The emerging hero of the Chilean miners’ story–in Latin America and elsewhere, if not in the U.S.–is Luis Urzua, a topographer who took a job at the San José mines as a shift foreman while awaiting the start of new a job in his field. NASA officials working on the rescue called Urzua “a natural leader,” but his most important accomplishment was getting the 33 miners through the first 17 days of their crisis, when all they had was enough food for two days, dirty water and no idea if a rescue effort was even underway.
Besides implementing food rationing and a 24-hour watch to listen for rescuers, Urzua is credited with unifying the men and mediating conflicts in the desperate situation. As a topographer, Urzua also had technical expertise useful to the rescue team. He was the last miner to be brought up because of his value to the effort.
Urzua, whose father was a Communist leader murdered by the Pinochet regime, and whose stepfather, a Socialist mining union leader, was in turn killed by anti-left government violence, explained his leadership approach to London’s Guardian:
Speaking from a hospital bed at the San José mine, shift foreman Luis Urzua–the man who kept the Chilean miners alive for two months–said his secret for keeping the men bonded and focused on survival was majority decision-making.
“You just have to speak the truth and believe in democracy,” said Urzua, his eyes hidden behind black glasses…. “Everything was voted on…. We were 33 men, so 16 plus one was a majority.”
So the hero of our story, a mine foreman, says he discarded corporate, top-down decision-making in favor of workplace democracy.
As we pointed out earlier, Daniel Henninger’s Wall Street Journal column, “Capitalism Saved Miners,” forgot to mention that a reckless capitalist company put the miners in their predicament in the first place, and that government played a far larger role in their rescue than did capitalism.
Urzua’s story further detracts from Henninger’s thesis, for unless capitalism and its anti-democratic decision-making processes have radically changed in the last two months, Henninger’s hallowed system played no role in getting the miners through the toughest part of their ordeal.
But Steve, while the profit motive may not have saved these guys, it’s going to make ’em relatively wealthy, what with Hollywood salivating over the rights to their story.
So, moviedom’s lust for lucre is a positive here, and lest we forget, the greed of the mining company put these folks in the position to profit, so to speak, from their ordeal.
In the end, I’d say the bottom line comes out on top, wouldn’t you?
And nobody had to die in the process – bonus points.
Wow. Not only did capitalism get the miners stuck in the first place, but it had nothing to do with their survival while they were in there. It took socialist, democratic decision-making to achieve that. Is there any sane argument left for not expanding that kind of decision-making to our workplaces, communities, and politics?
For more on twenty-first century socialism, see Michael Liebowitz’ The Socialist Alternative.
You’re a funny guy, Doug L.
Tim, they say laughter is the best medicine.
I live in the US, so I’ll just have to take their word on that.
Capitalism saved the miners to the same extent it prevented the BP Oil Spill, the home foreclosure crisis , the enormous growth in poverty, enemployment and lacl of health care that plagues our nation. What it really saved was the wealth of the Wall St banking barons who rule our country. To honor Mr. Urzua and the memory of his father and Pres. Allende, we should work to achieve democratic socialism in our country and an end to its addiction to wars and promotion of dictators in other countries
I agree with the sentiments posted so far and think the way to promote democracy in our country is to talk about democracy whenever and wherever we can because it will soon become clear how little there is in the US-in the workplace, in the communities, in the governments, in elections. We do have voting, but compare American results where registration is difficult with those in Brazil where voting is mandatory and abstention is punished with a small fine. They had a presidential election where two of the top three contenders had served time in jail for opposing the dictatorship and the third was a Green candidate from a lower class background. The right wing was the Social Democrats. In the US we struggle to have a little over 50% turnout among registered voters and keep seeing politics dominated by insane right wingers who sound like upper class people who have no connection to the reality of people who work for a living.
The “benefits” that these unspoiled men will be getting from their experience may well corrupt and degrade them. We Americans have been taught to believe that money is the top prize that we can achieve, as if money has any power to make us better human beings. I will be very surprised if they are not adversely affected by their fame, and the “rewards” that it brings.
So, according to Latimer, as long as the miners make a lot of money, their suffering is worth it.
Reminder: miners die in mines all the time. That’s capitalism!
True college student, “That’s capitalism!” Its about money, nothing else. “How can a dollar be made from this?”
Socialism looks at how things can be made better FOR PEOPLE. Which may have little or nothing to do with money. The value, the importance of LIFE is what is important. Socialism works well with Democracy, Capitalism destroys true Democracy.
College student, I’m assuming you’re not a lit major?
I’m not comparing myself to Swift, but my comments were meant in the same vein.
May I make a modest proposal – that you give ’em another read, with that in mind?
Much obliged.