Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

The Latin America thread


Stu Monty
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Ne Moe Imya said:

Have been without internet for the past few days but just wanted to tell you all that my mother was eventually evacuated by the organisation she works for. She is lucky enough to have dual citizenship so she was able to get out, she's really worried for the coworkers she left behind.

 

Poor, poor Bolivia. The country just can't catch a break. Right as you celebrate getting rid of a corrupt, incompetent Chavez wannabe, we replace him with a violent, crazed Pinochet wannabe.

 

I mean, what is going on? Why can we not just have a normal, decent person in power?

 

Desperately praying for elections to be scheduled in the very near future and for the voters to heartily reject both of these nutjobs and to bring someone in who will put the needs of the people first. I'm not holding my breath.

 

Do you know more, what is the rest of the opposition like, what are they likely to do?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, SasaS said:

 

Do you know more, what is the rest of the opposition like, what are they likely to do?

I honestly don't know.

 

It's quite difficult to follow Bolivian politics at a distance. The only people covering it for the major papers and websites are usually located in Buenos Aires or Rio de Janeiro or something. I asked my mum and she's not really helpful - my dad used to fill me in but since he died I feel like I don't really know.

 

She did say that the atmosphere at the moment is extremely toxic. Apparently both sides on facebook are polarised in a way she's not seen before. Even close friends cursing at each other for being on the other side, etc.

 

I don't expect a good outcome. Either Evo will swing back into power and declare himself to be president for life on the back of an electoral victory, or Anez and her gang seem like they're happy to imprison or run out of the country anyone who opposes them. Sigh.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 20/11/2019 at 02:20, Ne Moe Imya said:

I don't expect a good outcome. Either Evo will swing back into power and declare himself to be president for life on the back of an electoral victory, or Anez and her gang seem like they're happy to imprison or run out of the country anyone who opposes them. Sigh.

The latter would seem the more likely outcome... imprison or kill or run out of the country, that is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, SasaS said:

Interestingly, they have a similar situation in Uruguay, the left is most likely going to lose and go into opposition seemingly without all the drama seen in Bolivia and previously Venezuela.  

 

Not really similar then is it, mate? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's similar in that the side in power didn't win in the first round and will likely lose in the run-off, which is what they said could happen to Morales if he didn't win the 10 percent allowing him to avoid the run-off. As I said previously, it seems the governments in Venezuela and Bolivia think losing elections and going into opposition is something which must be avoided at all costs, which is not good for their democratic credentials.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SasaS said:

It's similar in that the side in power didn't win in the first round and will likely lose in the run-off, which is what they said could happen to Morales if he didn't win the 10 percent allowing him to avoid the run-off. As I said previously, it seems the governments in Venezuela and Bolivia think losing elections and going into opposition is something which must be avoided at all costs, which is not good for their democratic credentials.  

So it isn’t similar, then. Glad we cleared that up

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It presents a theoretical problem if you believe revolutions can be brought about by democratic means. Venezuela and Bolivia are not Cuba, which is obviously not  a democracy, you cannot form a political party and change the government at an election, like you can in Venezuela and Bolivia. However, it seems that societal change in these two countries falls somewhere in between, that is, they remained democracies, but only as long as the ruling party, the main agent of change, keeps winning. As soon as the support starts falling to the very marginal level, the government turns into a regime, which will try to prevent its removal, so becoming the opposition is seen as the ultimate, finite defeat. That may be conditioned by the nature of the opposition to the government, which is, in both countries also not particularly democratic and often acts as a reactionary force, a counter-revolution. But this may in turn be condition by the nature of the government, which resists change by democratic means.
 

Other South American countries, if the change of government is done more or less peacefully, for example now in Uruguay, would indicate that you in fact must stay within the realm of social democracy to remain democratic, that the possibility of democracy is limited once you step outside the rules outlined by broad principles of liberal democracy, of which social democracy is only a variation. True change of society may be possible only through non-democratic means, because it needs to eliminate the possibility of reversing the change. Fundamental change seems to resist being tested every four years at free elections. There may be no democratic socialism, only dictatorship of the proletariat.  

Thank you. I will now be taking questions from the audience.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 1 month later...
On 26/11/2019 at 23:04, SasaS said:

It presents a theoretical problem if you believe revolutions can be brought about by democratic means. Venezuela and Bolivia are not Cuba, which is obviously not  a democracy, you cannot form a political party and change the government at an election, like you can in Venezuela and Bolivia. However, it seems that societal change in these two countries falls somewhere in between, that is, they remained democracies, but only as long as the ruling party, the main agent of change, keeps winning. As soon as the support starts falling to the very marginal level, the government turns into a regime, which will try to prevent its removal, so becoming the opposition is seen as the ultimate, finite defeat. That may be conditioned by the nature of the opposition to the government, which is, in both countries also not particularly democratic and often acts as a reactionary force, a counter-revolution. But this may in turn be condition by the nature of the government, which resists change by democratic means.
 

Other South American countries, if the change of government is done more or less peacefully, for example now in Uruguay, would indicate that you in fact must stay within the realm of social democracy to remain democratic, that the possibility of democracy is limited once you step outside the rules outlined by broad principles of liberal democracy, of which social democracy is only a variation. True change of society may be possible only through non-democratic means, because it needs to eliminate the possibility of reversing the change. Fundamental change seems to resist being tested every four years at free elections. There may be no democratic socialism, only dictatorship of the proletariat.  

Thank you. I will now be taking questions from the audience.

Still baffled at this post 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, moof said:

Still baffled at this post 

Representative, liberal democracy as we know it works on the assumption that all parties will in their possible governance stay within some basic framework, introduce some reforms, change the taxation system, tweak this, tweak that. Once you starting fundamentally changing society, there may be no turning back. You are either assuming there is no possibility you are wrong, that is, your fundamental change won't work or people would reject it at the next election, or you don't actually intend to ever go back, regardless of the elections.

This is why I doubt that the true, fundamental change can be brought about just through representative democracy, since losing elections could effect equally difficult fundamental change back, a whole counter-revolution if you will. In that sense, all systems may basically be "totalitarian". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
On 13/11/2019 at 06:37, moof said:

I would just like to point out claims of election rigging and fraud are completely unsubstantiated as of right now 

This post has definitely aged well. Kudos Moof.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/world/americas/bolivia-election-evo-morales.html

 

A close look at Bolivian election data suggests an initial analysis by the O.A.S. that raised questions of vote-rigging — and helped force out a president — was flawed.

 

....

 

Now, a study by independent researchers, using data obtained by The New York Times from the Bolivian electoral authorities, has found that the Organization of American States’ statistical analysis was itself flawed.

The conclusion that Mr. Morales’s share of the vote jumped inexplicably in the final ballots relied on incorrect data and inappropriate statistical techniques, the researchers found.

“We took a hard look at the O.A.S.’s statistical evidence and found problems with their methods,” said Francisco Rodríguez, an economist who teaches Latin American studies at Tulane University. “Once we correct those problems, the O.A.S.’s results go away, leaving no statistical evidence of fraud.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...