|
On November 11 2019 15:36 Belisarius wrote: Given the circumstances around Morales's re-election, leading with "democratically elected" there is fox-level spin. Project veritas or info wars spin TBH.
|
To be fair, Morales has been democratically elected 3 times. He was leading this last elections as well and probably would have won.The alleged fraud and manipulations would have just granted him a 10 points lead, which means he would be elected directly.
|
On November 12 2019 01:59 Mo_tx wrote: To be fair, Morales has been democratically elected 3 times.
the third time after ignoring a referendum that would have barred him from even running. That alone is enough to put him into the category of aspiring tinpot despot, not to mention the cartoonish election irregularities this time around. Even the largest labour union in the country came out in opposition to Morales, I'm not really sure in what world organised labour is suddenly right-wing but these coup calls in particular by western politicians like Corbyn are just cringeworthy.
Him stepping down is clearly a win for democracy, it's good to see that the police and the military stood with the people and that civil society ousted him before he could entrench himself further.
|
On November 12 2019 02:38 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2019 01:59 Mo_tx wrote: To be fair, Morales has been democratically elected 3 times.
the third time after ignoring a referendum that would have barred him from even running. That alone is enough to put him into the category of aspiring tinpot despot, not to mention the cartoonish election irregularities this time around. Even the largest labour union in the country came out in opposition to Morales, I'm not really sure in what world organised labour is suddenly right-wing but these coup calls in particular by western politicians like Corbyn are just cringeworthy. Him stepping down is clearly a win for democracy, it's good to see that the police and the military stood with the people and that civil society ousted him before he could entrench himself further.
Win for democracy and glad to see the military and police push out the leader instead of having an election in order to clear the way for someone more willing to steal from poor people in the country so western corporations can profit. okay... _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Reports are that a group of officials in Mexico are trying to get Mexico to leave the OAS for coordinating the "Bolivian coup"
CDMX.- We are told that a group of deputies from Morena , are already preparing a point of agreement to request the Mexican government, particularly the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (SRE), to leave the Organization of American States ( OAS ), for having, according to they, coordinated the "Bolivian coup" and overthrow a legitimate government like that of Evo Morales .
www.eluniversal.com.mx
Also that Mexico will be offering Morales asylum because of threats he faces in Bolivia.
|
|
If Trumps supreme court was to get rid of the term limit so he could run for a third term would you feel the same way?
Putin can now legally rule for ever, is that a win for democracy?
Why is Morales the only one capable of leading his party? Surely there is another person capable?
|
If Trump could maintain re-election forever (and not die of old age or choking on McDonalds) via popular vote then that would seem to be the will of the people. He didn't even win popular vote the first time. America is a somewhat poor example of a functioning democracy. The two term limit is also not even 100 years old in America, and FDR is generally well remembered here despite having also had four terms (albeit dying in the fourth).
If the will of the people is Morales three times, four times, one hundred times, then that is democracy. That is the definition of democracy. There are elections every five years, if Morales is worse than his opposition in the eyes of his people, that is the venue set forth in all extant democracies to make that call and they can end his presidency there. Democracy is not when an opposition party ousts the winner of an election via military pressure.
Do you believe that democracy is found in the rejection of the rule of law and electoralism and instead in violence in the streets? Would the US have been more democratic if we turned to violence after Bush v. Gore? Does the political alignment of the military outweigh the will of the people?
EDIT: Or, since you bring up Trump, should the military have coerced Trump's resignation based on unproven claims of election tampering by Democrats?
|
On November 12 2019 07:55 des wrote: If Trump could maintain re-election forever (and not die of old age or choking on McDonalds) via popular vote then that would seem to be the will of the people. He didn't even win popular vote the first time. America is a somewhat poor example of a functioning democracy. The two term limit is also not even 100 years old in America, and FDR is generally well remembered here despite having also had four terms (albeit dying in the fourth).
If the will of the people is Morales three times, four times, one hundred times, then that is democracy. That is the definition of democracy. There are elections every five years, if Morales is worse than his opposition in the eyes of his people, that is the venue set forth in all extant democracies to make that call and they can end his presidency there. Democracy is not when an opposition party ousts the winner of an election via military pressure.
Do you believe that democracy is found in the rejection of the rule of law and electoralism and instead in violence in the streets? Would the US have been more democratic if we turned to violence after Bush v. Gore? Does the political alignment of the military outweigh the will of the people?
EDIT: Or, since you bring up Trump, should the military have coerced Trump's resignation based on unproven claims of election tampering by Democrats? You seem to be missing that he did not win election fairly, even he admitted this. So what we KNOW that is not some conspiracy theory is that someone cheated on his behalf, after he changed the rules. It is a lot more likely that it was him than anyone else. The party that would take over instead of him is not even remotely right wing so all that talk is utter BS. And the people who were rioting before the police and military had him step down, you would be applauding if they were doing it to a person who identified is right wing.
Basically the only reason you think this is conspiracy is because you are blinded by partisanship.
|
You're not reading my posts, I never said anything about the opposition party being right wing, and also I gave links showing that fraud claims are disputed and he offered another election. I also never said anything about a conspiracy, if anything you are the one trying to find the shadow actor who cheated the election in order to justify extrajudicial regime change. My post has a link disputing significant irregularities in the election, and indicates his win was legitimate. I also indicate that his fourth term run was legal as per the Supreme Court of Bolivia.
Please respond to those points instead of a strawman conspiracy theorist. I am making two assertions:
1) Military/police demanding and obtaining the resignation of an elected leader is a coup. 2) Military/police demanding and obtaining the resignation of an elected leader is antithetical to the democratic process, and should not be called a victory of democracy.
|
I appreciate that a lot of the important leftist people, especially in the US, who were timid on Maduro openly came out in support of Morales. The situation is clear but I wasn't taking it for granted. Good.
As for Bolivia, well, another example that in order to truly get socialism we need to start from one of the biggest superpowers, otherwise "democracy" will keep "winning" in the same fashion.
|
On November 12 2019 08:23 des wrote: You're not reading my posts, I never said anything about the opposition party being right wing, and also I gave links showing that fraud claims are disputed and he offered another election. I also never said anything about a conspiracy, if anything you are the one trying to find the shadow actor who cheated the election in order to justify extrajudicial regime change. My post has a link disputing significant irregularities in the election, and indicates his win was legitimate. I also indicate that his fourth term run was legal as per the Supreme Court of Bolivia.
Please respond to those points instead of a strawman conspiracy theorist. I am making two assertions:
1) Military/police demanding and obtaining the resignation of an elected leader is a coup. 2) Military/police demanding and obtaining the resignation of an elected leader is antithetical to the democratic process, and should not be called a victory of democracy. 1) He is not a fairly elected leader. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-50370013
In a 2016 referendum, a majority had voted "no" to dropping the limit of term numbers that Bolivians could serve.
However, Mr Morales' party took the issue to the constitutional court, which abolished the term limits altogether.
Now honestly consider this not in the terms of left or right, but does it sound like the will of the people to ignore a referendum and put it to the supreme court which he controls?
2) Shocker that other dictators like Maduro are calling it a coup. But what is important is what happens next, within the constitution it says elections must be called within 90 days. If Morales cares about his country and his party and the people he should be calling for calm and tell his voters to vote for a new leader of that party, one that is not covered in the stink of the election fraud. But this about him maintaining power.
We all know that there is no legitimate reason why it has to be Morales, no he is not Maduro level bad, but he is clearly corrupt and more interested in his own power than the health of his country.
Don't let the Starbucks communists of this thread or else where blind you to facts. Fair elections are necessary for democracies, without them left or right does not matter and the horseshoe theory of politics takes over. This is why many of Maduro's top allies are not remotely left, Russia, Turkey, Syria, China, notice what they all have in common?
Because the US did a lot of dirty shit in the past does not mean they are doing it now. They could be, but there is no evidence of it, the evidence all points to Morales trying to move from democratically elected leader to dictator, just like Maduro did. And this is why the people stood up to them.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/11/political-vacuum-bolivia-morales-announces-resignation-191111043447380.html
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/article-bolivia-evo-morales-exit-election-explainer/
The concern now is how to protect the country from falling into a civil war or a different dictator taking over.
edit: And it is not like there is not a lot of people that support Morales, there is. But the reality is he was not allowed to run again. So he put that to referendum and lost that, so instead of accepting that he went to his supreme court and the rules changed. He runs and low and behold with 84 % reporting it is a gauranteed run off. But then oops things go down and stop working for a while, they miraculously come back up and some how the lead has changed and He has the right margin of victory so no run off. What an incredibly lucky result. He knows that in a run off he would lose because the Third party likes the second more than him. So now twice he has gone against his constitutions rules and the will of the people so HE can keep power. Change his party leaning to Right, take the same events and the people on this thread calling this a coup would be cheering for the freedom fighters.
It sucks for the 40+ % that want him, that is a shit ton of people, but that is democracy. Even if you are a mass of people and over 40% is huge but if 51% of people, or college votes, or whatever the system is you deal with. The same way that 40+% dealt with the last 3 terms when he was the rightfully elected leader. I really hope this works out better for the Bolivian people, and I'm not so naive to think that is a guarantee, but that they fought of their democracy is awesome, and now all the people, Morales followers included should fight to make sure there are safe, free elections and respect the results when they happen. Hopefully the UN or someone both can agree too can monitor to make sure they are.
|
Luckily Morales agreed to have new elections (even though your account of what happened is wrong, there was no "low and behold" or miracle, the parts of the country that hadn't reported yet were parts of the country where he has more support, and his end result is consistent with polling before the election), so now that he agreed to have new elections we don't have to back a coup to "protect "democracy"", we can just have new elections.
Oh, wait, you're still backing a coup?
That's... let's say "interesting".
|
On November 12 2019 09:28 Nebuchad wrote:... we can just have new elections....
Oh, wait, you're still backing a coup?
That's... let's say "interesting".
Given the following quote, would you care to explain how you came to the above conclusion?
On November 12 2019 08:54 JimmiC wrote:... now all the people, Morales followers included should fight to make sure there are safe, free elections and respect the results when they happen. Hopefully the UN or someone both can agree too can monitor to make sure they are.
|
Would you call it a victory for democracy if it was a right wing candidate? If Trump were ousted from power by the US military, that would be a democratic outcome?
If Morales had to play cloak and dagger to win, why did he offer another election after allegations of fraud were raised? This election would have had more scrutiny and if, as you say, he clearly would have lost a fair election, what does he stand to gain. Why did the opposition reject this?
|
On November 12 2019 09:32 Aquanim wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2019 09:28 Nebuchad wrote:... we can just have new elections....
Oh, wait, you're still backing a coup?
That's... let's say "interesting". Given the following quote, would you care to explain how you came to the above conclusion? Show nested quote +On November 12 2019 08:54 JimmiC wrote:... now all the people, Morales followers included should fight to make sure there are safe, free elections and respect the results when they happen. Hopefully the UN or someone both can agree too can monitor to make sure they are.
Hey Jimmi Aquanim thinks that I'm misrepresenting your position when I say you're fine with the military ousting Morales so that democracy can prevail, would you care to set me straight?
|
On November 12 2019 09:32 Aquanim wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2019 09:28 Nebuchad wrote:... we can just have new elections....
Oh, wait, you're still backing a coup?
That's... let's say "interesting". Given the following quote, would you care to explain how you came to the above conclusion? Show nested quote +On November 12 2019 08:54 JimmiC wrote:... now all the people, Morales followers included should fight to make sure there are safe, free elections and respect the results when they happen. Hopefully the UN or someone both can agree too can monitor to make sure they are.
Given that he offered a new set of elections and they were declined by the opposition, anyone in support of free and fair elections should logically want another election w/ monitoring. Supporting the opposition in their current actions is supporting a coup. Why would the pro-democracy side reject an election?
|
I'm stating this for the record: if a right wing government were ousted via military action, either by the state military or popular paramilitary, I would not call that a democratic process. I would likely support a people's army acting revolutionarily in this way, but I would call it a coup d'etat. The only reason I can imagine this is being disputed is to provide an air of legitimacy to the opposition by being able to say they are pro-democracy rather than acknowledging their non-democratic methods of gaining power.
|
If Trump was to run for a third term, ignore a popular referendum, stack the courts in his favour, and suddenly freeze election results for 24 hours without explanation I'd pray that the military drags his ass out of office and anyone who would call that a loss for democracy has lost their minds.
The issue here is simply that Morales is a sort of messianic figure in particular for the far-left in the west, so just like with Cuba or Venezuela they'll ignore corruption or lack of due process or anti-democratic behaviour for political ends. The same has also been true for right-wing dictators in latin america and both is reprehensible. The only right position is to support the rule of law, transparent elections and the will of the people (that is all the people) which Morales had lost, including allies.
|
They asked for new elections. He said ok. They said no. That's what's missing from your little Trump analogy.
If you were in this for democracy, you would be fine with new elections with oversight so that we can trust the results (even though, again, those results are consistent with polling and there's no evidence that anything fraudulent has happened, which is probably why Morales is okay with new elections btw). But that's not what's happening. Instead a coup happened, and you're backing it. This isn't one of those ones where it's kind of hard to see who has the right facts like the Maduro one. This one is very clear.
|
On November 12 2019 09:35 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2019 09:32 Aquanim wrote:On November 12 2019 09:28 Nebuchad wrote:... we can just have new elections....
Oh, wait, you're still backing a coup?
That's... let's say "interesting". Given the following quote, would you care to explain how you came to the above conclusion? On November 12 2019 08:54 JimmiC wrote:... now all the people, Morales followers included should fight to make sure there are safe, free elections and respect the results when they happen. Hopefully the UN or someone both can agree too can monitor to make sure they are. Hey Jimmi Aquanim thinks that I'm misrepresenting your position when I say you're fine with the military ousting Morales so that democracy can prevail, would you care to set me straight? You are, and you know that you are. You are just conveniently leaving a bunch out. I'm sure you can find another video of a white guy in his dorm room and Europe to drop some truth bombs on me though.
edit: Nothing says we should trust this guy to hold fair elections next time that he has already been caught cheating. They have not even said Moreales can't run again. Why must he rule when he shouldn't be because of cheating? If he runs again and the people elect him so be it. There is no reason he shouldn't be calling for peace in the streets.
|
|
|
|