I’m Miguel Centellas, a political science professor at Mount St. Mary’s University. Because of academic interests, I post frequently on Bolivian politics. I also occasionally discuss interesting books, pop culture, and daily life in Baltimore.
In a brief 30-minute session last night, Bolivia’s legislature approved two constitutional referendums & annulled the proposed Santa Cruz & Beni autonomy referendum. The vote took place as pro-MAS protestors lay siege to the parliament building for several days, and as at least two female opposition candidates were beaten as they tried to enter the legislative session. Opposition legislators were refused the floor, the votes took place following no discussion, and the brief session took place with dozens of pro-MAS protesters crowded into the gallery.
Of the three laws: The first reduces the number of days needed for the legislature to submit the text of the constitutional referendum from 120 to 60 days. The second sets the date of the referendum for May 4th. The third gives the national legislature the exclusive right to convoke referendums (something not stated in either the current or proposed constitutional text).
The move resembles the last-minute, rushed passage of the draft constitution in Oruro last December. Then, too, opposition members were prevented from reaching the session & there was no debate on the floor. (Later, the “approved” draft was modified by a small committee, in violation of the procedural rules.) Of course, one could point to the November protests in Sucre (and before) who worked to intimidate the government delegates as the constituent assembly worked on a draft constitution.
The end result is a clearly illiberal “democratic” system in which decisions are made by threat, not by compromise. It’s also problematic for a government to unleash a street mob against its own institutions. For the past several weeks, tense negotiations between the government & opposition leaders (particularly those from pro-autonomy departments) were slowly making progress. All that is now swept away. By its actions, Evo’s government has legitimated force (understood in a broader sense) as the means to “do politics” in Bolivia. This is a disaster for democracy—and it may prove disastrous, in the long run, for Evo’s own project.
That is it, I am sorry to tell you all that we are under a Coup de Etat produced by the MaSSist regime. Democracy in Bolivia must be fight in the streets and through the web from now. It is a very sad moment for the Country but it was somehow expected.
Miguel: I agree that BL is prone to hyperbole, but I also think that you may see (or at least write) about developments in Bolivia through a purely academic lens. MAS, Evo, and AGL have shown their true colors. How does one defuse tensions with someone who deals in bad faith? Whose recourse at the end of the day is always violence. I hate to say it, but this may push the media luna to be more seccessionist than ever.
Posted by
galloglass
February 29, 2008 2:37 PM
Galloglass:
I certainly can see where you're coming from. I try to be at least somewhat objective (even though my personal preferences are often fairly clear). But I've often also noted that Evo's actions seem designed to radicalize the media luna. I'm not sure if this is due to miscalculation, or a clever ploy. Either way, it's bad news for liberal democratic politics.
Miguel, have you heard anything more about Morales' offer of holding a referendum on his (and prefects') rule? That got a lot of attention, then seemed to disappear.
Yes, that was dropped from the agenda suddenly. There is no indication that Morales will follow through with such a referendum, since the legislature just approved the other referendums. I think he might have won just such a referendum ... but it would also likely show a marked split between east-west parts of the country.
It has been more than obvious that Evo has no understanding of democracy, much less an inclination to preserve it. his election was bought by Hugo. Hugo has also bought the elections of other states, most recently, Argentina. Why should evo give anything but lip service to democracy when he knows hugo will back him, push come to shove? evo may win another vote, but not legit. Have you been to Bolivia lately? The country is in shambles. The economy is so poor that anyone who can get out has done so. Only those who can still make money in resources are still there. And they are getting all they can while they can. Bolivia is becoming another Cuba. read that as everyone works for the government for free and owns nothing with even a smaller chance of having anything. Prices have soared making the already low incomes less effective. These heavy handed, racist tactics of MaSS do nothing to even advance their own needs and wants. They are just too stupid to see the crap they are being sold. You can critize for pointing out the stupidity but nonetheless using violent, selfserving tactics to push through preceived programs will sooner or later be the norm by which those rights are taken from those who use them now. Of course, everyone thought Hitler was right too.
Posted by
roberto white
March 5, 2008 7:50 PM
Things certainly are tense in Bolivia. And Evo has shown a bit of a populist streak (then again, so did Mesa) and perhaps his move towards authoritarian tendencies is a reflection of Bolivia's historical political style/pattern. But direct comparisons to Hitler or even Cuba are a bit much, I'm sorry to say.
Yes, I've elsewhere pointed out that there is a relationship between some visions of democracy, populism, nationalism, and fascism. But that doesn't mean I think Evo is the same as Hitler. Such statements aren't only exaggerations that cloud the issue, they diminish the sheer evilness that was the Nazi regime.
If fascist just means "people I disagree with," then Hitler wasn't evil. He was just a guy we disliked. I think it's important (as C. S. Lewis has argued in "The Abolition of Man") that words retain their meaning, so that we don't lose the ability to discuss such concepts.
Well, not drawing direct comparisons between Bolivia and Nazi Germany and Cuba is the kind of blindness that leads to states like that being allowed to exist. Words do need to retain their meanings. In this case, as in all fascist states, facist means those who disagree with my thoughts do not matter in this society. That is how you get fiascos like the recent votes in La Paz and the past in Sucre. Why even have a vote at all if you eliminate anyone who disagees. That sir, is fascism. Replace Jew with "European decended minority" and it is the same rhetoric. Take their wealth, their possessions, their rights. All he has to do now is to start imprisioning and the comparisons are complete. It has happened alot in LA, and recently. I am not clouding the issues by pointing out the rush to diminish individual rights taking place in Bolivia. I do not know what words you prefer to use if not the names given to such political movements. Call it socialism, communism, facism or whatever you want. All the political correctness does is to defer conversaton about the issues by making the naming an issue. Hitler rose to power in the same manner, as did Castro. First popularism, then rampant overtaking of society by convincing the populace to support the removal of their rights. Much like Bush's attempts to subjucate rights in the USA to "national security". You look at Hitler in hindsight and Evo in the present. You need to see the beginnings of movements in the same time frame. Indeed, words have several meanings obviously. In Bolivia, democracy means all the people I like, or are like me, get what they want. Those who do not or are not are not important. Ok? The most glaring difference between Evo and Hitler, and Castro for that matter, is the latter had/have intelligence. Evo is a puppet.
Posted by
roberto white
March 7, 2008 12:00 AM
Roberto:
Look, I agree that there is a strong connection between Evo's "new left" (national syndicalism) and 1920s fascism (national socialism). So I'm not advising political correctness, but rather caution. There's more to fascism than Hitler. I'd readily compare someone like Chavez or Peron to Italian fascism (in rhetoric, style, militarism, etc). But Hitler's regime was not only substantially more systematic in its violence (that level of necessary organization is absent in Evo's movement) but also in its very sophisticated ideological discourse. Instead, I'd look to Hungarian or, better, Romanian fascist movements of the 1930s for comparisons.
But, in terms of political debate, comparing people to Hitler usually ends the conversation. Hence, I caution a more nuanced approach.
ok, point taken. However, I can equate brownshirts to ponchos rojos and locking out of opposition parties to the type of organization used and necessary as you point out. BTW, I would consider the signing of the illegally passed votes as grounds for impeachment. Luckily, the court found some balls, at least for time being, to find some grounds to stop the facade. Someone needs to step up and make Evo legally accountable for all the acts occuring in his name. Instead of boycotting, podemos and the others need to participate, make the police keep the meeting open and continue not to fold to the intimidation used in the name of democracy.
