Dutchy wrote:In Bolivia, there were accusations that the elections weren't open and fair. There was an unexplainable pause in counting. So the results are in doubt. That's why the people were protesting.
Hopefully, Morales will be electable and let's see how much support he really has in a fair and open election.
It seems to be that he resigned in free will, he isn't arrested, he hasn't fled the country or things like that.
ER757 wrote:Dutchy wrote:In Bolivia, there were accusations that the elections weren't open and fair. There was an unexplainable pause in counting. So the results are in doubt. That's why the people were protesting.
Hopefully, Morales will be electable and let's see how much support he really has in a fair and open election.
It seems to be that he resigned in free will, he isn't arrested, he hasn't fled the country or things like that.
He did flee the country - went to Mexico
AR385 wrote:I´m happy he´s gone. But, it was a military coup.
einsteinboricua wrote:AR385 wrote:I´m happy he´s gone. But, it was a military coup.
To call it a military coup implies that the military forced him out of power (put him under arrest and assumed all power). To also call it a coup means that he was the legitimate ruler of the country being forced out by the whims of a few. Despite the new Bolivian constitution forbidding reelection more than once, the Supreme Court (stacked with Morales loyalist) said it doesn't matter and allowed him to stand, even though the new constitution was passed during his first term (meaning his 3rd term should have been his last). During his first 3 terms he was the legitimate ruler. Once he stood for a 4th term (against the constitution and after having been denied explicit permission in a referendum), he lost all legitimacy. That's not even to say the mysterious 24hr freeze in vote counts before suddenly appearing that he had clinched the necessary number.
This was not a coup. This was the military assuming neutrality, telling Morales they wouldn't quell the protests, and a president who, in the eyes of the public, had lost all authority and respect.
einsteinboricua wrote:This was the military assuming neutrality, telling Morales they wouldn't quell the protests, and a president who, in the eyes of the public, had lost all authority and respect.
AR385 wrote:einsteinboricua wrote:AR385 wrote:I´m happy he´s gone. But, it was a military coup.
To call it a military coup implies that the military forced him out of power (put him under arrest and assumed all power). To also call it a coup means that he was the legitimate ruler of the country being forced out by the whims of a few. Despite the new Bolivian constitution forbidding reelection more than once, the Supreme Court (stacked with Morales loyalist) said it doesn't matter and allowed him to stand, even though the new constitution was passed during his first term (meaning his 3rd term should have been his last). During his first 3 terms he was the legitimate ruler. Once he stood for a 4th term (against the constitution and after having been denied explicit permission in a referendum), he lost all legitimacy. That's not even to say the mysterious 24hr freeze in vote counts before suddenly appearing that he had clinched the necessary number.
This was not a coup. This was the military assuming neutrality, telling Morales they wouldn't quell the protests, and a president who, in the eyes of the public, had lost all authority and respect.
When your military, who hold the weapons and the tanks come on TV in full uniform, and "suggest" you need to resign, they are forcing you out of power, outside any established constitutional provision. That, is a coup. Whatever he may have done, he was ultimately forced out of power by the military, period. That is no to say he was not a legitimate ruler (debatable) or had committed evident and rampant election fraud (not debatable).
zkojq wrote:einsteinboricua wrote:This was the military assuming neutrality, telling Morales they wouldn't quell the protests, and a president who, in the eyes of the public, had lost all authority and respect.
Ironic considering the massacre of protesters supporting Morales today
https://mobile.twitter.com/dancohen3000 ... 6261671944
zkojq wrote:einsteinboricua wrote:This was the military assuming neutrality, telling Morales they wouldn't quell the protests, and a president who, in the eyes of the public, had lost all authority and respect.
Ironic considering the massacre of protesters supporting Morales today
https://mobile.twitter.com/dancohen3000 ... 6261671944
Pyrex wrote:I guess Morales was not able to gather quite enough of a cocaine war-chest to keep the military happy, as Maduro has
PPVRA wrote:zkojq wrote:einsteinboricua wrote:This was the military assuming neutrality, telling Morales they wouldn't quell the protests, and a president who, in the eyes of the public, had lost all authority and respect.
Ironic considering the massacre of protesters supporting Morales today
https://mobile.twitter.com/dancohen3000 ... 6261671944
The left in Latin American has a very long history of violent protesting, vandalism.
BN747 wrote:PPVRA wrote:zkojq wrote:
Ironic considering the massacre of protesters supporting Morales today
https://mobile.twitter.com/dancohen3000 ... 6261671944
The left in Latin American has a very long history of violent protesting, vandalism.
And the Right in Latin America is notorious for jack-booted thuggery to murders of thousands in soccer stadiums to simply gunning down entire villages, led by Nazi-like Authoritarians ..and the worst ones come wrapped in religious beliefs. The left can't come close to that wickedness.
BN747
PPVRA wrote:BN747 wrote:PPVRA wrote:
The left in Latin American has a very long history of violent protesting, vandalism.
And the Right in Latin America is notorious for jack-booted thuggery to murders of thousands in soccer stadiums to simply gunning down entire villages, led by Nazi-like Authoritarians ..and the worst ones come wrapped in religious beliefs. The left can't come close to that wickedness.
BN747
Mind you, they did plenty of wickedness in Latin America, too.
And after nearly two decades in power, rather than fighting corruption, they disappointedly took part in it—often at the expense of the democratic process, and even stacking supreme courts across the region with people unqualified for the position, but who were given the position in exchange for a lifetime of favorable rulings.
That’s a stealth coup, the real coup, not the false and demeaning narrative they have created because they’ve lost power in democratic processes. The left is extremely arrogant to think they can’t lose power democratically. They must find a scape goat, always. Probably even harder for them to believe they lost elections after the millions in illegal campaign “donations” they received even while selling (and sometimes passing) laws requiring only public funds to finance election campaigns.
Fact is, the Latin American left is corrupt. They need to reinvent themselves, clean up their act, and give the people a mea culpa—something they have failed to do. Again, they’ve been too arrogant and still believe they’re god’s gift to humanity.
Democracy is finally working and people are putting these parties on “time out”. But there’s still an enormous struggle against the corrupt supreme courts who are fighting back, trying to protect their politicians with the same old “culture of impunity” legal tool box.
But thanks to the internet and social media, political engagement is extremely high. People at watching and they’re pushing Congress. Hard.
BN747 wrote:PPVRA wrote:BN747 wrote:
And the Right in Latin America is notorious for jack-booted thuggery to murders of thousands in soccer stadiums to simply gunning down entire villages, led by Nazi-like Authoritarians ..and the worst ones come wrapped in religious beliefs. The left can't come close to that wickedness.
BN747
Mind you, they did plenty of wickedness in Latin America, too.
And after nearly two decades in power, rather than fighting corruption, they disappointedly took part in it—often at the expense of the democratic process, and even stacking supreme courts across the region with people unqualified for the position, but who were given the position in exchange for a lifetime of favorable rulings.
That’s a stealth coup, the real coup, not the false and demeaning narrative they have created because they’ve lost power in democratic processes. The left is extremely arrogant to think they can’t lose power democratically. They must find a scape goat, always. Probably even harder for them to believe they lost elections after the millions in illegal campaign “donations” they received even while selling (and sometimes passing) laws requiring only public funds to finance election campaigns.
Fact is, the Latin American left is corrupt. They need to reinvent themselves, clean up their act, and give the people a mea culpa—something they have failed to do. Again, they’ve been too arrogant and still believe they’re god’s gift to humanity.
Democracy is finally working and people are putting these parties on “time out”. But there’s still an enormous struggle against the corrupt supreme courts who are fighting back, trying to protect their politicians with the same old “culture of impunity” legal tool box.
But thanks to the internet and social media, political engagement is extremely high. People at watching and they’re pushing Congress. Hard.
Yes, leftist governments are as corrupt throughout Latin America, because of a corrupt foundation was laid from their colonial past til this day. There has been periods of leaders breaking from tradition (corruption, nepotism especially) but the never last.
But Latin dictatorial leaders have always gone the martial law route to impose fear among the population.
But true Democracy can only from leftist thought (free thoughts/thinking politically), it cannot ever come from a Rightwing gov't...that approach only reinforces 'the status quo' of 'no changes necessary and a guarantee of the repression of political activism (silencing them).
Violence from the left has usually come in the form of protests..from the right it comes in the form of quelling dissent.
Plus in many cases, America has played a horrific role in Latin America affairs prolonging the unnecessary misery of the masses.
BN747
N757ST wrote:BN747 wrote:PPVRA wrote:
Mind you, they did plenty of wickedness in Latin America, too.
And after nearly two decades in power, rather than fighting corruption, they disappointedly took part in it—often at the expense of the democratic process, and even stacking supreme courts across the region with people unqualified for the position, but who were given the position in exchange for a lifetime of favorable rulings.
That’s a stealth coup, the real coup, not the false and demeaning narrative they have created because they’ve lost power in democratic processes. The left is extremely arrogant to think they can’t lose power democratically. They must find a scape goat, always. Probably even harder for them to believe they lost elections after the millions in illegal campaign “donations” they received even while selling (and sometimes passing) laws requiring only public funds to finance election campaigns.
Fact is, the Latin American left is corrupt. They need to reinvent themselves, clean up their act, and give the people a mea culpa—something they have failed to do. Again, they’ve been too arrogant and still believe they’re god’s gift to humanity.
Democracy is finally working and people are putting these parties on “time out”. But there’s still an enormous struggle against the corrupt supreme courts who are fighting back, trying to protect their politicians with the same old “culture of impunity” legal tool box.
But thanks to the internet and social media, political engagement is extremely high. People at watching and they’re pushing Congress. Hard.
Yes, leftist governments are as corrupt throughout Latin America, because of a corrupt foundation was laid from their colonial past til this day. There has been periods of leaders breaking from tradition (corruption, nepotism especially) but the never last.
But Latin dictatorial leaders have always gone the martial law route to impose fear among the population.
But true Democracy can only from leftist thought (free thoughts/thinking politically), it cannot ever come from a Rightwing gov't...that approach only reinforces 'the status quo' of 'no changes necessary and a guarantee of the repression of political activism (silencing them).
Violence from the left has usually come in the form of protests..from the right it comes in the form of quelling dissent.
Plus in many cases, America has played a horrific role in Latin America affairs prolonging the unnecessary misery of the masses.
BN747
Oh come on. Left versus right has many definitions, but traditionally the United States has been a right leaning government and democracy has flourished. Right- self reliance, limited government. Left- government reliance, collective socialism. Which either way you lean is up to you, but in very left leaning Soviet russia democracy sure didn’t flourish, and millions upon millions died as the USSR tried to implement its utopian industrial society. More on point, millions WILL die in leftist Venezuela, where government controls and corruption will eventually lead just like the USSR to mass starvation, unless the international community gets involved. Now, I’m not saying extreme right governments work either, the nazis are a perfect example of that. Extreme versions of left and right philosophy just don’t work. Communism, fascism, despotism... these are failed models. It’s the space in between we can go ahead and argue about.
BN747 wrote:But true Democracy can only from leftist thought (free thoughts/thinking politically), it cannot ever come from a Rightwing gov't...that approach only reinforces 'the status quo' of 'no changes necessary and a guarantee of the repression of political activism (silencing them).
BN747 wrote:Violence from the left has usually come in the form of protests..from the right it comes in the form of quelling dissent.
Plus in many cases, America has played a horrific role in Latin America affairs prolonging the unnecessary misery of the masses.
PPVRA wrote:BN747 wrote:But true Democracy can only from leftist thought (free thoughts/thinking politically), it cannot ever come from a Rightwing gov't...that approach only reinforces 'the status quo' of 'no changes necessary and a guarantee of the repression of political activism (silencing them).
reinforcing the status quo, 'no changes necessary', and the repression of political activism are the tools of governments of any kind who find themselves in a defensive position. From Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia. . to the Soviet Union. Only to name a few left wing dictatorships who have used these excuses.
The right does not have the monopoly on conservatism. That's a naive mistake.BN747 wrote:Violence from the left has usually come in the form of protests..from the right it comes in the form of quelling dissent.
Plus in many cases, America has played a horrific role in Latin America affairs prolonging the unnecessary misery of the masses.
Most of the time it was vandalism, not protest. Not to mention guerrilla groups across the region and the planet. A very bloody and embarrassing history.
extender wrote:Looking for the evil, right wing bugaboo are we?
The left fails every time, time after time, sooner or later. All conservatives are not Klukers wanting to shoot gays an minorities dead in their tracks. You can dress it up as much as desired, but any way you look at it, the left stifles free speech. The left uses violence. Keep painting that rosy image.
Morales was shit from the get go. He, along with Correa and Chavez promised the poor the rich man's house and possessions. And they were all for it. What do they have to show for it? Nothing but misery. Keep advocating leftist ways. The club will get smaller and smaller.
extender wrote:OK professor, what ever you say. Demonstrated how, by disagreeing with you and your cohorts?
PPVRA wrote:News reports in Brazil and Argentina are saying that Evo Morales’ government, through the Bolivian Department of Justice, were directly involved in election manipulation.
Bolivian DoJ workers were “forced” to manipulate ballots by the Secretary of Justice. The accusations were leveled by the workers themselves in a written document to the OAS.
PPVRA wrote:News reports in Brazil and Argentina are saying that Evo Morales’ government, through the Bolivian Department of Justice, were directly involved in election manipulation.
Bolivian DoJ workers were “forced” to manipulate ballots by the Secretary of Justice. The accusations were leveled by the workers themselves in a written document to the OAS.
MaverickM11 wrote:PPVRA wrote:News reports in Brazil and Argentina are saying that Evo Morales’ government, through the Bolivian Department of Justice, were directly involved in election manipulation.
Bolivian DoJ workers were “forced” to manipulate ballots by the Secretary of Justice. The accusations were leveled by the workers themselves in a written document to the OAS.
I'm not sure who I trust the least: Morales, Bolsonaro, or the OAS. Tough call.
Aesma wrote:From the start if another country is making comments on your internal elections, something isn't right. It's very possible, maybe even likely, that Morales has fiddled with the election, but this should be determined by an independant Bolivian entity, with as little link as possible to any political party.
BN747 wrote:MaverickM11 wrote:PPVRA wrote:News reports in Brazil and Argentina are saying that Evo Morales’ government, through the Bolivian Department of Justice, were directly involved in election manipulation.
Bolivian DoJ workers were “forced” to manipulate ballots by the Secretary of Justice. The accusations were leveled by the workers themselves in a written document to the OAS.
I'm not sure who I trust the least: Morales, Bolsonaro, or the OAS. Tough call.
if you trust the word of the poor and in the indigenous people, that's EVO's crowd. They have very little access to press...the Fifis, everything.
Bosonaro, is your guy if you love trump (and you do not) but he is a 1st class grifter sending his unqualified son to be US Amb. from Brazil.
BN747
MaverickM11 wrote:BN747 wrote:MaverickM11 wrote:I'm not sure who I trust the least: Morales, Bolsonaro, or the OAS. Tough call.
if you trust the word of the poor and in the indigenous people, that's EVO's crowd. They have very little access to press...the Fifis, everything.
Bosonaro, is your guy if you love trump (and you do not) but he is a 1st class grifter sending his unqualified son to be US Amb. from Brazil.
BN747
Well aware, but Morales went off the rails toward the end and obviously has an interest in pushing a narrative as much as anyone else.
BN747 wrote:MaverickM11 wrote:BN747 wrote:
if you trust the word of the poor and in the indigenous people, that's EVO's crowd. They have very little access to press...the Fifis, everything.
Bosonaro, is your guy if you love trump (and you do not) but he is a 1st class grifter sending his unqualified son to be US Amb. from Brazil.
BN747
Well aware, but Morales went off the rails toward the end and obviously has an interest in pushing a narrative as much as anyone else.
I'm unaware of the 'narrative'...catch me up!
BN747
MaverickM11 wrote:BN747 wrote:MaverickM11 wrote:Well aware, but Morales went off the rails toward the end and obviously has an interest in pushing a narrative as much as anyone else.
I'm unaware of the 'narrative'...catch me up!
BN747
ie that this additional term was as legitimate as the vote was, when neither seems to really be the case.
BN747 wrote:MaverickM11 wrote:BN747 wrote:
I'm unaware of the 'narrative'...catch me up!
BN747
ie that this additional term was as legitimate as the vote was, when neither seems to really be the case.
I wasn't sure if the Bolivian presidency similar to Mexico with a single term limit...it is not, according to wikipee the presidents is term is 'renewable' , he can run as long as he wants.
That tells me that the powers-that-be in Bolivia, decided to allow Evo's 1st term go through to 'demonstrate' that elections in Bolivia are fair and just because 'Hey look! An Indigenous guy won!'
...now that they've allowed his term to near completion...they have decided 'enough is enough'!
No more of the Poor people's candidate! They want a return to the status quo, ASAP!
I'm not fooled, the signs are everywhere and the no-so-educated Bolivians know this, it is exactly why they are in the streets.
BN747
MaverickM11 wrote:BN747 wrote:MaverickM11 wrote:ie that this additional term was as legitimate as the vote was, when neither seems to really be the case.
I wasn't sure if the Bolivian presidency similar to Mexico with a single term limit...it is not, according to wikipee the presidents is term is 'renewable' , he can run as long as he wants.
That tells me that the powers-that-be in Bolivia, decided to allow Evo's 1st term go through to 'demonstrate' that elections in Bolivia are fair and just because 'Hey look! An Indigenous guy won!'
...now that they've allowed his term to near completion...they have decided 'enough is enough'!
No more of the Poor people's candidate! They want a return to the status quo, ASAP!
I'm not fooled, the signs are everywhere and the no-so-educated Bolivians know this, it is exactly why they are in the streets.
BN747
This would have been his fourth term. While I don't doubt the wealthy and non indigenous were happy to see him go, I also think he wore out his welcome and did not do any succession planning, which is sad seeing as he legitimately has a lot to get credit for in Bolivia:
https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandso ... ed-to-flee