New strike in Bolivia against the increase of food prices

The social conflicts intensified with the paralization in the bolivian economy, translated in a strike and manifistations, in a country that is one of the pooorest in South America.
Bolivia is facing this friday the second strike in less then two months against the increase of prices in food and public transportation.   
Cochamba City, the third largest in the country, has its public schools closed, hospitals reduced to emergencies and public transportion scarce or nonexistent. The capital, La Paz, is hampered by public discontent. The mobilization is carried out by the powerful union strength Bolivian Workers Central and its leaders demand wage increases to pay off the rising prices of food and vital services such as transportation. 
The increase in prices is very significant in a country where, according to the 2010 United Nations Program for Development, six in ten people live in poverty and three in ten will not have enough to eat. The last large-scale mobilization against prices in Bolivia, December 30, ended in violence, making fifteen wounded.  
Nowadays, with a price increase of around 30 per cent in relation to transport and 40 percent sugar, Evo Morales maintains that the rise in 2011 will not be less than inflation in 2010. The Bolivian President is faced with the longest and most profound social and economic crisis since coming to power in 2006.

Egypt: turning point demands too much of people's lives

        What a high price people pay for change! Criminals running wild, political paralysis, destruction of people’s livelihoods and anarchy as police abandon their posts and their role as the custodians of law and order — in short, complete chaos.

        The Obama administration said they view the attacks as a way to purposely terrorize journalists, and White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said that all detained journalists should be released, according to an article by the Los Angeles Times.

        Intimidating journalists and attempting to prevent the coverage of the anti-Murabak protests in Egypt is wrong. The Egyptian government cannot keep its country united and peaceful by cutting off communication to its citizens — such as cell phone and Internet service, and it cannot win its people’s loyalty by censoring them.

        "I blame some friendly states that have completely unfriendly stations which set the young against the state … with false claims and exaggeration,” said Egyptian Vice President Omar Suleiman. According to the article, “he urged Egyptians to ignore ‘the rumors and satellite channels that incite you against the state.’"

        Shahira Amin, No. 2 editor for Nile TV, a state-run television network in Egypt, resigned when she was only allowed to show pro-Murabak demonstrators on the air, according to MSNBC.

        Journalists from other countries must be allowed to cover a peaceful protest without interference from the Egyptian government.

        Egypt is a sovereign nation and technically has the right to control its communication — but the Egyptian people have the basic human right to be informed. Creating a unsafe atmosphere for journalists from other nations will not change the dissatisfaction of the protesters.


        When will politicians in this world understand one quite simple fact that a corrupt and dictatorial regime will not last forever. Change is the only constant in this life. One cannot fight against the tide of democracy and hope to win.