What if Gore hadn't loved our democracy?

[Arrian]

It all depends on what exactly you mean by revolution. If you mean one that involves warfare, no we really don't need one of those. But there are other types of revolutions.

People actually paying attention, becoming involved... holding politicians accountable... that would be revolutionary!

-Arrian

[DanS]

I would like to see Dino's question answered. It is a good one.

[DanS]

Arrian: Responding to ridiculous posts leads to a proliferation of ridiculous posts. DanS' First Law Of Apolyton (and the Internet).

[Wycoff]

I think that Mexico would have had some form of revolution by now if not for the pressure release that massive illegal immigration provides for Mexico. Tens of millions of Mexicans fed up with the Mexican government have simply immigrated to the U.S. Why else do you think the Mexican government encourages illegal immigration? It helps keeps the old power structure entrenched.

There will be no change in Mexico so long as it remains so easy for Mexicans to come to the U.S.

[Velociryx]

Let the good times roll, Dan!



-=Vel=-

[MichaeltheGreat]

edit - in rely to DD's question:

That's almost like asking about accepting close Soviet elections, or like accepting continuous reelections of Chavez as being good for Venezuelan democracy.

Democracy in Mexico is like the Wizard of Oz. Dare you look at the man in the curtain? The only real difference, after little details like finding the head of a political enemy on the ranch of the President's brother, and the fiasco of '94, is that the ruling elite realized their arrogance and blatancy was just too much for the modern era. Outside of Chiapas, the people are too cowed for a real revolution, but dysfunction could have gotten far worse than it was, and that would rock the boat for the elite.

What you have on a national scale, is evolution from a more brutal form of Boss Tweed and Tammany style politics (it's a lot worse, but that's the closest American analogy), to something that is like a cross between depression era Chicago, and Tammany. There are disctricts across southern Mexico which are virtually feudal, and people know there are consequences to voting the wrong way.

The answer to your question depends on whether you believe a corrupt and fraudulent system will be allowed to evolve to democracy, or whether it needs to be broken and a new system built. The PAN was once viewed as a true opposition party - now it's a corrupt second face for the elites, and nothing more, but it helps create an illusion that continued one-party rule just won't sustain in the modern world. The PRI-PAN "coalition" is a joke. It's like Orwell's pigs eating at table in the farmer's house.

So is it better for the dispossessed to preserve an illusion which does not benefit them, or is it better to rock the boat and force a crisis? One is quiet political death, the other has risks.

Personally, if I was one of the Mexican poor, especially by southern and central Mexican standards, I wouldn't feel like I really had much to lose. Then again, my family and I might be too worried about next week's food to want to rock the boat, but I sure wouldn't be motivated by a feeling that sucking it up and accepting the status quo was good for me, for the country, or for democracy.

[SlowwHand]

He was behind the curtain, not in the curtain. You can't even get that part right.

[Wycoff]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat Personally, if I was one of the Mexican poor, especially by southern and central Mexican standards, I wouldn't feel like I really had much to lose. Then again, my family and I might be too worried about next week's food to want to rock the boat, but I sure wouldn't be motivated by a feeling that sucking it up and accepting the status quo was good for me, for the country, or for democracy.

If you were one of the Mexican poor, you'd probably do just what the Mexican government wanted you to do: illegally immigrate into the U.S. and start sending back remittances.

[MichaeltheGreat]

In Oz, yes, because there was one man at the controls.

In Mexico, you look, and all you see is layer upon layer of chiffon curtains - no controls, no man or men behind them, and nothing at all once the the fabric is drawn tight around your neck for the crime of trying to look.

How's that for a recovery from a typo, Tex?

[SlowwHand]

HEY!

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
MtG: What's better for the health of democracy in Mexico? That Obrador and his supporters accept the results of a close and hard fought election or that they set up a paralel "People's government" which questions the legitimacy of the elected government? Especially given the lack of any evidence for the fraud he asserts.

For God's sake, the PRD won many seats in the Mexican parliament. He claims that part of the election was clean. It's the Presidential election that seems to have raised his ire only because he lost that one. He's claiming subliminal messages cost him the presidency.

[SlowwHand]

Way to rock and fire, Michael.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Wycoff


If you were one of the Mexican poor, you'd probably do just what the Mexican government wanted you to do: illegally immigrate into the U.S. and start sending back remittances.

That's a real cute, typically gringo jerkoff response. First, the government doesn't "want" you to emigrate - they just don't care. Second, all the bogus counts of illegal immigrants aside (if you can't catch 'em, and don't know who they are, then how the **** does everyone come up with some magic count? Or is the common assumption simply that one out of every three spics must be a wetback?), there are clost to 100,000,000 people still in Mexico (including illegal immigrant gringo retirees, and illegal immigrant Chinese, Koreans, Indonesians, central and South Americans, all heading north for you-know-where). Most of those nearly hundred million are poor, and most of them don't go anywhere near the US. It takes money to get across the border.

Seems to me it's the US government that wants the illegals - cheap labor for your business masters, day laborers and maids for the yuppie scum, and someone to blame for every political problem under the sun.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
For God's sake, the PRD won many seats in the Mexican parliament. He claims that part of the election was clean. It's the Presidential election that seems to have raised his ire only because he lost that one. He's claiming subliminal messages cost him the presidency.

Certainly, the PRD has seats in Congress. I'm sure there are opposition legislative seats in Venezuela. Having an opposition in office looks good. Having it have so few seats that it has no more power than you allow it to have is double plus good.

Obrador himself is a little nuts in some of his accusations - he needs to get laid or spend a week at a spa or something, but the underlying point is still valid.

You have a political and electoral system that is fundamentally corrupt, manipulated and fraudulent. Everything from employers making their political preferences clear, and arranging paid time off to vote, plus transport to polling places, to cities where the municipal government and police enforce the local ruler's will, and God won't even help you if you're from a neighborhood that didn't vote right enough, to bribery, extortion and outright vote rigging. The PRI is still in power in many of its enclaves through a system of one hand holding out a free breakfast, while the other hand has a billy club. The entire political system is a fraud - not just one particular election.

[Wycoff]

[SIZE=1] Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Seems to me it's the US government that wants the illegals

Oh yes, the US government also wants it. Both governments do.