On 2008-05-07 01:38 +0100, dave.walters@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
allegedly wrote:
> Declaración Política de "La Chispa" (grupo simpatizante de la 4ª
> Internacional) Después del 4 de MayoŠ Bolivia Está en Peligro
>
> ¡Unidad para derrotar el golpe "autonómico" de las oligarquías!
>
> (...)
>
> <no spanish up my sleeve, so I had to see it through the Babel fish,
> still...>
I've read the argument a few times, by the Bolivian government,
Venezuelans, etc., that the "no" votes, combined with the abstentions,
made about or more than 50% of the population, hence... the referendum
was "invalid". Goodness me, what a pathetic and frighteningly lame
argument. "Frightening" if that's all they have.
What type of bloke is this Morales anyway? Sounds a bit like a
social-democrat castrate (meaning that social-democrats are castrates
inasmuch as they are well-meaning). I read a page about their
land-redistribution program, how it was being fought by the agrarian
aristocracy in eastern Bolivia, meaning government officials being
beaten up and shot at, etc.; how workers were being kept as slaves, and
so forth. So I'm wondering: why don't they send the military to root up
the whole lot? Shouldn't they?
They haven't, and it seems fairly obvious they don't plan to. What I've
read until now (not that much, but still some) sounded, as I said above,
frighteningly lame. If it were about showing teeth (and I believe it
is), one would have to conclude they don't have any. That's not the way
you deal with fascist gangs. At this rate, they're bone. Am I missing
something?
--
DF.
|
