues to be the largest buyer with a 40% share. Latin America’s exports to the U.S. are more diversified and remain fairly balanced so it is better suited to survive a possible commodity cut-off in Latin America. Roughly 24% of the region’s exports are raw materials another 12% consists of resource-based goods and 60% is manufactured products. Karen Poniachik of Latin Trade also sees enormous risks for the region: “The steep overvaluation of the region’s currencies—due in part to the flood of investment flows and export proceeds—is eroding the competitiveness of its higher-value added goods and services. This could in turn fuel its already high level of overdependence on commodities.” Future Implications With both the U.S. and China making gains in the region in different sectors there is seemingly room for each side to grow. which implies that in fact trade with Latin America is not a zero-sum game. China presents an alternative to the United States but that is not necessarily a bad thing. The U.S. is much more diversified than China at the moment and therefore does not need to enter into direct competition. However as China responds to calls from Brazil and diversifies its investments there is increasing worry that China is going to outmatch U.S. trade in the region. These fears may be economically based but there are potentially harmful political consequences – primarily providing Latin America with a quasi-world power as an alternative to the U.S. Since the Monroe Doctrine Latin America has been considered a secure sphere of influence for the U.S. The fact that China presents a less democratic alternative to U.S. influence presents a major problem. </source> [/INST] <claim>Engagement is not zero-sum – the US & China have different interests. </claim> <psg>While China’s commodity-based trade structure is currently lucrative it does not encourage diversification U.S. investment in the region is far more diversified and spans a range of value-added activities With both the U.S. and China making gains in the region in different sectors there is seemingly room for each side to grow. which implies that in fact trade with Latin America is not a zero-sum game. China presents an alternative to the United States but that is not necessarily a bad thing. The U.S. is much more diversified than China at the moment and therefore does not need to enter into direct competition</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> However even though China has expanded commercial ties with Latin America and is an important new investor in the region U.S. trade and investment in the Americas continues to dwarf that of China. U.S. trade with the region exceeded $445 billion in 2004 10 times China's level Shapiro said. He noted that Latin America's exports to the United States are up 10 percent and imports from the U.S. are up 15 percent in the first half of 2005 compared to 2004 levels. And whereas Chinese investment in the region is approximately $8.3 billion U.S. investment in Latin America is more than $300 billion the State Department official said. Apart from the significant difference in scale Shapiro explained the United States' economic engagement in Latin America fundamentally differs from that of China. Chinese exports particularly in the areas of textiles and apparel provide stiff competition for some Latin American and Caribbean producers but the United States provides high-tech and knowledge-based goods and services he said. </source> [/INST] <claim>No trade-off the US & China offer different form of engagement. </claim> <psg>even though China has expanded commercial ties with Latin America U.S. trade and investment in the Americas continues to dwarf that of China. Apart from the significant difference in scale he United States' economic engagement in Latin America fundamentally differs from that of China. Chinese exports particularly textiles provide competition for Latin American producers but the United States provides high-tech and knowledge-based goods</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> For the United States the value added by the above process lies in its promotion of trilateral cooperation. Both China and the United States favor more open markets in Cuba and considering the attempts of Chinese enterprises to build Cuba’s export capacities and develop its transport manufacturing and resource sectors the United States is a logical source of management services and marketing expertise. Building on existing U.S. activities in agriculture medicine and telecommunications expansion into these sectors would bring both economic benefits for U.S. firms and opportunities for harmonizing approaches to governance and information sharing. Indeed the Obama administration’s relatively conciliatory stance toward Cuba could lay the foundation of a much-needed “mutually reinforcing diplomacy” with China in the region (Wilder 2009:4). A defining challenge for U.S. foreign policy in the 21st century will be the development of mutually beneficial partnerships with China. With sensible diplomacy Chinese projects in Latin America could become a source of deeper cooperation for as Daniel Erikson concisely put it to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs “trade is not a zero sum game” (2008:3). Hu Jintao’s proposal at the 2009 G-20 to jointly develop financial monitoring mechanisms reflects China’s desire for cooperative relations with the United States. With legal authorization Cuba could become a platform for advancing responsibly governed trilateral projects that demonstrate awareness of regional diversity and a commitment to international cooperation. Accommodating diversity is critical to effective diplomacy for although Confucius may have stated “have no friends not equal to yourself” in his pragmatic wisdom he also taught his followers to be “firm in the right way and not merely firm.” </source> [/INST] <claim>China and United States seeks to cooperate with each other in Latin America and Cuba—not a zero sum game. </claim> <psg>Both China and the United States favor more open markets in Cuba the Obama administration’s stance toward Cuba could lay the foundation of a much-needed “mutually reinforcing diplomacy” with China in the region Chinese projects in Latin America could become a source of deeper cooperation trade is not a zero sum game Hu Jintao’s proposal to jointly develop financial monitoring mechanisms reflects China’s desire for cooperative relations with the United States Cuba could become a platform for advancing responsibly governed trilateral projects that demonstrate awareness of regional diversity and a commitment to international cooperation</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> China has always placed economics at the forefront of most other matters. Despite the often-tumultuous state of Sino-Indian relations (and an unresolved border dispute) trade has touched $63 billion. China is India’s second largest trading partner. In the Senkaku island dispute with Japan Deng Xiaoping as soon as he came into power in 1978 proposed that China and Japan jointly explore the oil and gas deposits near the disputed islands without touching on the issue of sovereignty. China has also sought joint exploration in the resource-rich Spratlys a solution which is the right step forward and is in fact more urgent than sovereignty which the Philippines and Vietnam and have so far been reluctant to do. China doesn’t mind waiting and biding its time until sovereignty issues get resolved. As Deng Xiaoping famously remarked regarding the Senkaku dispute “It does not matter if this question is shelved for some time say 10 years. Our generation is not wise enough to find common language on this question. Our next generation will certainly be wiser. They will certainly find a solution acceptable to all”. Unlike his predecessor Jiang Zemin Hu Jintao has used a softer approach towards Taiwan promoting stronger economic and cultural ties high-level official visits and direct flights in order to reduce tensions. This pragmatic approach is on display even in the Taiwan dispute. China is Taiwan’s largest trading partner and Taiwan is China’s seventh largest. Two-thirds of all Taiwanese companies have made investments in China in recent years. In 2010 China (including Hong Kong) accounted for over 29.0% of Taiwan’s total trade and 41.8% of Taiwan’s exports. The ECFA was heavily tilted in Taiwan’s favor. It cut tariffs on 539 Taiwanese exports to China and 267 Chinese products entering Taiwan. Under the agreement approximately 16.1 % of exports to China and 10.5 % of imports to China will be tariff free by 2013. Taiwanese firms have invested $200 billion in the mainland and trade between the two sides has exceeded $150 billion. Taiwanese trade with China. Source: Reuters Both China and Taiwan have a lot to lose by fighting with each other. Another factor to consider is the incalculable loss that an invasion will have on the Chinese economy not to mention scaring away potential investors. </source> [/INST] <claim>No war – economies too intertwined</claim> <psg>China has always placed economics at the forefront of most other matters China doesn’t mind waiting and biding its time until sovereignty issues get resolved. As Deng Xiaoping famously remarked regarding the Senkaku dispute “It does not matter if this question is shelved for some time say 10 years Hu Jintao has used a softer approach towards Taiwan promoting stronger economic and cultural ties high-level official visits and direct flights in order to reduce tensions China is Taiwan’s largest trading partner and Taiwan is China’s seventh largest Two-thirds of all Taiwanese companies have made investments in China Both China and Taiwan have a lot to lose by fighting with each other. Another factor to consider is the incalculable loss that an invasion will have on the Chinese economy not to mention scaring away potential investors.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> The challenge to Washington from China's presence in the region also extends beyond economics and policy objectives. The U.S. Defense Department's critical posture regarding Chinese cyberattacks is a reminder that hostilities between the United States and China though highly improbable and undesirable are not unthinkable. In such a conflict China-operated ports airports telecommunications infrastructure and other parts of the Chinese commercial presence in Latin America would represent potential assets in a global asymmetric warfare campaign against the United States. </source> [/INST] <claim>Chinese presence enables cyber-terror attacks.</claim> <psg>The challenge to Washington from China's presence in the region also extends beyond economics and policy objectives. The U.S. Defense Department's critical posture regarding Chinese cyberattacks is a reminder that hostilities between the United States and China In such a conflict China-operated ports airports telecommunications infrastructure and other parts of the Chinese commercial presence in Latin America would represent potential assets in a global asymmetric warfare campaign against the United States</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> And this is not just a criminal problem. it is also a national security problem. This is because our nation's critical infrastructures -- and by that I mean those services that are vital to our economy and to our national security such as electrical power telecommunications transportation and government operations -- are now all dependent on computer technology for their very operations. And that dependence makes them vulnerable to an attack which if successful could deny service on a very broad scale. The same basic types of cyber attacks that therefore have become attractive to criminals are also attractive to foreign intelligence services who seek new ways to obtain sensitive government or proprietary information and also to terrorists and hostile foreign nations who are bent on attacking U.S. interests. </source> [/INST] <claim>Cyber-attack would destroys the US economy</claim> <psg>our nation's critical infrastructures services that are vital to our economy and to our national security are now all dependent on computer technology for their very operations. And that dependence makes them vulnerable to an attack which could deny service on a very broad scale. The same basic types of cyber attacks that therefore have become attractive to criminals are also attractive to foreign intelligence services and also to terrorists and hostile foreign nations who are bent on attacking U.S. interests.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Is China a Threat to the Normative Advances in the Hemisphere? Since the end of the Cold War however the region has struggled to develop a regime of democratic behavior that is intended to prevail in the hemispheric community of nations. Democracy including freedom of the press is to be respected. labor and the environment protected. corruption and illegal activities inspected and prosecuted. It is difficult to implement such standards unless leverage exists to develop a broad consensus that promotes certain behaviors and at least one nation or regional organization is willing and able to enforce the regime effectively. For example U.S. efforts to promote labor and environmental reforms through trade agreements are undermined when other nations have the ability to sign similar agreements with China that do not include similar provisions. Programs of multilateral lending agencies like the IMF World Bank and Inter-American Development Bank that promote financial reforms and good governance become less relevant if borrowing nations can receive funds from China or elsewhere including Venezuela without conditions. To put it starkly the oft-maligned IMF has no influence with nations such as Argentina that do not currently require IMF funding or access to global capital markets.5 In fact China’s huge purchases of hemispheric commodities and the provision of credits on favorable terms have greatly assisted Latin American commodities exporters in the ongoing global economic crisis. In some cases this has allowed leaders the flexibility to postpone indefinitely the necessary economic and political reforms that would otherwise be consistent with open market healthy democratic governance. Ironically this has allowed some democratically elected leaders to undermine democratic institutions including freedom of the press and return to the days of corporatist rent-seeking economies. This model failed spectacularly during the twentieth century but it is now enabled if not promoted by Chinese economic engagement. At the microeconomic level firms with government connections have profited handsomely from these arrangements but such an economic model tends not to foster innovation dynamism or sustainable broad-based economic growth over time. It just makes the politically connected more wealthy—exaggerating what has traditionally been one of the fundamental problems of Latin America’s economic development. Additionally the behavior of Chinese firms has not always followed the Western model which includes corporate social responsibility activities payment of taxes job creation in the local economy environmental mitigation anti-corruption policies and the like. This will be an increasingly important issue because China is laying the groundwork for a long-term relationship. Its toolkit goes beyond commercial engagement. It includes student exchanges and the export of Chinese language studies through the Confucius Institutes which have spread like kudzu across Latin America since the first institute was opened in South Korea in 2004. </source> [/INST] <claim>China influence decks democracy in the region. </claim> <psg>the region has struggled to develop a regime of democratic behavior that is intended to prevail in the hemispheric community of nations. Democracy is difficult to implement unless leverage exists labor and environmental reforms through trade agreements are undermined when nations sign with China financial reforms and good governance become less relevant if borrowing nations can receive funds from China China’s huge purchases have greatly assisted Latin American commodities exporters In some cases this has allowed leaders the flexibility to postpone indefinitely the necessary economic and political reforms that would otherwise be consistent with open market healthy democratic governance. Ironically this has allowed some democratically elected leaders to undermine democratic institutions This model failed but it is now enabled if not promoted by Chinese economic engagement. . It just makes the politically connected more wealthy—exaggerating what has traditionally been one of the fundamental problems of Latin America’s economic development China is laying the groundwork for a long-term relationship.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> OTHER THREATS This hardly exhausts the lists of threats to our security and well-being in the coming years and decades. In the former Yugoslavia nationalist aggression tears at the stability of Europe and could easily spread. The flow of illegal drugs intensifies through increasingly powerful international crime syndicates that have made common cause with authoritarian regimes and have utterly corrupted the institutions of tenuous democratic ones. Nuclear chemical and biological weapons continue to proliferate. The very source of life on Earth the global ecosystem appears increasingly endangered. Most of these new and unconventional threats to security are associated with or aggravated by the weakness or absence of democracy with its provisions for legality accountability popular sovereignty and openness. LESSONS OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY The experience of this century offers important lessons. Countries that govern themselves in a truly democratic fashion do not go to war with one another. They do not aggress against their neighbors to aggrandize themselves or glorify their leaders. Democratic governments do not ethnically 'cleanse' their own populations and they are much less likely to face ethnic insurgency. Democracies do not sponsor terrorism against one another. They do not build weapons of mass destruction to use on or to threaten one another. Democratic countries form more reliable open and enduring trading partnerships. In the long run they offer better and more stable climates for investment. They are more environmentally responsible because they must answer to their own citizens who organize to protest the destruction of their environments. They are better bets to honor international treaties since they value legal obligations and because their openness makes it much more difficult to breach agreements in secret. Precisely because within their own borders they respect competition civil liberties property rights and the rule of law democracies are the only reliable foundation on which a new world order of international security and prosperity can be built. </source> [/INST] <claim>Loss of democracy leads to extinction</claim> <psg>Nuclear chemical and biological weapons continue to proliferate. The very source of life on Earth the global ecosystem appears increasingly endangered. Most of these new and unconventional threats to security are associated with or aggravated by the weakness or absence of democracy with its provisions for legality accountability and openness. Countries that govern themselves in a truly democratic fashion do not go to war with one another Democratic governments do not ethnically 'cleanse' their own populations They do not build weapons of mass destruction to use on one another They are more environmentally responsible because they must answer to their own citizens</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> The colon introduces the following: a.  A list but only after 'as follows ' 'the following ' or a noun for which the list is an appositive: Each scout will carry the following: (colon) meals for three days a survival knife and his sleeping bag. The company had four new officers: (colon) Bill Smith Frank Tucker Peter Fillmore and Oliver Lewis. b.  A long quotation (one or more paragraphs): In The Killer Angels Michael Shaara wrote: (colon) You may find it a different story from the one you learned in school. There have been many versions of that battle [Gettysburg] and that war [the Civil War]. (The quote continues for two more paragraphs.) c.  A formal quotation or question: The President declared: (colon) 'The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.' The question is: (colon) what can we do about it? d.  A second independent clause which explains the first: Potter's motive is clear: (colon) he wants the assignment. e.  After the introduction of a business letter: Dear Sirs: (colon) Dear Madam: (colon) f.  The details following an announcement For sale: (colon) large lakeside cabin with dock g.  A formal resolution after the word 'resolved:'Resolved: (colon) That this council petition the mayor. </source> [/INST] <claim>1. Interpretation—the affirmative should defend a federal government policy that increases economic engagement to one of the topic countries</claim> <psg>The colon introduces A formal resolution after the word 'resolved:'Resolved: (colon) That this council petition the mayor.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> The Proposition of Policy: Urging Future Action In policy propositions each topic contains certain key elements although they have slightly different functions from comparable elements of value-oriented propositions. 1. An agent doing the acting ---“The United States” in “The United States should adopt a policy of free trade.” Like the object of evaluation in a proposition of value the agent is the subject of the sentence. 2. The verb should—the first part of a verb phrase that urges action. 3. An action verb to follow should in the should-verb combination. For example should adopt here means to put a program or policy into action though governmental means. 4. A specification of directions or a limitation of the action desired. The phrase free trade for example gives direction and limits to the topic which would for example eliminate consideration of increasing tariffs discussing diplomatic recognition or discussing interstate commerce. Propositions of policy deal with future action. Nothing has yet occurred. The entire debate is about whether something ought to occur. What you agree to do then when you accept the affirmative side in such a debate is to offer sufficient and compelling reasons for an audience to perform the future action that you propose. </source> [/INST] <claim>B. “United States Federal Government should” means the debate is solely about the outcome of a policy established by governmental means</claim> <psg>each topic contains certain key elements . 1. An agent doing the acting ---“The United States” in “The United States should adopt the agent is the subject of the sentence. 2. The verb should that urges action For example should adopt means to put a policy into action though governmental means The entire debate is about whether something ought to occur.</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> Power is not a dirty word or an unfortunate feature of the world. It is the core of politics. Power is the ability to effect outcomes in the world. Politics in large part involves contests over the distribution and use of power. To ac- complish anything in the political world one must attend to the means that are necessary to bring it about. And to develop such means is to develop and to exercise power. To say this is not to say that power is beyond moral- ity. It is to say that power is not reducible to morality. As writers such as Niccolo Machiavelli Max Weber Reinhold Niebuhr and Hannah Arendt have taught an unyielding concern with moral goodness undercuts political responsibility. The concern may be morally laudable re- flecting a kind of personal integrity but it suf- fers from three fatal flaws: (1) It fails to see that the purity of one’s intention does not ensure the achievement of what one intends. Ab- juring violence or refusing to make common cause with morally compromised parties may seem like the right thing. but if such tactics entail impotence then it is hard to view them as serving any moral good beyond the clean con- science of their supporters. (2) it fails to see that in a world of real violence and injustice moral purity is not simply a form of powerlessness. it is often a form of complicity in injustice. This is why from the standpoint of poli- tics—as opposed to religion—pacifism is always a potentially immoral stand. In categorically re- pudiating violence it refuses in principle to oppose certain violent injustices with any ef- fect. and (3) it fails to see that politics is as much about unintended consequences as it is about intentions. it is the effects of action rather than the motives of action that is most significant. Just as the alignment with “good” may engender impotence it is often the pur- suit of “good” that generates evil. This is the lesson of communism in the twentieth century: it is not enough that one’s goals be sincere or idealistic. it is equally important always to ask about the effects of pursuing these goals and to judge these effects in pragmatic and histori- cally contextualized ways. Moral absolutism in- hibits this judgment. It alienates those who are not true believers. It promotes arrogance. And it undermines political effectiveness. </source> [/INST] <claim>Privileging ethics over political consequences dooms the affirmative to political irrelevance</claim> <psg>Power is not a dirty word or an unfortunate feature of the world. It is the core of politics. To ac- complish anything in the political world one must attend to the means that are necessary to bring it about an unyielding concern with moral goodness undercuts political responsibility. it suf- fers from three fatal flaws: (1) It fails to see that the purity of one’s intention does not ensure the achievement of what one intends. Ab- juring violence or refusing to make common cause with morally compromised parties may seem like the right thing. but if such tactics entail impotence then it is hard to view them as serving any moral good beyond the clean con- science of their supporters. (2) it fails to see that in a world of real violence and injustice moral purity is not simply a form of powerlessness. it is often a form of complicity in injustice. . and (3) it fails to see that politics is as much about unintended consequences as it is about intentions. it is the effects of action rather than the motives of action that is most significant Just as the alignment with “good” may engender impotence it is often the pur- suit of “good” that generates evil it is not enough that one’s goals be sincere or idealistic. it is equally important always to ask about the effects of pursuing these goals and to judge these effects in pragmatic and histori- cally contextualized ways. Moral absolutism in- hibits this judgment. It alienates those who are not true believers. It promotes arrogance. And it undermines political effectiveness</psg></s>

<s>[INST] Construct an argument in XML format made of an argument claim (<claim>....</claim>) and selected passages from the source text (<psg>...</psg>). Use the source passage: <source> This excess of justice over law and calculation this overflowing of the unpre­sentable over the determinable cannot and should not [ne peut pas et ne doit pas] serve as an alibi for staying out of juridico-political battles within an institution or a state between institutions or states. Abandoned to itself the incalculable and giv­ing [donatrice] idea of justice is always very close to the bad even to the worst for it can always be reappropriated by the most perverse calculation. It is always possible and this is part of the madness of which we were speaking. An absolute assurance against this risk can only saturate or suture the opening of the call to justice a call that is always wounded. But incalculable justice commands calculation. And first of all closest to what one associates with justice namely law the juridical field that one cannot isolate within sure frontiers but also in all the fields from which one cannot separate it which intervene in it and are no longer simply fields: the ethical the political the economical the psycho-sociological the philosophical the liter­ary etc. Not only must one [il faut] calculate negotiate the relation between the calculable and the incalculable and negotiate without a rule that would not have to be reinvented there where we are “thrown’ there where we find ourselves. but one must [il faut] do so and take it as far as possible beyond the place we find our­selves and beyond the already identifiable zones of morality politics or law beyond the distinctions between national and international public and private and so on. The order of this il faut does not properly belong either to justice or to law. It only belongs to either realm by exceeding each one in the direction of the other—which means that in their very heterogeneity these two orders are undis­sociable: de facto and de jure [en fait et en droit]. Politicization for example is interminable even if it cannot and should not ever be total. To keep this from being a truism or a triviality one must recognize in it the following consequence: each advance in politicization obliges one to reconsider and so to reinterpret the very foundations of law such as they had previously been calculated or delimited. This was true for example in the French Declaration of the Rights of Man in the abolition of slavery in all the emancipatory battles that remain and will have to remain in progress everywhere in the world for men and for women. Nothing seems to me less outdated than the classical emancipatory ideal. One cannot attempt to disqualify it today whether crudely or with sophistication without at least some thoughtlessness and without forming the worst complicities. It is true that it is also necessary to re-elaborate without renouncing the concept of eman­cipation enfranchisement or liberation while taking into account the strange structures we have been describing. But beyond these identified territories of juridico-politicization on the grand geo-political scale beyond all self-serving misappropriations and hijackings beyond all determined and particular reappropria­tions of international law other areas must constantly open up that can at first resemble secondary or marginal areas. This marginality also signifies that a vio­lence even a terrorism and other forms of hostage taking are at work. The exam­ples closest to us would be found in the area of laws [lois] on the teaching and practice of languages the legitimization of canons the military use of scientific research abortion euthanasia problems of organ transplant extra-uterine con­ception bio-engineering medical experimentation the “social treatment” of AIDS the macro- or micro-politics of drugs homelessness and so on without forgetting. of course the treatment of what one calls animal life the immense question of so-called animality. On this last problem the Benjamin text that I am coming to now shows that its author was not deaf or insensitive to it even if his propositions on this subject remain quite obscure or traditional. </source> [/INST] <claim>Calculation is good the only question is whether you use calculations to save the other which we do. Their ethic only leads to cooptation. </claim> <psg>This excess of justice over calculation should not serve as an alibi for staying out of juridico-political battles within an institution Abandoned to itself the incalculable idea of justice is always close to the worst for it can always be reappropriated by the most perverse calculation incalculable justice commands calculation Not only must one calculate negotiate the relation between the calculable and the incalculable each advance in politicization obliges one to reconsider and reinterpret the very foundations of law such as they had previously been calculated This was true in all the emancipatory battles all reappropria­tions of international law other areas must constantly open up</psg></s>