Comments on: The problem of Bolivia for the radical left http://hangingaroundonthewrongsideoftheworld.wordpress.com/2008/09/10/the-problem-of-bolivia-for-the-radical-left/ A space for rants, ramblings and cultural bemusement Thu, 01 Oct 2009 18:44:32 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: The Civil War in Bolivia › Voyou Desoeuvre http://hangingaroundonthewrongsideoftheworld.wordpress.com/2008/09/10/the-problem-of-bolivia-for-the-radical-left/#comment-160 The Civil War in Bolivia › Voyou Desoeuvre Sun, 28 Sep 2008 05:51:22 +0000 http://hangingaroundonthewrongsideoftheworld.wordpress.com/?p=149#comment-160 [...] Moll on the difficulties facing Evo Morales in Bolivia. What I find particularly interesting is the overlap between, for want of better terms, ethical and tactical questions. Moll is worried about Evo sending in the troops against the rich, racist protesters in Santa Cruz; both because if it worked it would reinforce the power of the state (the ethical concern) and because it might not work (the tactical one), fatally weakening the revolution/reform process currently underway. These concerns might look like they’re in tension with one another, if not flat-out contradictory, but I think they’re actually two sides of the same coin, an illustration of the difficulty of understanding the role of the state in revolution. [...] [...] Moll on the difficulties facing Evo Morales in Bolivia. What I find particularly interesting is the overlap between, for want of better terms, ethical and tactical questions. Moll is worried about Evo sending in the troops against the rich, racist protesters in Santa Cruz; both because if it worked it would reinforce the power of the state (the ethical concern) and because it might not work (the tactical one), fatally weakening the revolution/reform process currently underway. These concerns might look like they’re in tension with one another, if not flat-out contradictory, but I think they’re actually two sides of the same coin, an illustration of the difficulty of understanding the role of the state in revolution. [...]

]]> By: Moll http://hangingaroundonthewrongsideoftheworld.wordpress.com/2008/09/10/the-problem-of-bolivia-for-the-radical-left/#comment-141 Moll Thu, 11 Sep 2008 13:42:11 +0000 http://hangingaroundonthewrongsideoftheworld.wordpress.com/?p=149#comment-141 Hi John, Thanks for your comments. Part of this reply is in response to you and part in response to some other comments I've been reading on other sites. Well this is the thing, I agree that the only way to stop the small, very violent, right wing is to start exactly at the top. And it will have to be forcibly done, followed by trials and so on. My point is exactly that when I see the destruction and chaos being meted out by a minority of <i>very </i>rich people who are afraid of losing their inherited power, I support sending in an army to oppose them. My personal position that I started this post with then remains: if I support the use of force by the state in this situation, where does that leave my political stance on state violence? Aside from that, while not for a moment do I agree with the right-wingers that the government are terrorists or that they are freedom fighters, I am pointing out that on a theoretical level the right-wing are putting forward the argument that they are comparable because they are, now, in a similar position of opposition vis à vis the state. The argument that 'if we shot them now, then when they are in power they can shot us' may seem trite, but it is unfortunately the basis of the problem, both practically and theoretically. The legitimacy of the state in Bolivia has been weakened. Partly by the use of violence to bring about change in the past, and partly by Morales' symbolic position as an alternative to 'normal politics'. On a practical level, I believe he should do one thing, but believe he probably will feel that his hands are tied and won't, and things will disintegrate. The right will have won. On a theoretical level, we could start with Hobbes and work our way up discussing how the will of the majority is maintained within the concept of the State, and the greater good for the greater number is imposed. Actually now I think of it (and I'm rusty on my Hobbes and far from my library, which is probably part of my problem thinking through this) the situation as it is today under Morales is probably closer to the idealised concept of the state than it has been in many other places or times - ie, the State is indeed working for the greater good of the greater number, as opposed to the greater good of the small elite. Hi John,

Thanks for your comments. Part of this reply is in response to you and part in response to some other comments I’ve been reading on other sites.

Well this is the thing, I agree that the only way to stop the small, very violent, right wing is to start exactly at the top. And it will have to be forcibly done, followed by trials and so on. My point is exactly that when I see the destruction and chaos being meted out by a minority of very rich people who are afraid of losing their inherited power, I support sending in an army to oppose them. My personal position that I started this post with then remains: if I support the use of force by the state in this situation, where does that leave my political stance on state violence?

Aside from that, while not for a moment do I agree with the right-wingers that the government are terrorists or that they are freedom fighters, I am pointing out that on a theoretical level the right-wing are putting forward the argument that they are comparable because they are, now, in a similar position of opposition vis à vis the state. The argument that ‘if we shot them now, then when they are in power they can shot us’ may seem trite, but it is unfortunately the basis of the problem, both practically and theoretically.

The legitimacy of the state in Bolivia has been weakened. Partly by the use of violence to bring about change in the past, and partly by Morales’ symbolic position as an alternative to ‘normal politics’. On a practical level, I believe he should do one thing, but believe he probably will feel that his hands are tied and won’t, and things will disintegrate. The right will have won. On a theoretical level, we could start with Hobbes and work our way up discussing how the will of the majority is maintained within the concept of the State, and the greater good for the greater number is imposed.

Actually now I think of it (and I’m rusty on my Hobbes and far from my library, which is probably part of my problem thinking through this) the situation as it is today under Morales is probably closer to the idealised concept of the state than it has been in many other places or times – ie, the State is indeed working for the greater good of the greater number, as opposed to the greater good of the small elite.

]]> By: John Rice http://hangingaroundonthewrongsideoftheworld.wordpress.com/2008/09/10/the-problem-of-bolivia-for-the-radical-left/#comment-140 John Rice Thu, 11 Sep 2008 11:39:46 +0000 http://hangingaroundonthewrongsideoftheworld.wordpress.com/?p=149#comment-140 We seem kindred spirits—at least in ways relating to our wishes for Bolivia--great blogging! I think that up to now at least, Evo has played his cards extremely well. He has avoided the trap of using overwhelming violence against the seditionists seeking to return Bolivia to the control of the oligarchy. What I'd like to (perhaps naively) see happen, is to: *Bring charges of treason against the leaders of those seeking to destroy Bolivia, and to then do whatever it takes to arrest them and bring them to trial. *Make a public announcement of intent prior to taking any action, to give the criminals a chance to turn themselves in and submit to trial. *Start at the top with Branko Marinkovic , Reuben Costas et al and any of the other prefects who have incited and supported violence against the people and government of Bolivia. *Work from the top on down the ranks of the leaders until the violence stops. *Use restrained but overwhelming force, and only use violence to react to resistant violence--never as the instigator. *Imbed the press to record it all, making certain that the press includes friends and foes alike, and that they are prevented from issuing warnings--under penalty of sedition. *The force used would ideally be the most professional available to avoid any unintentional collateral damages. *Use existing news footage, recordings and photos as evidence, and hold them until trials determine their fate. *Get them in custody or force them back into their hidey-holes, or force them to leave. *Those fomenting violence should be charged for any damages they cause, with a premium charged them for loss of lives or injuries they caused to happen. If the current nationalization process is applied to appropriated property, deduct those charges from any settlement. *Any of the above not currently in Bolivian law, should be declared as law by decree until Congress or appropriate referendum codifies it. I believe that Bolivian law allows that, with precedents having been set by previous presidents. I believe that Evo has to take charge and act to reduce the destructive violence in Bolivia being fomented by a US-advised/supported/financed relatively few, and he must act soon, before it is too late. Comments appreciated--I live to learn. Regards,,,John We seem kindred spirits—at least in ways relating to our wishes for Bolivia–great blogging!
I think that up to now at least, Evo has played his cards extremely well. He has avoided the trap of using overwhelming violence against the seditionists seeking to return Bolivia to the control of the oligarchy.
What I’d like to (perhaps naively) see happen, is to:
*Bring charges of treason against the leaders of those seeking to destroy Bolivia, and to then do whatever it takes to arrest them and bring them to trial.
*Make a public announcement of intent prior to taking any action, to give the criminals a chance to turn themselves in and submit to trial.
*Start at the top with Branko Marinkovic , Reuben Costas et al and any of the other prefects who have incited and supported violence against the people and government of Bolivia.
*Work from the top on down the ranks of the leaders until the violence stops.
*Use restrained but overwhelming force, and only use violence to react to resistant violence–never as the instigator.
*Imbed the press to record it all, making certain that the press includes friends and foes alike, and that they are prevented from issuing warnings–under penalty of sedition.
*The force used would ideally be the most professional available to avoid any unintentional collateral damages.
*Use existing news footage, recordings and photos as evidence, and hold them until trials determine their fate.
*Get them in custody or force them back into their hidey-holes, or force them to leave.
*Those fomenting violence should be charged for any damages they cause, with a premium charged them for loss of lives or injuries they caused to happen. If the current nationalization process is applied to appropriated property, deduct those charges from any settlement.
*Any of the above not currently in Bolivian law, should be declared as law by decree until Congress or appropriate referendum codifies it. I believe that Bolivian law allows that, with precedents having been set by previous presidents.
I believe that Evo has to take charge and act to reduce the destructive violence in Bolivia being fomented by a US-advised/supported/financed relatively few, and he must act soon, before it is too late.
Comments appreciated–I live to learn.
Regards,,,John

]]> By: cactus flower http://hangingaroundonthewrongsideoftheworld.wordpress.com/2008/09/10/the-problem-of-bolivia-for-the-radical-left/#comment-139 cactus flower Thu, 11 Sep 2008 03:56:42 +0000 http://hangingaroundonthewrongsideoftheworld.wordpress.com/?p=149#comment-139 So if the right wing use violence that makes Anarchists want to support it ? Grow up. So if the right wing use violence that makes Anarchists want to support it ?

Grow up.

]]>