There is a surge of populism world wide. My theory is that social media and its fake news have largely contributed to it. But also, with religion gone and materialism partially satisfied we probably have the phenomenon of lost people who want to believe in something, anything that they think will give direction to their lives.
We saw that early in Venezuela. Chavez did play that messianic card well, to the point that even today, as the country is finishing to sink, you can still find genuine supporters. They want to believe and cannot, ever, admit they were wrong. Fanaticism always lurks close....
From the Rio Grande to Ushuaia I see that phenomenon playing everywhere, with either unsuitable governments elected or worse, self destruction like in Chile. Exceptions are counted on one hand, and endangered anyway.
But if such a torn sub continent can explain Messianic episodes, what worries me more is that it is also taking place in the US. I am not going to talk about the hordes of "deplorables" though having lived in the South, and a supporter of Hillary, I certainly agree that she had a point. Rather I am going on the left (*) which is using Trump to reinvigorate itself and push the Democratic party where it should not be if it wants to win elections. But that left does not care about losing one of two elections more: what they want is polarization so when they finally win they will be able to do as they please. Trump loves it of course, they feed from each other.
The recent events in LatAm illustrate well this frame of mind, allowing me to skip discussion on internal US politics.
For example the US left has had no qualms to go and support the revolts in Ecuador and Chile, without taking a second to understand the whys and whos. For memory, Venezuela has been for years in revolt, has been massacred in its opposition rallies, the regime has been internationally denounced by the UN and more, and yet you would be hard pressed to find significant criticism on that by the US left. There is even the occasional incredibly stupid support of the regime by people such as representative Ilhan Omar from Minnesota.
But the Bolivia collapse has taken the prize. The speed and unanimity about condemning an alleged coup against Evo Morales was stunning. Along their shocked attitude they forgot all about Morales trying to commit electoral fraud (amen of violating the constitution so as to run again). In short, Morales has done two things that are at the very least equivalent to a coup: violating the constitution and rigging the electoral system.
Silent crickets from the left on that.
I have been at this since 2003 and yet I am still surprised at the crass hypocrisy of the left in the US. Only the hard left in Europe shows the same degree of hypocrisy (Melanchon in France, e.g.)
------------------------------------------------
*I refuse to apply the demagogic language of US politics. For me Liberals are not socialists, maybe not even social democrats. The left is rather far from Liberals, Sanders being a good example although he tempered a little bit once he decided to run with democrats.
Socialist today has become the code word for communist that dare not say their names. I would like to know if that US left is socialist or social democratic, two very different things but quite confused in US minds.
Political language is meant to deceive. You're not supposed to understand it. Just vote what you feel.
ReplyDeleteI'm amused at how the left rails against US imperialism while ignoring the Cubans'. The right rails against Cuban imperialism while ignoring the US's. Round & round it goes.
Along their shocked attitude they forgot all about Morales trying to commit electoral fraud (amen of violating the constitution so as to run again). In short, Morales has done two things that are at the very least equivalent to a coup: violating the constitution and rigging the electoral system.
ReplyDeleteConsider, for a moment, the court ruling that enabled Evo to run for another term, in spite of 1)Constitutional prohibition of same and 2)losing a referendum to amend the Constitution permitting him to run for another term. Evo Morales Finally Went Too Far for Bolivia.The socialist president claimed authoritarian powers in the name of the popular will. But average citizens were fed up with arbitrary rule.
As Morales started to come up against the two-term limit for presidents stipulated by the constitution he himself had championed in 2009, his enmity toward any semblance of the rule of law became more and more evident. In 2016, he held a binding referendum that would allow him to stay in office indefinitely. When a majority of Bolivians voted down the proposal, Morales resorted to his tight control of previously independent institutions to get his way. In 2017, the country’s supreme court ruled that limits on the length of his tenure in office would violate Morales’s human rights.
Evo's "human rights" were violated by not being permitted to run indefinitely for President. ¡Que bolas! Or, as one would say in Gringatierra (USA), what chutzpah!
Evo has always considered the rules merely as an obstacle in the way of getting what he wants. In 2007, Evo got the required to-thirds majority approval of the draft of a new Constitution- by locking the opposition delegates out of the hall.
Don't forget how Evo plays dirty in soccer/football- kicking an opponent in the groin. Bolivian President's Low Blow.
Bolivian politics has always been rather rough, so I can't say that Evo was all that big a change from the norm in Bolivian politics. Evo's team had roadblocks. The oppo had roadblocks. The lynching of the Evo-supporting mayor, while not common, had been done in the past. A corrupt mayor in Aymara country- Evo is Aymara- was lynched and hung in 2004. A President was hung from a lamppost in 95.
I have been at this since 2003 and yet I am still surprised at the crass hypocrisy of the left in the US.
ReplyDeleteYou are to be commended to have perceived lefty hypocrisy from 2003 on, but I am disappointed that you didn't perceive it earlier. You are telling me you never perceived any of that hypocrisy in your time at Brandeis, in the Bahston/Boston suburbs? Must have been too busy in your lab to get to know Boston.
As someone born and raised in bluest, deepest lib-land, who used to vote Demo, I was aware of lefty hypocrisy before I got out of high school. Such as those who vociferously denounced bigotry/racism/vilifying of the out group when done in the South, but were blissfully unaware of the same in New England- or in their own hearts. In a phrase, they didn't think their excrement had any odor.
Or the Kennedy clan, who all presented themselves as the rich people with a conscience. A childhood friend worked for the Kennedys at Hyannisport one summer. As he told us, the Kennedys were not rich people with a conscience, they were merely rich people. Hypocrites to the nth.
I voted Republican for the first time in 1988, in response to prominent Democrats such as Senators Kerry and Dodd making nice with the Sandinistas. As some digging into the library stacks showed me that the Sandinistas were unadulterated supporters of Soviet imperialism well before Reagan was elected, I saw no reason to make nice with the Sandinistas.
When have I talked about Brandeis?
DeleteAnd I was Liberal which is not, in my mind left. AOC is left, she is no liberal. For example.
And the 2003 date is the start of this blog. Before the election of Chavez I was detecting the inconsistencies of the European and US left.
When have I talked about Brandeis?
DeleteI have NOT located a mention of Brandeis, but you did mention living in Waltham, while doing research at a campus.Scott Brown versus Obama. Really?
I lived one year in Waltham, a working class suburb of Boston, while doing research in a campus (it is the only light pink county in the map above, the only county Brown carried with less than 50%). Of course I looked for the results of Waltham.
I made the assumption, apparently incorrectly, that one who was living in Waltham and doing research at a campus was doing research at a campus located in Waltham. Which would be Brandeis. BTW, I have been in touch this year with two childhood friends, both of whom graduated from Brandeis, though four years apart.
You differentiate between liberal and lefty/leftist,a distinction quite a few people make.(Some self-proclaimed conservatives will describe themselves as old-style liberals.) I will accordingly modify my hypocrisy statement to "I was aware of liberal hypocrisy before I got out of high school."
And the 2003 date is the start of this blog. Before the election of Chavez I was detecting the inconsistencies of the European and US left.
I noticed your multiple & vociferous denunciations of Jesse Helms- reasons which predate the 2003 beginning of your blog. I have no problem with that. Cousins from North Carolina weren't exactly Jesse Helms fans, either. By contrast, your attitude towards Ted Kennedy was rather sanguine. Ted was at least as big a scoundrel as Jesse,
I therefore modify my previous comment:
You are to be commended to have perceived either lefty or liberal hypocrisy hypocrisy from 2003 on, but I am disappointed that you didn't perceive either lefty or liberal hypocrisy earlier.
Your criticism of US politics has been much more even-handed than, for example, what Caracas Chronicles has done. While you supported Obama and Hillary, you did not hesitate to criticize Obama's Venezuela or Latin American policy on occasion or point out some agreement you had with Trump. Caracas Chronicles, OTOH, never criticized Obama(as far as I can tell) and had a non-stop denunciation of Trump- even before he was elected.
DeleteI try not to fray too deeply into American politics in the blog. I think that this is not the place for that, it is all about Venezuela ya'know.
DeleteThis being said I will discuss some matters when related to Venezuela, or more rarely myself.
A President was hung from a lamppost in 95.
ReplyDeletecorrection "A President was hung from a lamppost in 1945." Gualberto Villarroel.
Socialist today has become the code word for communist that dare not say their names. I would like to know if that US left is socialist or social democratic, two very different things but quite confused in US minds.
ReplyDeleteWhile the left has long been dominant on college campuses in the US, in recent years it has become very intolerant of views that dissent from the narrative of the day.College Insurrection has had good coverage. Here is an example. Leftist Mob at Binghamton U. Shuts Down Speech by Economist Art Laffer. There are many more examples. Consider Antifa.
Oberlin@ College Insurrection.
"Socialist today has become the code word for communist that dare not say their names". That was yesterday, today the code word is "progressive" since "socialist" is starting to stink to high heaven.
ReplyDeleteSocialist today has become the code word for communist that dare not say their names. I would like to know if that US left is socialist or social democratic, two very different things but quite confused in US minds.
ReplyDeleteDaniel is familiar with Chesa Boudin, who spent a year in Miraflores working for Hugo Chavez. Chesa's foster father Bill Ayers came to Caracas several times to praise all of Hugo's "accomplishments."
Chesa Boudin was recently elected District Attorney in San Francisco. FYI, Daniel.
yes, awful... But SF is a lost cause. Even Nancy is considered right wing there.
DeleteBoludo Tejano,
DeleteAm I correct that you are the same person from Caracas Chronicles comments before the comments were shut down?
I used the comments section to make contact with people and try to get aid to the people that so desperately needed it.
One man that went by MRubio collaborated with me and we were able to create a sustainable seed program and distribute critically needed medicines to people in his area.
Sadly MRubio died earlier this year. With his death I have lost a valuable contact and a good friend inside of Venezuela.
I would greatly appreciate it if you know of any other site that would allow me to make contact with people and possibly continue the good work that MRubio and I were doing.
I am glad to see you posting again despite les foux that confuse the VZ and LatAm issues with first world politics. I can tell you its not the escapees from the South who are partisan populists, they have been there and done that!
ReplyDeleteI know you miss VZ, so do I, traveling all over in the early 90's it was hard to choose what place would be best to retire to. But, now I can imagine either of us laying on the floor as the gangsters steal everything we have. At least we have a safety net to finish off in dignity. Also, I do wish you will post more of your views, not only of VZ and LatAm but, the world in general.
BTW, even though Im posting with my other persona, Im the original Roger Biron de LaFrance (not the one who posted last) from, now, so many years back. While I would still like to go to France, its getting less possible. Even though, while most French Canadians have some Indian blood, mine is 100% French and Catire.
Thanks!
DeleteThe problem I have is that I do not have much spirit for writing these days. That is the first thing to overcome. Imagine if I were into a writing mode all what I could say on Gilets Jaunes and Brexit....
I have followed the Bolivia situation closely, and it seems the opposition has managed it in a good way! Kudos to the military for handling it in a democratic manner. I really hope Añez et.al. can get a credible election committee in place, and that serious parties will participate in the spring election. Activists unproven in politics such as Camacho, old corrupt guys as Mesa, the very weird conservative Chi; well let's hope they gather less support and that some robust parties that gather support from many regions can reach power (not MAS). One big issue with Bolivia is that the regions/tribes can only unite on one thing; the hate for Chile. Other than that they don't trust each other, Cambas, Altiplanos, Cochalas...
ReplyDelete