- Joined Mar 30, 2007
This is quite the understatement, and you can't possibly handwaved putting aside the political process because the person you support is in power.
For this statement to be accurate, one would have to completely ignore the tribal dynamics that exist and that play an important role in the politics of many African countries. The civil war in Ivory Coast (2010?) had a xenophobic and tribalist component to it, mostly encompassed in the concept of "ivoirite," or who could be considered a true Ivoirian; in my own country, the political class draws most of its members from the president's ethnic group, which is not even the most populous, and secessionist groups in the North West and South West provinces largely identify with a single linguistic group, which has been largely ignored by the powers that be.
In an environment where most folks are the same skin color, in-groups and out-groups are determined differently; they don't just disappear.
Time to include BBC Africa in your listening regimen.
The machinations you describe in your last paragraph also happen in African economies that rely on extraction of raw materials. In fact, African countries have a history of leftist leaders who ended up overstaying their welcome. Just because one defends socialism doesn't give them carte blanche to usurp power.
So stealing elections are cool as long as someone is a socialist?Again, I'm comparing Latin America to Africa and I am doing so in the context of former colonies existing in a post colonial but still neocolonial, capitalist, imperialist and white supremacist world.
The elite institutions in Africa are much more likely to be racially representative, in the black and white dichotomy, compared to elite institutions in Latin America. You're right about the ethnic groups and certainly know more than me about that.
The main point is that Latin American countries tend to have a white elite still in charge and that white elite teams up with US power to subvert sustained attempts at economic equality between whites and non whites.
That still doesn't really excuse military intervention in civilian politics anywhere but the legalistic and procedural defenses of a coup are more plausible in Africa than they are in Latin America. In Latin America, every subversion of an elected and/or civilian government is an attempt to restore white power in a nation's politics.
I know you won’t like this analogy but this discussion has strong vibes of the debate about inner city crime circa 1990. One side sees the whole picture of divestment and police brutality and the other side is just like “so you’re ok with people robbing liquor stores?”So stealing elections are cool as long as someone is a socialist?
Dude I respect alot of the thing you have posted in here since socialism saved you from diet white supremacy, but this is **** is wildI know you won’t like this analogy but this discussion has strong vibes of the debate about inner city crime circa 1990. One side sees the whole picture of divestment and police brutality and the other side is just like “so you’re ok with people robbing liquor stores?”
Elections are not unimportant but elections are not the be all end all either. Socialists deserve more leeway because their countries face relentless pressure from Washington and London and Wall Street in a way that liberal, centrists and conservative lead states do not.
The other point is that for leftists control of the economy is more important than elections. For liberals elections are more important than whole controls the economy. Most people have to submit to living in an autocracy for 40-70 hours per week. Voters in most countries spend very little time casting a vote and usually the choice is between various pro capitalism candidates. That is not democracy. Democracy is controlling who polices your, community, democracy is controlling your work place, democracy is deciding how your nation resources will be used.
In Bolivia, what ever emerges from this action will cause the mass of people to have much less control over all those aforementioned things and there is no guarantee that this right wing interim government will even allow for fair elections.
One other thought, why wasn’t Evo’s replacement another left wing politician? Why is his replacement an out spoken white supremacist? If the issue was with Evo, why not replace him with someone with the same policy goals? It is awfully convenient for right wingers in Bolivia and for Industrialists in the global north to have Evo’s replacement being someone who wants to overturn his pro worker and pro indigenous policies.
So comrade is it Oochie Wally or One Mic? We respecting that courts decision or not?De facto Leader Añez--a virtual unknown until this week--has netted an early win: the same Constitutional Court that abolished term limits for Morales has declared her the legitimate president