Ecuador declares state of emergency

[oddlots]

Re: Ecuador declares state of emergency

First, regarding your earlier comments:

Re:

Wow, all of a sudden he is extremely popular imagine that!, nice choice of words there.

My point was one of logic: if you accept the idea that America has been pursuing a policy toward South America analogous to Pakistan's toward Afghanistan then, logically, to the same extent that Evo is a successful democratic leader he will be in the crosshairs of American power. The question is whether this lens does a better job of explaining American actions in Latin America for the last century that any alternative theory. (But he is extremely popular. I can post the polling and election data if you like.)

Funny that your bothere by anti-chavez coverage. Anyone with intellectual honesty could realize that he is a wannabe dictator who uses his famous “circulos bolivarianos” as thugs to intimidate people. His violations of free speech and property on top of being disastrous for venezuela (now boasting the highest crime rate in Latin America).

As I said from the beginning I do not support Chavez. I think anyone with intellectual honesty would recognize the insane logic whereby popular demonstrations can be violently put down in Honduras by a government that is supposedly upholding the constitution. Or that cops that withdrew services wholesale with the clear intent to create havoc over pay (and succeed gloriously) can somehow be represented as political activists worthy of protection.

Uh, I never referenced the media luna.

Well I don't know how else to characterise your reference here:

What economic record of evo are you talking about? The same one that made 3 different state's want to become autonomous?

but as a reference to the Media Luna since the term refers to the region those states form. And unfortunately the leaders of the separatist movement here were implicated variously in all or some of the deplorable events there that I've referenced (Pando Massacre, the attempt on Morales' life, incidents of intimidation of indigenous peasants) so there's nothing fringe about it. That movement was totally discredited by its actions as far as I can tell (and I've looked hard.) So no, I don't think everyone that opposes Morales is a Nazi but I do think, when it comes to the Media Luna / "three different states" that the movement exhibited over time and in a public way such rabidly un-democratic and racist behaviour that the distinction hardly matters. What did you think was going on down there?

There was no need to know in detail the events you referenced. I merely mentioned Evo's and Correas policies and rehtoric. You brought into conversation honduras, and the media luna which is a small fringe group which you seem to be obsessed with.

Well, as in the example of the Bolivian separatists, I think you do need to know in detail the events I referenced. I don't think a purely ideological reading of rhetoric and policies does it. In fact I think that's my point. But let me come back to this.

I mentioned Honduras because I think it is one of a string of events that show a pattern: first is the crisis over the Media Luna separatist movement (which you introduced), second is the Honduras coup (I brought up), third is the Ecuador coup attempt / police revolt that we were originally discussing.

I'm not accusing you of harbouring any views about the coup in Honduras. I'm saying that the coup there was represented in the press in a way that is eerily similar to the way the Ecuador crisis has been presented.

I'm glad you cited Vargas Llosa in the Washington Post (cough) because we can examine the two cases side by each. Here's his defense of the events in Honduras as critiqued by Inca Kola news:

The NYT editorial post is here.

1) Zelaya actually planned to be deposed by the military and...get this...the military fell for it! Allyboy sez;

IN the weeks leading up to Honduras’s coup, President Manuel Zelaya, an ally of Hugo Chávez of Venezuela, knew what he was doing. In pushing the limits of democracy by trying to force a constitutional change that would permit his re-election, he set a trap for the military. The military fell for it, turning an unpopular president who was nearing the end of his term into an international cause célčbre.

Damn, I wonder if Mario's son considered the bullets that shot through the presidential motorcade on June 12th, just missing Zelaya's noggin...betcha that was part of the plan, too.

2) The coup was a popular move in Honduras (hmm...let's check those images again, yeah? My, what a popular fascist repression we have here...betcha that guy getting kicked, pushed to the ground and having an assault rifle prod him in the back is shouting ˇViva Micheletti! right now). How Vargas Loser managed to conduct his opinion poll between Sunday and now is beyond me, but as he says, "the coup has popular support in Honduras", so if it's written in the NYT it must be true, right?

3) Then there's this pearl:

"Across the Spanish-language news media, the recurring image of the last two days has been that of Mr. Chávez and his allies working furiously for Honduran democracy."

Errrr....no. Allyboy's watching the wrong news channels. The single recurring image of the last two days has been the unanimous support for Zelaya from every single Americas country. The OAS has been front'n'centre on all screens, closely followed by anything Obama says. Only then does Chavez get airtime.

4) We then get Allyboy regurgitating the lies propounded by the kneejerk right and tipping his hand to his real agenda. This argument has been shot down in flames already.

"As the general elections scheduled for November began to creep up, Mr. Zelaya decided to hold a referendum with the ultimate aim of allowing him to seek re-election."

Let's say it again; even the US State Dep't, not normally known for its pally attitude to the Bolivarian Revolutionaries, understands that;

"..we're (talking) about conducting a survey, a nonbinding survey"

Do Gallup pollsters get arrested with rifles pointed at their tushes when they ask people for opinions? But even a numbskull like Alvaro Vargas Llosa can string a sensible sentence together sometimes;

"This is not what Honduras’s establishment, horrified by Mr. Chávez’s increasing influence, intended when it got rid of Mr. Zelaya."

No shit Sherlock. And they would have gotten away with it too, if it hadn't been for those pesky kids and their dog. The NYT note carries the title line "The winner in Honduras: Chávez". Wrong, wrong and a hundred times wrong, the winner in Honduras will be (not is...not yet) democracy and Latin America's self-esteem. At long last the whole region has the wherewithall to stand up to army bullies and their apologist pseudointellectuals such as Alvaro Vargas Llosa standard-bearer. Really, I have to ask myself "is that all they got these days?".

Of course that was written before the denouement and democracy didn't win out. The result has been, among other things, the extrajudicial killings of unionists and social activists I referenced earlier and an emboldened extreme right which now has Correa in their sights.

So cue Vargas Llosa on the attempted whatever in Ecuador: darn where'd it go?

That's really funny.

Someone's rethinking that.

[tsetsefly]

Re: Ecuador declares state of emergency

YOu got it wrong with Zelaya. He was fast losing popularity for his Chavez and Correa like move of changing the constitution. He had lost support of the people and his own congress was going to vote against that. Vargas Llosa correctly points out that there was no need for the military to take action becaue Zelaya's attempt to change the constitution was going to fail. As for the"yeah that was a really popular move". Really? just because there were protest it was not a popular move? did the majority of hondurans flock to the street? where they outraged at this? No.
I dont know how you got that Vargas LLosa was in favor of that move. I also dont get how you characterize him as a typical rightwing latin america. If you had read any of his stuff you would know he is anything but that. But you seem to have in for pretty bad.


That link you gave for the "june 12th attempted murder" is laughable. Throwing out the fascism term to anything left of them. And ironically criticizing the "dictator" micheletti for closing down radio stations. And in the entry before that praising your boy chavez, who incidentally did the same thing. haha. Yet one is a fascist dictator and the other a president of the people. Haha, please. If that is the stuff you rely on for you news and analysis I can understand your asinine assumption and terrible analogies. Btw, since you used the term people from "el norte" I would like to know where your from? And I can bet one of the guiding lights for your understanding on things is "las venas abiertas de latino america" i would be shocked if that was not high on your favorite book list.

You sound like a broken record, throwing out nazi and fascist lables left and right, making gros generalizations etc.

[oddlots]

Re: Ecuador declares state of emergency

So let me get this straight, UNASUR and every sitting head of state in South America, and the State Department and I got it wrong with Zelaya but you and Vargas Llosa got it right? Strains credulity don't you think?

The hilarious thing to me is how bad Llosa's arguments are: there was no need for the military to take action in Honduras therefore the fact that they did was not somehow illegitimate? He takes the exact same line with the situation in Ecuador: the fact that the military didn't join in in number and in the end defended the President is somehow proof that it wasn't a coup attempt.

Can you see the problem with that argument?

If you can't see the problem with that argument then I can see why you read him. And the Washington Post.

Regarding "june 12th attempted murder" link you have to admit that the link embedded in Inca Kola's post as a reference is hardly central to the argument. Since you have cited, what 2 (?) sources in support of your position, I'm hoping you'll give me a pass on this since my tendency to cite sources could work to my disadvantage.

As I've said over and over now I don't support Chavez. You seem incapable of any nuance. As I said here:

"FWIW there's a good doc by Frontline called "The Chavez Show" here:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/hugochavez/

There's enough in the program to give anyone who admires Orwell's insights into politics a great deal of pause.

But the key moment in the doc to me was what Teodoro Petkoff (who ran against Chavez in 2006) says: basically, Chavez has changed Venezuelan politics permanently by harnessing the power of the poor who had been - in his telling - successfully marginalised by the political process.

To me the fact that his critics will have to address themselves to this audience in order to regain power is an improvement in the country's civil society whatever one thinks of Chavez on other counts.

There's also a very funny blog called borev which I really think is worth a look. It makes no bones about its politics - pro Chavez - but really just addresses itself to demonstrating how off-kilter western coverage of South America is.

http://www.borev.net/

That this is so easy to do and, much of the time, the results in journalistic terms are so laughable I think pretty much vindicates the site's thesis if not its pro-Chavez stance.

The best anti-Chavez site I've found so far is called "The Devil's Excrement":

http://devilsexcrement.com/

But even here the writer laments the anti-Chavez media's exaggerations (such as the charge that he's a dictator) as undercutting their credibility and pleads with his fellow critics to stop making sh!t up: what Chavez is actually guilty of in his eyes is enough.

Any reco on other resources welcome."

My point in this whole thread is to say that bad coverage of South American political events in North America (not to mention general disinterest, apathy whatever) allows the craziest PR alchemy to occur.

This strikes me as particularly sad since the region has largely extracted itself from a pin-ball machine of extremism on both sides. The events I've cited I think exemplify this:

I think anyone with intellectual honesty would recognize the insane logic whereby popular demonstrations can be violently put down in Honduras by a government that is supposedly upholding the constitution. Or that cops that withdrew services wholesale with the clear intent to create havoc over pay (and succeed gloriously) can somehow be represented as political activists worthy of protection.

You have consistently pursued a line of argument that supports elements that act contrary to law or democratic principles from the Media Luna separatists to the putschists in Ecuador and now to Micheletti. In fact you show a meanness about economic issues that I think is all too typical of the libertarian bent and why I find it an unconvincing dead-end (see our discussion of the old age pension issue and the notion that anything short of absolute ownership of natural resources is somehow an outrage.) You kind of sealed the deal with the comment about Evo's congressional candidates not speaking Spanish well enough. It reminded me of this story:

http://incakolanews.blogspot.com/200...peru-case.html

[tsetsefly]

Re: Ecuador declares state of emergency

So let me get this straight, UNASUR and every sitting head of state in South America, and the State Department and I got it wrong with Zelaya but you and Vargas Llosa got it right? Strains credulity don't you think?

The hilarious thing to me is how bad Llosa's arguments are: there was no need for the military to take action in Honduras therefore the fact that they did was not somehow illegitimate? He takes the exact same line with the situation in Ecuador: the fact that the military didn't join in in number and in the end defended the President is somehow proof that it wasn't a coup attempt.

Can you see the problem with that argument?

If you can't see the problem with that argument then I can see why you read him. And the Washington Post.

Regarding "june 12th attempted murder" link you have to admit that the link embedded in Inca Kola's post as a reference is hardly central to the argument. Since you have cited, what 2 (?) sources in support of your position, I'm hoping you'll give me a pass on this since my tendency to cite sources could work to my disadvantage.

As I've said over and over now I don't support Chavez. You seem incapable of any nuance. As I said here:

"FWIW there's a good doc by Frontline called "The Chavez Show" here:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/hugochavez/

There's enough in the program to give anyone who admires Orwell's insights into politics a great deal of pause.

But the key moment in the doc to me was what Teodoro Petkoff (who ran against Chavez in 2006) says: basically, Chavez has changed Venezuelan politics permanently by harnessing the power of the poor who had been - in his telling - successfully marginalised by the political process.

To me the fact that his critics will have to address themselves to this audience in order to regain power is an improvement in the country's civil society whatever one thinks of Chavez on other counts.

There's also a very funny blog called borev which I really think is worth a look. It makes no bones about its politics - pro Chavez - but really just addresses itself to demonstrating how off-kilter western coverage of South America is.

http://www.borev.net/

That this is so easy to do and, much of the time, the results in journalistic terms are so laughable I think pretty much vindicates the site's thesis if not its pro-Chavez stance.

The best anti-Chavez site I've found so far is called "The Devil's Excrement":

http://devilsexcrement.com/

But even here the writer laments the anti-Chavez media's exaggerations (such as the charge that he's a dictator) as undercutting their credibility and pleads with his fellow critics to stop making sh!t up: what Chavez is actually guilty of in his eyes is enough.

Any reco on other resources welcome."

My point in this whole thread is to say that bad coverage of South American political events in North America (not to mention general disinterest, apathy whatever) allows the craziest PR alchemy to occur.

This strikes me as particularly sad since the region has largely extracted itself from a pin-ball machine of extremism on both sides. The events I've cited I think exemplify this:



You have consistently pursued a line of argument that supports elements that act contrary to law or democratic principles from the Media Luna separatists to the putschists in Ecuador and now to Micheletti. In fact you show a meanness about economic issues that I think is all too typical of the libertarian bent and why I find it an unconvincing dead-end (see our discussion of the old age pension issue and the notion that anything short of absolute ownership of natural resources is somehow an outrage.) You kind of sealed the deal with the comment about Evo's congressional candidates not speaking Spanish well enough. It reminded me of this story:

http://incakolanews.blogspot.com/200...peru-case.html

Again. Vargas LLosa criticized the Honduran army for impeding with the democratic process. You seem to completely ignore that or make up your own conclusion.

You have consistently pursued a line of argument that supports elements that act contrary to law or democratic principles from the Media Luna separatists to the putschists in Ecuador and now to Micheletti. In fact you show a meanness about economic issues that I think is all too typical of the libertarian bent and why I find it an unconvincing dead-end (see our discussion of the old age pension issue and the notion that anything short of absolute ownership of natural resources is somehow an outrage.) You kind of sealed the deal with the comment about Evo's congressional candidates not speaking Spanish well enough. It reminded me of this story

So because I pointed out that there is popular support from the Media Luna region to want to become autonomous region and because I am against correa I am against law and democracy. I never once said I supported those coup attempts for any sort of violence. Reread all my post and find that quote for me. Your not making bad assumptions, you are just lying.

I would hope any member of congress would at least know their native language. I dont think that is a ridiculous requirement. You might disagree but I dont think many would...

you didnt answer my last question in the last post btw.

[oddlots]

Re: Ecuador declares state of emergency

Again. Vargas LLosa criticized the Honduran army for impeding with the democratic process. You seem to completely ignore that or make up your own conclusion.

Here's what he said:

IN the weeks leading up to Honduras’s coup, President Manuel Zelaya, an ally of Hugo Chávez of Venezuela, knew what he was doing. In pushing the limits of democracy by trying to force a constitutional change that would permit his re-election, he set a trap for the military. The military fell for it, turning an unpopular president who was nearing the end of his term into an international cause célčbre.

I'm not sure that's a criticism of the military unless they happen to be standing behind Zelaya and the bullet passes through him. Anyway, if true that Zelaya guy is one wily character.

To repeat the charge that Zelaya was seeking to amend the constitution to allow him to run for another term is just false so if anyone has fallen for something it is Vargas Llosa. Either that or he's lying.

Which brings me to the question of lying.

I never once said I supported those coup attempts for any sort of violence. Reread all my post and find that quote for me. Your not making bad assumptions, you are just lying.

You don't support the coup attempts or any sort of violence? Hallelujia. But for F@#*'s sake why didn't you state as much? It's a little unclear when your only reaction to the situation of a democratically elected leader in Ecuador being threatened with death by his own police force over (purportedly) pay (!?!) is to say he's a buffoon anyway (as I said very early on.) Given the history of the region and coups that struck me as either incredibly sinister, cavalier, or ignorant.

Could have saved us a lot of time.

I would hope any member of congress would at least know their native language. I dont think that is a ridiculous requirement. You might disagree but I dont think many would...

My point was implicitly it's not their native language. What's more shocking: a congress member who doesn't speak spanish or a congress member that doesn't speak the language of his or her constituents? Both would be great but if you had to choose it gets interesting, no?

you didnt answer my last question in the last post btw.

And I'm not going to because it's as irrelevant as the fact you were born and raised or whatever in Guatemala. I believe the point of a forum like this is to make sense of the world in coherent prose including using your own personal experience when relevant. Take that how you like.

[tsetsefly]

Re: Ecuador declares state of emergency

My point was implicitly it's not their native language. What's more shocking: a congress member who doesn't speak spanish or a congress member that doesn't speak the language of his or her constituents? Both would be great but if you had to choose it gets interesting, no?



And I'm not going to because it's as irrelevant as the fact you were born and raised or whatever in Guatemala. I believe the point of a forum like this is to make sense of the world in coherent prose including using your own personal experience when relevant. Take that how you like.

Youre right, not her native language. I should of said, a member of congress should at least know the official language of their own country and government.

Ill just go ahead and assume one of youre favorite books is "las venas abiertas de lantionamerica", the rhetoric from people that read that is so predictable, could of saved me alot of time...

[oddlots]

Re: Ecuador declares state of emergency

Youre right, not her native language. I should of said, a member of congress should at least know the official language of their own country and government.

Ill just go ahead and assume one of youre favorite books is "las venas abiertas de lantionamerica", the rhetoric from people that read that is so predictable, could of saved me alot of time...

Never read it. Promise. I did read some Liberation Theology way, way back. Maybe that's it. Ha.

FWIW I got interested in Latin American politics because I invest some of my meagre savings in resource projects in the region on occasion.

[oddlots]

Re: Ecuador declares state of emergency

Youre right, not her native language. I should of said, a member of congress should at least know the official language of their own country and government.

Ill just go ahead and assume one of youre favorite books is "las venas abiertas de lantionamerica", the rhetoric from people that read that is so predictable, could of saved me alot of time...

Never read it. Promise. I did read some of the Liberation Theologists way, way back. Maybe that's why I get up your nose.

FWIW I follow Latin American politics a little because I make some very modest investments in the resource sector there from time to time.