My Letter in Today's New York Times
Below is my letter to the editor, published in today's New York Times, responding to the paper's editorial last week. As the letter notes, I agree with the Times that dialog between the battling factions here is urgent. But let us not forget as well the open racism of key elements of that opposition, including the outrageous racial attacks against indigenous people in Sucre, captured in the video posted above. Sometimes what's required is more complex than the Times' beckoning from a hemisphere away, to 'just get along.'
August 21, 2008
LETTER
Racism in Bolivia
To the Editor:
Re “Everybody Loses” (editorial, Aug. 15):
You are right that dialogue between Bolivia’s battling political factions is key. But there is a larger point.
President Evo Morales, despite important missteps, is the political expression of the desire of the nation’s impoverished and indigenous majority to chart a new course for the country. His victory in the referendum, with more than two-thirds of the popular vote, confirms that. Yet instead of negotiating, Mr. Morales’s opponents have thrown obstacles in the way.
Some, although not all, of Mr. Morales’s opponents are driven by overt racism against the country’s first indigenous president. In May, indigenous supporters of Mr. Morales were marched by a mob to the center of one opposition city, Sucre, stripped of their clothing and made to chant anti-Morales slogans.
Genuine dialogue takes two sides, and until a responsible opposition unhooks itself from alliances with racists and radicals, Bolivia will continue to be ungovernable.
Jim Shultz
Executive Director
The Democracy Center
Cochabamba, Bolivia
posted by The Democracy Center at 12:25 PM
71 Comments:
Jim, I don't think Bolivia needs you or any other foreigner to mail any letters to foreign newspapers telling them your biased point of view.
Racism existed in Bolivia since the beginning of the republic, but it has been fed by Evo Morales himself. Now racism runs rampant in our streets and schools and it is all Evo Morales' and his Fascist-Comunist followers' fault.
Well Pablo, since you speak for all Bolivians (no arrogance there) about who and who does not have the right to have an opinion about "your country", perhaps you can tell us where in the video of the attacks in Sucre Evo can be seem telling the perpetrators to do it. After all, it is all his fault, as you said.
Thank you for giving us a direct glimpse of the mindset in operation in Santa Cruz today, and Sucre in May.
Sorry, Anonymous. Evo can not be seen on that video (but I guess we all know that).
Why don't you ask something smarter...and -if you really want a response- give your name.
Thank you.
Why do lefties insist in re-writting history to benefit their cause?
What happened in Sucre was not racially motivated, it was a politically motivated attack, heck I would not even call it an attack, but an act of self defense. Even the Spaniard basketball team picture had more racism than what expired on Sucre.
Sucre was under direct threat from the Masistas who marched onto the city with the intention of "teaching them a lesson." The people that got caught were not innocent bystandards nor were they peaceful protesters. (Now I can't recall if these were made to apologize for the colleagues killing that kid in Sucre)
If you want to show racism in Bolivia, you don't need to lie or invent incidents that never took place, you can simply talk about the UJC and show the financial ties they have with the prefectura. There are plenty of pictures of them with their swastivas.
Another thing, Amelia Pando USED to be one of the better journalists, but now she is clearly a sell out. Even on the clip she is manipulating by misrepresenting. COTAS is a private company and they can do as they please (within the law & license) with their network. I have yet to see an imparcial report on TVB, so they are the last to talk about censorship. They are actually a propaganda machine with a significant portion of the programming coming from Cuba and Venezuela courtesy of TvSur. Ironic how she gets her grannie panties in a bunch over Cotas not carrying the TBV signal (as if you couldn't get it over the air) yet she (nor any of the TVB reporters) has never ever said about Cerrudo and the attacks on Unitel, Cadena A, PAT, Panamericana, Fides, etc.
Now can we expect to see any simpathy for the Christians, animal rights, pacifist, or even the indigenous anti-evo demonstrators that routinely get beat up and humilliated in Plaza Murrillo? Can we expect to see a Youtube Video with melodramatic music of congresswomen being beat up for trying to attend a session of congress? Of course not.
There is plenty of blame to go around, and to say that what happened in Sucre was a racist incident is merely a myopic analysis, because we all know that it was far more complicated than a white vs brown fight.
To some extent I agree with Pablo. Gringo hippies tend to idealize the Bolivia indigenous. It is easy for them because after all they are only visiting here and they ignore the ugly side of them. Would ever expect Jim to talk about how Aymaras practiced cannibalism in Achacachi? or write about Quechua racism against their Aymara slaves? or highlanders vs. lowlanders? Sure he denounces the "croat elites," but has he ever condemn the big smuggling sindicates in Eloy Salmon or Siete Calles? Or the transportistas, agueros, glp smugglers? of course not, he can more easily get funds from 1st world lefties like himslef if blames it all on whitey.
Bolivia is far more complicated.
Pablo,
Thank you for opining, branding yourself as "Pablo", and requesting others to provide nomenclature for themselves as a threshold issue for dialogue with you. (It aids clarity and contributes to responsible comments.)
I think you are correct as to this arguable twofold claim that I bifurcate for clarity: 1) "Racism existed in Bolivia since the beginning of the republic,"
2) "but it has been fed by Evo..."
I respectfully disagree with your seemingly parochial opinion that restricts the global marketplace of ideas to only Bolivians or those you approve. As a Bolivian-American, please indulge me if only Bolivians in Bolivia meet your standards for expression of viewpoints on international forums. I and many of Jim's international readership probably consider it significant if you would set forth your positions more fully and provide factual support or a cognizable pattern of reasoning. I, for one want to understand your mindset. I think that would allow understanding one or more of the attitudinal barriers to possible plans of action to solve Bolivia's problems (including but not limited to racism).
You made an unsupported, controversial, universal claim about rampant racism in Bolivia: "it is ALL Evo Morales' fault". Since you encourage that one "ask something smarter", could you please write that in a verifiable argument form so readers can test it for validity? For brevity, it is a given that Evo's misstatements, policies and lack of a formal education has contributed to polarization which may have "fed" racism so no need to argue that point.
I thank you in advance for gracing us with your thoughtful response. It is an opportunity to show the global community of opinion-makers that Santa Cruz's youth is "smart".
Yep.
Anon 2:18, you just described what Jim et al prefers to simplify as Morales' "important missteps."
By the way, did Jim inform the NYT that "Bolivia's first indigenous president" doesn't speak an indigenous language and that a gringo like Sanchez de Lozada probably spoke more Quechua than he did?
;-)
The Croats are Morales' Jews
Beni is Morales' Katrina
Thanks Jim.
I've got another request for you now that it is clear to you what kind of bias their editorial desk uses. How about refusing to give the NYTimes your interviews until they start writing fair articles on Bolivia? And tell your friends too. That might give them a real message.
Gracias Jim, from the heart. I have, and I'm sure I am not alone amongst white English speaking Bolivians or Bolivian Americans, many times felt sick to my stomach by the lies that the New York times "South America "correspondent"" Simon Romero and the NYT Editorial page often peddles about our nation.
Please, continue to use your voice to raise the important issues: necessary dialog and need to quell the racist fascism -because there is no other word- of some of these groups.
Grindio, well spoken. Start a blog already man!
Pablo, you can't possibly be serious that racism in our country is Evo's fault, he's only been president for 2 and a half years!! No, it goes back much farther, and is much deeper and instincive than any of us care to admit.
But I'm sure even Nelson Mandela was accused by the white minority of "creating racism" in apartheid South Africa, it goes with the territory.
Evo "se defiende" in Aymara (he speaks some) and very little Quechua. Yes, he is fluent in neither. But Goni, man he could barely speak Spanish!
And I would attribute this fact to the RACISM in Bolivia which has led so many campesinos to teach their children only Spanish, as is common in El Alto, because Aymara and Quechua were never, until now, the language of POWER, de la "gente bien".
Paz!
This post has been removed by the author.
Pablo wrote that racism is "...all Evo Morales' and his Fascist-Comunist followers' fault". I'm sure when he has time, Pablo will support his contention so we may test his argument for validity and soundness. My belief is based on the idea that Santa Cruz's youth (relative to the age of its leaders) is "smart" thus one must meet their demands to "name" oneself and ask "smarter questions". Clearly they are unlike their leaders Marinkovic and Costas.
Unlike learned Pablo, Costas (Mr "Yo soy el unico comandante") is regarded as suffering from emotional immaturity, low self-esteem, and accused of being "drunk with power" according to the expert opinion of the dean of the psychology department of one of Bolivia's best universities. See corresponding article on Erbol's website or at this link:
http://abi.bo/index.php?i=noticias_texto_paleta&j=20080820175818&l=200805030044_Costas_enfrenta_problemas_de_salud,_seg%FAn_una_psic%F3loga._(ABI).
Just because Pablo is a product of the same socio-economic and academic environment that molded Costas values and mindset, one should not think Pablo makes wild, unsupportable claims like Costas does since Costas' statements are a function of his mental health issues.
In contrast to Evo and his Andean-based culture, Pablo and his camba cultural elites are very advanced. They learn rapidly from their US model as evidenced by the cultural element they pride themselves on (their "magnificas") and how they market their careers in the manner of Paris Hilton, Pamela Anderson or Kim Kardashian's internet sex tapes. See the marketing tools they use on this cambita's scandalous website which contains adult content, NOT FIT FOR MINORS:
http://antoinettelazarte.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2008-06-12T15%3A31%3A00-07%3A00&max-results=7
Crooked Brain said,
"By the way, did Jim inform the NYT that "Bolivia's first indigenous president" doesn't speak an indigenous language and that a gringo like Sanchez de Lozada probably spoke more Quechua than he did?"
Crooked, the dribble from your so called brain stinks of pure ignorance but it reaches moronic levels when it focuses on the native experience in Bolivia.
Franco
"By the way, did Jim inform the NYT that "Bolivia's first indigenous president" doesn't speak an indigenous language and that a gringo like Sanchez de Lozada probably spoke more Quechua than he did?"
Crooked face: and your point is???
I have worked on the Navajo Reservation in education for
over ten years. This generation barely speak their own language. A Certificate of Blood card is needed to qualifiy as a Navajo.
An estimated one-third of the Navajo speak their language (my opinion is that it is less than that). Yet try to claim that they are not Navajo because they don't speak the language and you could find yourself in trouble. Language is not the deciding factor in deciding if one is indigenous or not! The only truly indigenous people come from the Rift Valley!.
Crooked Face's ("crook") point is to:
1) file a flurry of negative attacks that diminish Bolivia's president;
2) obfusticate the issues arising from Jim's topics (today, Racism in Bolivia); and
3) burn out the commentators and readers of this blog so as to diminish the value of the Democracy Center (DC) such that people stopping visiting; and
4) impede the DC's work so its efforts to inform and educate fail.
Crook, who is not Bolivian and protests when anything is not posted here in "Shakespeare's English" does this in benefit of Goldberg's plan to Balkanize Bolivia and control its natural resources by and through racist elites like Marinkovic, Costas and Dabdoub.
Based on past drive-by ad hominem attacks on my substantive comments, one can conclude that Goldberg assigned a US Mission staffer to attack my posts expressing the above idea. Generally, that is done by the ridiculous notion that the pro-Bush transnationals have resources at their disposal. The counterpoint is that Bolivia's and Latin America's resources matter. For example, the world is changing and no longer content to serve as Big Oil's colonies as set forth in this article: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/19/business/19oil.html?_r=1&scp=3&sq=big%20oil%20resources%20control%20venezuela&st=cse&oref=slogin
Why is it that (almost) all reactions to Jim´s posts, from both sides of the political divide, cannot rise above the level of tired slogans, clichés and insults? How about some serious arguments?
RE: Pablo above.
Let us note that an English-speaking Bolivian in Santa Cruz does not believe it is appropriate to say that there is anti-indiginous racism in Bolivia, or if there is it is the fault of the indiginous man who is president.
The following is also true:
Certain radical Islamists do not believe that the holocaust was real.
Many Serbs do not believe that their country attacked their neighbors.
McDonalds thinks that Big Macs are healthy and certain tobacco makers think the same about cigarettes.
The human mind has an enormous ability to warp the facts to suit self-interest.
By the way, FYI, the sun rotates around the sun, because I believe it to be so.
First, kudos to Anon 8:19PM for a witty counterargument to Pablo.
Second, as to Anon 7:29PM's question why insults instead of serious arguments:
Every time serious arguments are posted,-almost exclusively supporting the democratic government of Bolivia- it seems Goldberg's underlings or other right wing nuts launch a Rovian ad hominem attack. Why does that puzzle you?
Are you Barack Obama to not know that Rove-Goldberg negative attacks work?
Consider McCain. He promised to not go negative. When he was almost 10 points down in the polls, he decided to go negative and hired those Rove staffers who led Bush's negative attacks on Kerry. The result: after two weeks of falsehoods and negative attacks against Obama instead of engaging in serous argument, McCain is up almost five points over Obama as a result of said negativity. Now, to stop the bleeding, Obama belatedly started to attack McCain as much as to engage in serious argument.
This blog does not operate in a vacuum. Evo is nowhere near as bright or educated as Obama. Nor are those who support him as laden with the resources of Obamas. If Obama and his supporters cannot avoid getting into mudslinging with the Republicans, how can you expect more from those of us seeking to build a just, united Bolivia with a functioning, participatory democracy built from the ground up?
Tell you what, I for one will try to not get pulled off of my rhetorical ground. But I must still tell it like it is about the evil deeds of Goldberg’s torture-based Republicans and their racist proxies. They, who shed so much Bolivian blood to preserve the status quo, can not hurt me with their powerless words.
This post has been removed by the author.
Los unicos oriundos de Bolivia somos los Urus...the rest are all croats as far as I'm concerned.
Grindio is largely right.
The 'culture' of Santa Cruz is crass, obscene, and intensely racist. It lacks the depth and the moral structure of that which as been sourced from the Andean regions.
THANK YOU Jim for your work and for sending a letter to the NYT.
The latin correspondents for the NY times, and Washington Post, such as Marcela Sanchez. (did I write Sanchez) seem to write on behalf of Goni Sanchez or the Company In Action.
Thanks again for clarifying biased and distorted news and editorials.
Goni and Costas are so dying of envy because Evo an "indio de mierda" has accomplished more in two years than they ever did.
Croats and jews
Beni and Katrina?
What a bunch of nonsense.
LOL Chasqui.
Anon 11:12 and Grindio, attacking "cambas" in general, or Santa Cruz's culture or women in a political argument is as stupid an argument as denying that some (not all) of Evo's opposition are fascsist, racist and violent groups.
Certainly the Union Juvenil Cruceñista, funded by the Comite Cívico and the Prefecture is a fascist, racist group, which uses violence to intimidate the general population of Santa Cruz and Sucre into furthering their "operators" political goals. Just watch the video to see that.
Which political operators of these urban paramilitaries ARE part of Santa Cruz's elite. But Santa Cruz is much more than Evo's opposition, it is filled with Bolivians like the rest of the country and deserves better than to have anyone project Northern "culture wars" or colonialist "indian vs. whitey" simplifications.
Racism and poverty, are the true enemies on both sides. That is why negotiations and discussion between the different political leaders is so important.
Mr. Schultz's letter to the New York Times is exemplary because it does not sink into this political name-calling and insults, it simply points out the facts of racism and the need for compromise. This is closer to reality and puts pressure on the UCJ (youth-thug appendage of the Comite Civico) because their "natural ally" is the State Department and they can't be seen to be a racist group (as they are) supported directly by the US.
gratuitous name calling
cheers, pollucks!
Mr. Aureliano Buendia,
I was anon @ 11:12, and I am now a different anon. But the mind typing this is the same.
As for my remarks about Santa Cruz, I will let them stand, since the events of the past 5 years are 1/2 of the basis for them.
The other half of the basis is my personal experience, living there for nearly 2 decades, prior to the ascent of MAS. I have not-so-fond memories of entire towns that had made it their purpose to forbid any Kolla from living within town limits; of classmates of mine that piled into pick up trucks "Pa' ir a patear los collas 'e mierda" in the poorer districts. Of their long disgusting conversations of how they liked fucking their maids.
And so on, and so forth. But I assure you, Santa Cruz is a city that has its charms, but which also harbors an exceedingly ugly people.
The irony is that most of the camba come kollas are k'ollas themselves as for the true camba comes from tierra adentro and were traditionally characterized by being guarani, pata-pilas with their sombrero de saó and extremely poor. The wealth in cambalandia (Sta. pué is very la-la landish vis-à-vis La Paz east coast cultural snobbery that cuts across races and economic status) was created by either foreigners or colla carpetbaggers from the various regimes. So the provincialism from their younger generation is very ironic.
The rise of the UJC is an extremely worrisome as it is based on this false sense regional pride-superiority complex that appeals to the worst in today's cambas. Their use of nazi paraphernalia is in the public record and Bolivia & Evo should use this to start a case for sanctions against them and all of those who provide them comfort by the international community. If the UCJ is proven to be a neo-nazi party, the US is bound by law to revoke the visas of any and of the members and immediate relatives. Nothing would hurt cruceños more than knowing that their support of this abomination can barred them from setting foot on their dreamland of the good ol' USA where collas, cambas, gauchos, braziquinhos and spaniards are all simply dirty mexicans to most gringoes.
C'mon, Quasimodo, make up your mind! Are ya gonna call me "Crook" or "Mole?" (I like "Mole" better. It makes me sound so... mysterious and sinister!) LOL
Stop whining of "ad hominem" attacks. Therein lies the problem. You use "ad hominem" too much! Get a synonym book and mix up your lefty hyperbole a little. C'mon, entertain us! Your "debate" class shoulda taught you better.
The fact is Bolivia's "first indigenous president" neither has an "indigenous name" nor speaks an "indigenous language." He can barely pronounce "Kausachun coca, "Wañuchun gringos", for el Ekeko's sake!
Reminds me of Obama trying to pass himself as African American rather than biracial.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=17958438
;-)
The Croats are Morales' Jews
Beni is Morales' Katrina
Croat Goni lovers:
Accept defeat like real men. It seems that the hijitos de papa, and the brainwahed just want to cry foul without any concerns to veracity.
Go home please, Europe is waiting for you. Leave now, or are you waitng to get refugee visa status in Miami?
Chasqui, very true.
I cannot take anonymous 1:58 "assurance" that Santa Cruz is a city "which harbors an exceedingly ugly people". For one, I have been there myself, and have family and friends in that city who are not racists or provincial in their outlook.
The fascists and outright assholes he (she?) speaks of are but a small fraction of Santa Cruz de la Sierra's population and a tarnish on its name, which carries the great social libertarian tradition of "Los Igualitarios" and Andres Ibañez in the undercurrents.
As anon 2:18 said before, Bolivia is more complex than "foreign lefties" tend to think. However, this does not
mean that I agree with his/her other statements. Rather I agree with anon 10:19 that many commentators use this complexity to "cry fouls without any concerns to veracity". But anon 10:19, are you surprised to agree with an "hijito de papa"? I'm sick of this name calling and polarization. We can all do better.
"The fascists and outright assholes he (she?) speaks of are but a small fraction of Santa Cruz de la Sierra's population and a tarnish on its name, which carries the great social libertarian tradition of "Los Igualitarios" and Andres Ibañez in the undercurrents."
So what if they are a minority. They are vociferous, and are at the forefront of this political struggle. They are who they are, and they are the muscle of the 'Nacion Camba' movement. As for the rest of the population in that city, their silence is complicit, and for that reason, I write them off as being one and the same.
Furthermore, you are conflating American political philosophies with what is basically simply xenophobia. They have not studied any U.S. constitutional principles, much less their own constitution, and are thus unable to place their thinking in the proper context. What we are dealing with, in Santa Cruz, is really not alot different from the mindset that the Deep South in the USA had, before the great Civil Rights movement fixed things.
In that sense, it is an old and familiar beast. And the U.S. State Department is skillfully manipulating it to the their advantage.
Wow! I see I have been mentioned more than once in the comments since yesterday. Well... I don't have as much time as you people do for commenting on blogs (I have to do it from an Internet Café) so I'll just say a few short things. First of all I'd like to thank "El Grindio" ¿? for allowing me the time for a reply; that's nice of him and I appreciate it for what it's worth.
OK. Now to the (short) replies:
- NO. I don't speak for all Bolivians and never pretended to.
- the Anon 2:18 has an excellent view of the situation and I think he practically explains all the issues that arose.
- I never "branded" myself as Pablo, I was christened with that name.
- What is a Bolivian-American? aren't all Bolivians, Americans?
- I still "opine" (el grindio dixit) that racism in Bolivia has gotten worse and it's all Evo Morales' handiwork (That does not mean that others -the MAS party and the Morales administration- did not add their grain of sand to contribute to this bigotry). Like Aureliano Buen Díaz says, there is a small fraction of people in Santa Cruz who always were racist but that does not mean all of Santa Cruz is. The problem is that Evo Morales points to ALL CAMBAS (or all cruceños or all the 'media luna') to be this or that way -the same as anon 1:58, 11:12 and el grindio do when they speak of Santa Cruz and her culture.
- Evo is not "indigenous". he is mestizo just like the majority of Bolivians, such as myself.
- I strongly doubt that the whites in South Africa said that racism was Mandela's fault but, anyhow, mandela did not replace one race's superiority with another, he went for equality. This is not true for Evo Morales, he is creating different classes of citicenship where indigenous people will have more rights than the "rest" of the people.
- "drunk with power" Now, this is the ring for Evo Morales' finger; couldn't describe him better. i talked to Evo Morales in person when he was a Diputado. The man that I see on TV today is another persona altogether.
- Excuse me? I'm not from the same academic or socioeconomic background as Governor Rubén Costas. I am not "camba", but I am not "Kolla" either. I am from Cochabamba and I am not part of any "elite". Plus, I consider an offense (yes, an offense to the people and women of Santa Cruz, Bolivia), the words of El Grindio where he hints that they are some sort of pornographic stars, all of them. That's outright disrespectful and I won't stand it.
- I do not deny that there is anti indigenous racism in Bolivia. There is, just like in Perú, Ecuador, Colombia, Mexico, Argentina, Brasil, Chile, Paraguay, Uruguay, Venezuela and practically every country where there still are indigenous people. My point is that Evo Morales uses this racism, he feeds it, and causes it to multiply many fold in his speeches and communications laden with hate messages.
- "The 'culture' of Santa Cruz is crass, obscene, and intensely racist. It lacks the depth and the moral structure of that which as been sourced from the Andean regions." THIS QUOTE IS AN EXAMPLE OF RACISM.
- Too bad poor anonymus (I don't know what number) did not do anything to stop his classmates from going "kolla-bashing" or denounced them to the proper authorities. Now, 50 years later he comes around. TSK TSK.
- Boys have been going to bed with their maids since time everlasting in La Paz, Cochabamba, Sucre, Oruro, Tarija, Chuquisaca, Beni, Pando and Potosí and if you ask people from other south american countries they will tell you the same. If you (anon xxx) did or said nothing against it, it is your problem.
- I repeat. All this discrimination and deepening of differences is Evo Morales' fault. His and his followers'
- Lastly, paraphrasing the last Anon "I'm sick of this name calling and polarization. We can all do better."
"- "The 'culture' of Santa Cruz is crass, obscene, and intensely racist. It lacks the depth and the moral structure of that which as been sourced from the Andean regions." THIS QUOTE IS AN EXAMPLE OF RACISM."
How can it be racism, when it has been justified by both observation and personal experience?
They are racists, pure and simple. In the absence of a proper ideology (be it libertarianism, socialism, you name it), the political motivation of a people has to go the route of fascist impulse. Hence the racism I mentioned.
"I do not deny that there is anti indigenous racism in Bolivia. There is, just like in Perú, Ecuador, Colombia, Mexico, Argentina, Brasil, Chile, Paraguay, Uruguay, Venezuela and practically every country where there still are indigenous people ..."
Captain Obvious, I see.
But, after making this astute observation, you devolve into menial politicking.
Is it your purpose to turn this into a he said / she said affair?
No, that is not my intention, I'm through. Thank you and good night.
It is obviously your intention.
You are here, vociferously supporting a secessionist movement, using apologetics that are almost a cut and paste from sites like the Free Republic.
Who are you working for?
Furthermore, you are conflating American political philosophies with what is basically simply xenophobia
Anon,
Not at all. Google "igualitarios" or "Andrés Ibañez". The term "social libertarian" may not be exact- but I used it so our Northern audience can understand.
However, I clearly referred to the undercurrent of Santa Cruz. I am in no way attributing this noble heritage of all Cruceños to the fascist thugs of the UJC or their political operators in the Comite Cívico.
My point is that, as Pablo has noted, your and Grindios generalized statements about Santa Cruz culture in general and on Grindios part women vis a vis ONE pornographic blog, were dumb and an insult to Santa Cruz, and therefore Bolivia.
I otherwise agree fairly closely with both of your arguments, but that attack on Santa Cruz is just not acceptable, and not necessary to make the point.
Pablo, todos somos Americanos, claro! Debi decir Bolivianos y Boliviano-USamericanos.
I belive your intention is honest debate, however you have an ingrained bias against Evo and in defense of the indefensible fascist "autonomy" movement.
You will never read me attacking Santa Cruz or any fellow Bolivian personally, culturally or socioeconomically. As you can see, I will instead defend our compatriots even when the expediency of a political argument could lead to a different path. But don't try to use my arguments to defend the widespread racism and overt urban paramilitaries who enforce it.
I still trust, as is happening before our collective eyes, that the Igualitario spirit (Plan Tres Mil autonomo!) will redeem Santa Cruz and return its standing and name to the place that its good people deserve.
Great post and a necessary letter.
As a Bolivian myself, I thank Jim for representing the social and moral conscience that cholos like Pablo never had and probably will never have, for they live in denial of their origin and the color of their skin.
They are unaware of their own history, and very afraid of the new country that this indio presidente wants to make possible.
Sorry I didn't write the letter myself.
Hey Grindio, what did you score on the LSAT's? Most of your posts resemble Kaplan test prep classes.
Definition: "opine"
to opine (third-person singular simple present opines, present participle opining, simple past and past participle opined)
1. To hold or state as an opinion.
I had to opine on the situation because I thought a different perspective was in order.
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/opine
Saying "Governor" to the racist prefect-who usurped the powers and title of Governor-Pablo wrote 'I'm not from the same academic or socioeconomic background as Governor Rubén Costas. I am not "camba"... I am not part of any "elite".'
In contrast to the above, Pablo previously wrote in his profile: "Location: Santa Cruz de la Sierra: Departamento Autónomo de Santa Cruz: Bolivia"
I opine that Pablo lacks credibility. He claims he is not from Santa Cruz. That trick masks his comments as those of an uninterested party. The facts prove he identified himself as from the same location/socio-economic background as Costas.
As to Pablo's claims that Evo is responsible for "all" the racism in Bolivia, view the evidence of camba acts of racist violence when Costas, Branko and Pablo's fellow racist cambas ambushed the police chief:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5do1US_KC8&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbOgeoJmh0E&feature=related
Cambas being described as racists by an international human rights organization:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImEdFARxMDw&feature=related
Pablo and ALL cambas show themselves to be "ugly" as an anonymous poster described them. This is because by failing to speak out against violent racism, they are complicit in those acts of racist violence that chills the freedoms of ALL who would build a participatory democracy from the bottom up.
Grindio, don't be ridiculous. How can "ALL" million+ cambas "show themselves" to be anything on this Democracy Center blog?
You, as the above anonymous who spent 20 years in high school or university with upper middle class "hijitos de papa" in Santa Cruz, are simply conflating a fascist, extremist and ultra minority movement, with the general population who are being harrassed by them! Tsk. Tsk.
from Bolpress:
"Mientras los vecinos desde temprano debatían en mítines y reuniones en la rotonda del Plan. Llegado el mediodía se retiraron a almorzar momentos cuando los unionistas aprovecharon para aparecer. El pretexto que usaron para llegar al Plan fue que la "casa autonómica" había sido invadida por "masistas" y que el Plan "también es Santa Cruz". Estuvieron respaldados por movilidades y la guardia vieja de la UJC que siempre se mantuvo detrás."
The people of Plan Tres Mil, area with large K'olla (La Paz) and/or Cochabamba internal immigrant population, but also a large Camba component, that is, the original working class of Santa Cruz, self-organized in order to carry on with their business in the face of a UJC imposed "civic strike", the buddings of some "participatory" something or other for sure.
Many people throughout the city, as the article
http://bolpress.com/art.php?Cod=2008082411&PHPSESSID=e3e098bcbbcbb722b420172fc1f64f3f
describes, were against the "paro civico" or grudgingly complied at the risk of having their livelihood or their own bodies beaten or destroyed by thugs who sport swastikas.
But many, many of these people, Grindio, are proudly Cambas, proudly identifying both with Evo-s process of change and with "autonomy". I of course opine that what they really want is descentralization, and Evo has no choice but to give that.
Furthermore, Evo is willing to give much of the autonomy even which they demand, but NOT the unreasonable demands of the "Civicos" political operators, which are reduced to FREEZING LAND REFORM, and taking control of the economic resources created by nationalization in order to prevent populist national programs and invest in the industrial-export oriented fashion which is also important, but too exclusively in their lopsided vision of development
Evo is not against all Cambas, as has been claimed, but has made clear statements that autonomy is going forward and that he respects that desire of Santa Cruz. You should join us on that page, because from there, the true fascists bullshit is more clearly lit and highlighted for the world to see, and the New York Times strawman arguments that Morales is "oppressing" and entire region are clearly dissolved.
Do you want to know why many Cruceños harbor ill will towards Collas? I can tell you in one word that summarizes their feelings: Terebinto.
This post has been removed by the author.
Like Aureliano's comment above:
'How can "ALL" million+ cambas "show themselves" to be anything...', many learned individuals express anger or apathy about the claim of Santa Cruz being racist because they do not understand the complexity of that social pathology.
Regarding the meaning of the term “racism”, typically many of them, whites or members of the dominant class fixate on certain types of despicable acts by an individual of a dominant racial class against an individual of a minority racial class.
The significance of racism in Santa Cruz does not lie in the overt violent acts I documented by video links on this blog. The significance of its harm is in the way it has silently been institutionalized into the infrastructure of Santa Cruz’s body politic and society in general. It is such that even well meaning individuals like Pablo-by silent racism-perpetuate the societal harms caused by these evil, destructive social pathologies. According to Chesler’s article in “Contemporary Theories of Sociological Racism” (1976), those pathologies are manifest whenever “institutional procedures help create or perpetuate sets of privileges for whites and exclusions or deprivations for minorities”.
Using David Wellman’s field-specific definition in his “Portraits of White Racism”, racism is defined as “culturally sanctioned beliefs which, regardless of intentions involved, defend the advantages whites have because of the subordinated position of racial minorities”.
If one changes the term "white" to "whites/mestizos", that describes a Santa Cruz where white ogliarchs like Marinkovic have institutionalized advantages over dark-skinned minorities(in terms of power and wealth) in Santa Cruz as documented in the article supplied to us by Aureliano.
Santa Cruz’s Structural-Economic Racism:
1) Dark-skinned minorities are violently forced to adhere to the paros and not allowed to transport themselves around or work.
2) Whites like Marinkovic and Kuljis (whose hypermaxi markets worked unimpeded) have the advantage of having their business continue to produce for them by closing their doors and requiring their employees to come in the wee hours of the morning to work and then LOCKING THEM IN TO WORK.
3) Scapegoating or attacking Evo as a racist functions as an attack of Evo’s strategies for social change that can bring equitable relief to the disenfranchised urban poor or integrate and empower marginalized, rural indigenous peoples.
4) Pablo, Costas, Marinkovic, and ALL who voted for Costas (including dark-skinned 2nd generation immigrants from the Andean regions aka “camba-collas” or Mestizos like Pablo can be classified) defend the advantages of Marinkovic and other whites to have de facto Guarani slaves working their land (stolen from Guarani natives), pay sub-survival wages to the brown-skinned racial minorities of colla or camba derivation.
White/Mestizo Cambas-like Pablo-who hold themselves out as non-racist and sympathetic Whites/Mestizos are to blame for perpetuating racism just as much as the overt racists like Costas or Marinkovic. This is because they fail to act against or speak out against racism whenever possible to confront racism in other Whites/Mestizos when they come across it. By being members of the dominant racial group, who are granted privileges by being members of the racial group in that society, research shows they exhibit certain behaviors and attitudes which preclude other behaviors and emotional reactions. And that perpetuates the racism pathology. Thus they are racists on that level despite their well-meaning, possibly liberal mindsets. They unintentionally (although perhaps intentionally on a subconscious level) exacerbate the plight of the racism victims by their silence and complicity. By silence, they acquiesce and ratify perpetuating institutionalized oppression and racism in Santa Cruz.
My aggressive advocacy argues that Santa Cruz must realize that their silent racism perpetuates institutionalized racism and that non-racism and/or awareness of said injustice without being proactive is not possible. Their passive racism must become active anti-racism. They must collectively fight social injustice and their camba cultural blindspots by illuminating their understanding. Acknowledging their passive/silent racism is a good start.
Thus, I say to the Pablos of Santa Cruz or this blog’s readership regarding institutional racism in Santa Cruz, “by being apathetic, you are a pathetic, at your core” (which is a line of dialogue from one of my student films, long ago, which I might put on youtube if I find it).
Anon 3:38PM,
"Terebinto"?
That's all you have?
Racism, masked as a revengeful "ill feeling" for something long ago? That's like Mexicans being subjected to racism while yelling "Remember the Alamo".
Did you not get the memo? The MNR and the FSB made up over Terebinto and backed a camba as dictator, Banzer, to justify stopping President Torres' efforts at effecting social change and subsequently murdering him. Probably, you weren't born then so why dredge up perceived sleights.
So racism is a pathology?
W.A.B.O.B.S
Anyhow, I am Mestizo myself, and I find good things in both my origins, so I don´t like comments disqualifying one or another race. Most whites in Bolivia (I like to call them blancoides, since to me true whites came from the apenines to the northeastern regions of europe, and of course Great Britain) come from spanish families of lower social extraction, probably peasants or "campeches" in Spain. I talk about the bulk of the whites and mestizos here, not counting the counts, duques, etc, etc.
There are also turkish, lebanese, syrian and afghan families who somehow stood out and by now represent "traditional" families in the capitals of Bolivia.
Of course we also, as many american countries have a population of African descent, and mixed races of practically all sorts, even Asians.
So, I am convinced that to try to put the racial problem of Bolivia in a context of white vs dark skinned is deliberately stupid, and acceptable only to a very ignorant individual.
This blog needs to get some direction from its source, because at this point it only missinforms and creates inaccurate and very biased opinions about Bolivia´s political problem.
That is of course, if the intention is to solve any problem at all.
I emphasize that Bolivia has a POLITICAL PROBLEM more than a white vs dark issue; and on exit a quote for my dear grindios and such.
WIKIPEDIA
Redneck refers to a stereotype of usually rural, Caucasian (i.e. white) people of lower socio-economic status in the United States and Canada. Originally limited to the Appalachians, and later the South, the Ozarks, the Great Plains and the Rocky Mountains, this stereotype is now widespread throughout North America. Southern comedian Jeff Foxworthy defines "redneck" as "a glorious lack of sophistication," stating "that we are all guilty of [it] at one time or another."
This post has been removed by the author.
According to another anon and his powers to practice internet-psychology by virtue of being able to leave comments here as "anonymous", the long genealogy of racism as a pathology (which includes early psychological work on racism that regards it as an attibute of individual or social pathological outcome of a dysfunctional childhood)is in his field-specific scientific jargon: "BS".
According to more of the puffery of this most recent of the ignoramuses that hide their ignorance behind the "anonymous" smokescreen, one of the misconceptions about Bolivia is that it's not about structural racist-economics in Santa Cruz. No, it's only a "POLITICAL PROBLEM" and definitely not about a dominant class of people defining themselves as white whereas others are differentiated by them not being white.
When Bolivision's current anchorwoman, Gabriela Oviedo, was Miss Bolivia, she got herself into hot water upon responding to an innocuous question:
Interviewer: “What is one of the biggest misconceptions about your country?”
Gabriela Oviedo: "Um... unfortunately, people that don't know Bolivia very much think that we are all just Indian people from the west side of the country, it's La Paz all the image that we reflect, is that poor people and very short people and Indian people ... I'm from the other side of the country, the east side and it's not cold, it's very hot and we are tall and we are WHITE people and we know English so all that misconception that Bolivia is only an "Andean" country, it's wrong, Bolivia has a lot to offer and that's my job as an ambassador of my country to let people know much diversity we have." (emphasis added)
That's right, readers, Miss Bolivia thought her job was to inform the world that in Santa Cruz they are white and unlike the non-white indigenous types associated with Bolivia.
Maria Alvarez Plata, Bolivian Vice-Minister of Culture, must not of gotten another anon's memo about racism in Santa Cruz not being an issue and the declaration there only is a little "political problem". Ms. Plata called Oviedo’s statements “lamentable” and declared that “No person who represents us has the right to have such a racist outlook…”
The racist pathologies I discussed are a field of study at certain elite law schools, Critical Race Theory. They have been also studied in greater detail by social scientists, including those I referenced previously. If one were to google the terms pathology and racism in Google books or Google scholar, one would get a plethora of hits. Perhaps another anon can provide us with some cites supporting his theory of how institutionalized structural-economic racism that oppresses majorities is only a "political problem".
I for one won't hold my breath waiting for a response based on anything but another anon's half-baked ideas that would never see this area of the bandwidth spectrum but for the ability to post as anonymous and thus hide their prior comments which show their ignorance.
I conclude by thanking this anon for tasking himself to his apparent research limits by pulling the non-funny comedian Foxworthy "evidence" from wikipedia. I'll use it:
If the reader plugs in Anonymous 6:41PM into the Foxworthy definition of "redneck" it proves that Bolvian mesizo (Anonymous 6:41PM) is a redneck by how his comment shows his "glorious lack of sophistication" about the problem, cause and possible solution to racism in Santa Cruz.
Grindio, do not put words in MY mouth.
I defended Santa Cruz, and I still do, because it is a great city, beautiful, prosperous to a certain degree, and as I said way at the beginning, FILLED WITH BOLIVIANS.
many learned individuals express anger or apathy about the claim of Santa Cruz being racist because they do not understand the complexity of that social pathology.
No, I express my opinion based on my factual knowledge and personal experience where applicable. If you need to discount my opinion based on who it is coming from, I am a "white" Paceño with proud roots in our mixed indigenous and european past. There you go. I'm a privileged whitey but I support the process of change and frankly as I see it, the "autonomist" ring leaders are a bunch of (fascist) clowns. The unification and rise of Suramerica will soon than later prove them as such, if first justice does not reach them and send them to jail since they are indeed violating our sacred Bolivian constitution every day.
I have personally been to Santa Cruz (have you?) and experienced both the beauty of its people and the racism of of its racists. Racism is a big problem in Santa Cruz, in all of Bolivia, and in the United States, despite many Usamericans' belief that the Civil Rights movement "fixed" everything.
But fascism, violence, separatism, the threat of civil war, these go far beyond any societal pathology of racism even if they are furthered and aided by it.
So I must repeat, (plus I find myself with some free time now that the olympics are over) and as you have the courtesy to not insult a fellow truth seeker, I clarify again that it is your argument, not your person, your argument against Santa Cruz or against ALL Cambas, which is STUPID.
I will give anonymous 6:41 one point, at the bottom.
But first let me tear apart his simplistic argument:
I emphasize that Bolivia has a POLITICAL PROBLEM more than a white vs dark issue;
=
I emphasize that Bolivia has a Political Problem.
Ok, ok, no, really? But he tried to sneak in this:
more than white vs. dark issue
No, they are intertwined but not the in the simplistic way Grindio and original anonymous seem to feel by branding "all Cruceños as the problem" I feel it is equally SILLY to say that all Cambas are bad/racist/the enemy than to say that the racial issue is not paramount at many levels and degrees.
Ok now I will give anonymous 6:14 "la razon". not the crappy newspaper, I'm stipulating to his point that this blog needs some direction from its writers (-:
So I will take the liberty of copying the extremely sage, clarivoyant, and valuable advice which Mr. Schultz gave to those sorely needing it at the New York Times, initial topic of our lovely conversation.
Some, although not all, of Mr. Morales’s opponents are driven by overt racism against the country’s first indigenous president. In May, indigenous supporters of Mr. Morales were marched by a mob to the center of one opposition city, Sucre, stripped of their clothing and made to chant anti-Morales slogans.
Genuine dialogue takes two sides, and until a responsible opposition unhooks itself from alliances with racists and radicals, Bolivia will continue to be ungovernable.
Ok, so we disagree: I subscribe to the theories posted above that holds Crucenos collectively accountable for the INSTITUTIONALLY sponsored racist violence. Aureliano does not share that opinion.
When I was a youth, I attended: lunch with Banzer, tea at President Torrelio's home; Garcia Meza's parillada for his then ruling military junta; and was shown around Santa Cruz by the Falange's presidential candidate and Banzer's Foreign Minister Mario Guttierez's son. I saw a lot of things. I saw Guttierez's paramilitaries who then were serving Meza. They included a scary fellow named Palenque who threatened the US ambassador. The US Ambassador was called to DC and did not return until Palenque was found dead from an unknown assassin's bullets.
I think it is key that racism and institutionally sponsored racist violence should be addressed by all. Apparently the racist institutions of Santa Cruz have hired paramilitary matones again to kill collas or others for no worthy reason as in the case of this fellow sponsored by the UCJ, Unitel and the Comite Civico of Santa Cruz:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIHNtCEQNDs
EG:
Please tell me when, if even once, that Cruceño or Camba hordes have ever invaded the Occidente raping youths and killing women. Please, just one example.
Another Anon's request for me to answer their hypothetical is nontopical.
This blog is about racism in Bolivia today. Not about the Spanish conquest when hordes invaded, raped and killed. If one has a controversial claim relevant to the past couple of years then make it and support it with facts.
Anonymous 6:18 PM, why interesting that you bring up Terebinto.. is that a Fox News style tactic to "fair and balance out" the recent Civico strike and beating up of the Santa Cruz Police Chief (for crying out loud) so close to the 37th anniversary of the Santa Cruz sponsored, celebrated and collaborated bloody and fascist coup of Hugo Banzer Suarez? How many "indios comunistas de mierda" were beat up and assasinated by Banzer or Garcia Mesa's nazi-trained paramilitary forces? How is that different from the UJC violence of today except in degree?
No, if an eye for an eye were my philosophy, Grindio's arguments would hold sway. Fortunately we don't need a civil war, just dialogue as the majority want. The change in consciousness of South Americans, as Eduardo Galeano has said recently in Paraguay, is really transcending this type of conflict, but it cannot be done with a selective historical memory.
If you hanged at a party with Mesa, Banzer and those others, that would make you close to forty. You are either lying or your writing is too immature for someone your age.
That you had access to those circles implies that your family was part of the "rosca". That it was Palenque that was killed and not your family, it probably means that your gated community house was probably brought with dirty money and that you are trying to clean yourself by blogging and "investing" in Bolivia. Have you questioned the company your parents kept?
I'd like to hear how you rationalize your way out of this one.
Fox Network has indeed much more "fair and balanced" viewership than the other major news cable networks. Certified none other than celebrity lefty Alan Colmes and the latest Pew survey.
CNN: 51% Democrats, 18% Republicans, 23% independents
MSNBC: 45% Democrats, 18% Republicans, 27% independents
Fox News: 33% Democrats, 39% Republicans, 22% independents
http://www.alan.com/2008/08/17/fox-vs-msnbc-vs-cnn/
;-)
The Croats are Morales' Jews
Beni is Morales' Katrina
E-G, I haven’t posted recently because I really haven’t had anything to add to the discussion, but I found your 3:43 PM post interesting. I think it is the first time I can recall that you've tried to convince us of the validity of your point of view rather than try to win an argument / debate. Of course I disagree with the whole concept of “collective accountability” but relating your first-hand experience is strong testimony, even if a bit dated. That racism exists in Santa Cruz is beyond debate, (though it’s a logical absurdity to blame every non-mestizo / non-indigenous). I’ll argue your point a bit though. More obvious examples exist in a profile of employment. Entering any bank in Santa Cruz the clerks and account executives are invariably of European descent. I’ve never seen an indigenous account executive. It goes beyond race though; I’ve never seen a fat account executive. I’ll have to pay attention to other services. Gas stations will have a mix of indigenous and Euro. Restaurants will be whatever the owner is. No argument; racism exists and needs to be addressed, but morales seems to want to take it to the other extreme.
At the cantina where I ate yesterday, the manager had the TV on with morales waving his finger shouting “Patria o muerte” and she was just shaking her head. She was complaining that morales is governing only for his people and not for all Bolivians. “Some of us aren’t indigenous” she said. She’s not institutionally racist; she simply wants to make a living and sees her rights as a Bolivian citizen taking second place to the rights of other citizens based on her skin color. You need to visit Santa Cruz again. You-tube gives a tainted view based on violent minority actions.
Goldberg met secretly with Costas for an hour and a half yesterday. If the violent racist actions of the UCJ increase or decrease, might not that be a result of Goldberg's instructions to Costas?
http://www.abi.bo/index.php?i=noticias_texto_paleta&j=20080825235422&l=200808250032_Goldberg_(derecha)_sube_a_su_veh%EDculo_tras_la_reuni%F3n_con_Costas_(ABI).
"If the violent racist actions of the UCJ increase or decrease, might not that be a result of Goldberg's instructions to Costas?"
You're kidding, right?
This post has been removed by the author.
Norman would have us believe:
A) there is such a plethora of video recording being done by youtubers in Santa Cruz that it provides youtube with a disproportinate amount of footage of the UCJ's racist violence; and
B) to infer a causal relationship between what Goldberg says to Costas and Branko and what they have the UCJ do or not do is a joke.
So, let’s try it this way as to what I posted above:
Definition of Ambassador:
“Ambassadors are accredited to a foreign sovereign or to an international organization, to serve as the official representative of his or her own country”
Given Premises:
A) Goldberg is known as the "Butcher of Bosnia" for partitioning a nation-state into entities the Bush-Cheney regime could control.
B) Bush-Cheney have a geo-political agenda to control natural resources for their constituencies: transnational corporations that contributed to Republican coffers, hire Republican lobbyists and employ Bush-Cheney staffers, as in Haliburton's employment of Cheney post papa Bush’s government;
C) Costas lacks support from Argentina or Brazil, neighboring clients of the Media Luna's gas and oil;
D) Bush-Cheney’s failed attempt to overthrow Chavez proved they stoop to subversive, anti-democratic tactics to install puppet regimes to administer nations currently hostile to the idea of functioning as colonies (thus, Evo has cause for concern); and
e) Costas relies on the US recognizing the Republic of Santa Cruz and supplying arms, logistical support and funding when-and if-civil war breaks out in Bolivia.
Then, Conclusions:
A) It is likely that Goldberg's directions to Costas (during their above-referenced 1 1/2 hour secret meeting) will determine Costas' and Branko's directions to the UCJ. Thus, if the UCJ increases or decreases its racist violence MARKEDLY soon hereafter then is it not reasonable to conclude said violence is more a function of Goldberg's orders than independent thinking by Costas?
Alternative Conclusion:
B) Goldberg spent said time explaining the meaning of the US’s statement that they were freezing their policy positions toward Bolivia in deference to the upcoming change in the US government after the November elections and spent time answering their questions as to what they can get away with while still being supported by Goldberg and Bush-Cheney.
Bottom Line:
Ambassadors are ambassadors to Nation-States not to municipalities and not to departments of a Nation-State or to Non-State Actors like Branko’s civicos or his UCJ.
Note: The link between Costas and UCJ violence was established in an above-linked video of him with them when the state's police chief was mugged directly after meeting with Costas and Branko and refusing to sign over his police force to Costas to command, mercilessly clubbed and sent to the hospital only after Costas intervened when he thought the chief had been beaten sufficiently close enough to death.
Below is a video that shows Costas, who Republicans like Norman and Crucenos like Pablo apparently regard as worthy of defending and leading them whereas Goldberg treats Costas to secret meetings as if Costas was a foreign sovereign’s leader: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfeQ1cB6FyI&feature=related
A couple of clarifications from bottom to top: If I've come across as a Costas apologist before (I'm not sure as to what degree that might be true anyway), his recent actions since the referendum would lead me to withhold such defense. morales called for dialogue following the referendum which was first ignored and then rejected (failed). Dialogue though is exactly what is needed. morales di well in that.
Re the Unión Juveníl Cruceñista, while I know of no direct link between the UJC and Costas, their most recent actions with the police chief are deplorable and should be condemned. To my knowledge, Costas did not do that. E-G likes to post that Republicans are machine-stamped automatons incapable of independent thought - an intentional ignorance on his part.
As to what I find a joke - you missed the point completely. Look at what I highlighted. You imply that any change, positive or negative, in the actions of the "UCJ" (sic) would be a direct result of a Costas-Goldberg meeting. As nothing ever remains exactly the same, your premise is ridiculous.
As to You-tube, my point is that regardless as to how advanced technology gets wth internet publishing, you-tubing, etc. you are not an expert on Santa Cruz unless you come see for yourself. You make very broad statements about the general population. It sounds like you're overdue for a visit.
As to your "Given premises" it's too late for me to be arguing each point. Cheers.
Norman wrote: “…I know of no direct link between the UJC and Costas, their most recent actions with the police chief are deplorable … To my knowledge, Costas did not do that. E-G likes to post that Republicans are machine-stamped automatons incapable of independent thought ”
Hmm, why would that be?
As evidenced above, on a date known to Norman, Costas and Branko summoned the police chief. They demanded the chief sign and agree to put himself and his force under their command. He refused and was ambushed by Costas and Branko’s UJC shortly after leaving Costas office at night as can be seen in the video below. The fat, grey-haired man in the video, who finally calls off the death trap’s thrashing, is Costa (as Norman knows).
Hmmm, “no direct link between the UJC and Costas” despite the video proving the link? (Norman wants us to believe the UJC were just out for a walk with their clubs? And Costas just went out for a walk with them when the chief beat their clubs with his head? )
Hmmm, “Costas did not do that”?
I think it is persuasive proof that Norman’s wild claims (refuted above) are those of “machine-stamped automatons incapable of independent thought”, or those of a human ostrich. Apparently, Norman would have us believe all is well in Santa Cruz as we would see if we were there like he is (inferring we should just trust his analysis because none of us are an "expert"). Apparently, in Norman's scenario, if we were in Santa Cruz, we would not see the things we see in so many internet videos. He's right.
Said evidence, like the video below, generally is censored from being shown in Santa Cruz's media or being shown in all the media owned by the ogliarchs. Only channel 7, Television Boliviana (the government channel which is not under the ogliarchs' control) showed the video.
Below is the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbOgeoJmh0E
Firstly, Jim I echo previous thoughts when I take my hat off to you for your letter. My blood boils when I read South American reports in so-called liberal US broadsheets and their incessant lies of omission. You can be proud of doing a little to lift the lid on the Santa Cruz autonomous movement.
Secondly, this has been a highly entertaining blog response. My personal highlight has been "Croat Goni lovers". It just seems to capture every puerile insult that comes onto this blog. I am keeping it.
Thirdly, Costas and Marinkovic have shown their hand and their characters. Marinkovic, as we know from the Guarani land-stealing affair, is a piece of work, and his sponsorship of the UJC make his autonomous movement morally incapable of taking power. As for Costas, he has been guilty of encouraging coups and undermining a democratically elected leader. These are simply put, bad men leading a movement with some very nasty elements that are unacceptable in a modern society. Evo is not the perfect leader, we know that, but he is not a Costas or a Marinkovic.
Shame on you Bowsie.
You left out the mayor. After all when mayor Fernandez called for the armed forces to overthrow Morales' democratically elected government that should have earned him a spot in your troika of evildoers: municipal, departmental and non-governmental "leaders" of Santa Cruz.
E-Go, you posted on both threads!! I'm honored. Pardon if I only respond on one.
Okay, I wasn't as well read on this situation as I should have been. Mea culpa; I was more interested in the limited amount of Olympics coverage I could get here. I've read up a bit on it now and, rather than try to spin this left or right as some are wont to do, let me just say what I found.
It’s pretty much common knowledge in Bolivia (though if you don’t live here and only catch news from You-tube you may have missed it) that this all started about a month prior even before the referendum with the protests by the disabled throughout the country (even in MAS territory lest you cry “Costas”) to get evito to comply his campaign promises (signed into law in May 2007) for a 3,000 Boliviano per year bono for the disabled. In San