Re: [Marxism] Behind the coup in Ecuador | Green Left Weekly

[stansfield smith]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


 Yes, this was a good article. As I wrote before, the statements of the head of 
CONAIE on October 6 and of PACHAKUTIK on September 30, both show they supported 
the coup d'etat which failed, regardless of a NED smoking gun.
  The only question now is did they receive NED money or not. For that, it will 
be worthwhile to keep up with what is on Eva Golinger's blog for October 7.  It 
is possible they supported the coup for free, as a free service to US 
imperialism, but I wouldn't bet on that. 
  In any case, they supported the coup. 
 
 
 
The Alleged Coup d’Etat, Democracy, and the Indigenous Organizations

By Marlon Santi

President, CONAIE

(my italics)

We, the Federation of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador (CONAIE, in
its Spanish initials) and the Pachakutik Bloc, in response to the
events of September 30, 2010, and the claims made in recent days about
the alleged support by USAID-NED to indigenous organizations,
standing firmly on our historic process of bringing about a true
Pluri-national State, announce:

The struggle of the peoples and nationalities is not an individual
one, rather, it corresponds to the collective dream of constructing a
diverse country, inclusive of the diverse popular and social organized
sectors that seek a real change to end the old neoliberal,
exploitative structures and the decolonization of the institutions of
the State. We seek a pluri-national democracy, respectful of the
rights of individuals, of collective organizations and of nature.

We energetically announce that there never was any attempted coup
d’etat, much less a kidnapping, but an event that responded to the
uncertain political management of the government that causes popular
discontent through permanent aggression, discrimination and violations
of human rights consecrated in the Constitution.

We do not recognize this dictatorial “democracy” because of its lack
of freedom of speech, the kidnapping of all the powers of the state by
the executive branch in its political system of one government, that
does not generate spaces to debate the projects, and laws elaborated
from the indigenous movement and other social sectors.

We categorically refute claims that the CONAIE, the Pachakutik
Political Movement, the peoples and nationalities have any
relationship at all with the organism known as USAID, previously NED,
not today nor ever. To the contrary, we know that this organization
finances the “social programs” of this government like the forest
partnership and that, yes, is condemnable.

We demand the constitutional suspension of the National Congress for
its failure to comply with the constitutional mandate that it
legislate much less audit as it is well known that all laws are
approved by the president’s legal minister.

We condemn the usurpation of press freedom when on September 30 all
media not allied with the government was forced to broadcast
government news in “cadena nacional,” a means by which all access to
information is controlled and manipulated with a version of the facts
that does not inform about the real dimensions of the situation on
that day in the country.

Quito, Ecuador, October 6, 2010

Government of the Peoples and Nationalities,

Marlon Santi



 
 
  Does this support the coup? Well literally, no, it denies there was a coup.
Does he condemn the coup - no. 
Does he call for the suspension of the National Congress? yes.
Does he support the actions of the Correa gov. to defend itself against the 
coup? No. 
Does he criticize the coup-plotters? No.
Dooes he criticize the statement (below) of Pachakutik which called on 
Equadorians to actively support the coup? No.
 

 
 
PACHAKUTIK ASKS PRESIDENT CORREA TO RESIGN AND CALLS FOR THE FORMING OF A 
SINGLE NATIONAL FRONT (September 30, 2010)

Press Release 141

In the face of the serious political turmoil and internal crisis generated by 
the dictatorial attitude of President Rafael Correa, who has violated the 
rights of public servants as well as society, the head of the Pachakutik 
Movement, Cléver Jiménez, called on the indigenous movement, social movements 
and democratic political organizations to form a single national front to 
demand the exit of President Correa, under the guidelines established by 
Article 130, Number 2 of the Constitution, which says: “The National Assembly 
will dismiss the President of the Republic in the following cases: 2) For 
serious political crisis and domestic turmoil.”

Jiménez backed the struggle of the country’s public servants, including the 
police troops who have mobilized against the regime’s authoritarian policies 
which are an attempt to eliminate acquired labor rights. The situation of the 
police and members of the Armed Forces should be understood as a just action by 
public serv

[Marxism] Rashid Khalidi, "The Palestine Question and the U.S. Public Sphere"

[Dennis Brasky]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


Rashid Khalidi, "The Palestine Question and the U.S. Public Sphere"


The 1967 war had a galvanizing effect on American Jewish attachment to
Israel. It connected a whole generation that was coming of age at that time
with Israel in a way that was different from what had come before. . . . The
growing emphasis on the Holocaust and the increased identification with
Israel have grown into what have now been institutionalized as central
pillars of American Jewish identity in ways that were not true previously. .
. . These were changes that were the result of the fact that our government,
the U.S. government, was increasingly coming to see Israel, for the first
time, as an ally. It was seeing it for the first time as a proxy in the Cold
War rivalry with the Soviet Union and its Arab clients in the region. This
was not always the case. We think it was but it wasn't. The United States
and the Soviet Union were on the same side in 1947-1948; they both supported
the establishment of Israel. They were on the same side in 1956; they both
opposed the tripartite aggression against Egypt. There was no Cold War
alignment on one side or the other on the Arab-Israeli conflict. Israel had
not been considered to be a strategic asset to the United States, by most
American policy-makers, from 1947 right up through the mid-1960s. But by
1967, the United States had become completely aligned with Israel against
the Arab states, most of which were supported by the USSR, in a
configuration that continued until the end of the Cold War. Israel has been
considered a strategic asset ever since -- but, I'm trying to stress, never
was before that -- even though there may be some questioning of Israel's
strategic value in some policy-making circles in this town today. . . . The
impact of the Vietnam War was also a big factor in causing policy-makers to
see the Middle East in Cold War terms much starker than had been the case
before. And the June war itself played a role in this closer alignment with
Israel. This resounding Israeli victory showed American policy-makers who
were deeply shaken at this time by Vietnam -- Johnson was about to resign a
year later because of Vietnam, this was before the Tet Offensive, but things
were already going badly -- it showed him and the people around him that
Israel could serve American interests in opposing the Soviet Union. The
defeat of the Soviet-supplied Arab armies provided a welcome triumph for the
free world at a time when news from the Southeast Asian battlefields was
bad.

Full article –



http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2010/khalidi081010.html

Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Behind the coup in Ecuador | Green Left Weekly

[Greg McDonald]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


I sincerely hope that this article is read widely, and that it is
noted that Correa's election in 2006 was due in no small part to
support from the popular and INDIGENOUS movements (read CONAIE), thus
rendering null any idea that a fucking NED training had anything at
all to do with anything at all. And to those dipshits who wish to
point out that Pachakutik ran their own candidate in the first round,
yes, BUT, they pushed hard for Correa when it counted.

Greg


Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Democratic rights victory in Cleveland, Ohio

[jay rothermel]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


Special thanks to all of those who signed the online petition set up by the
International Action Center, attended the demonstrations in support of
Bronaugh Sisters, and did not allow the media's slanderous claims to get in
the way of the truth. The victory in the courtroom belongs to the entire
working class. It was the result of the mass pressure and refusal to back
down on the part of countless individuals who supported DeAsia and her
sister, as well as a great deal of bravery on the part of the sisters and
their mother. We must now move forward, and fight for a similar victory for
the Whitby family, and for DeAsia's older sister, Destini, also facing
charges.

*"Power Concedes Nothing Without Struggle!" -* Frederick Douglas.


>From *Scene* Magazine:

http://www.clevescene.com/scene-and-heard/archives/2010/10/08/deasia-bronaugh-wins-in-juvenile-court

*DeAsia Bronaugh Wins in Juvenile Court*

*by Kyle Swenson*

Throughout the summer we’ve kept readers dialed-in to the fates of Destini
and DeAsia Bronaugh, the teen sisters who tangled with Cleveland Police at a
protest outside of Collinwood High School in
May.
The girls were subject to a rough arrest, and the entire incident was caught
on tape by *Scene*’s favorite Marx-toting community organizers, Caleb Maupin
and Adam 
Gluntz.
The clip, below, was shown on media outlets across the city, stirring up
talk of police brutality. After some uncertainty, county prosecutors went
ahead and charged the two with felonies, and the younger girl — 17-year-old
DeAsia — went on trial this week in juvenile court.

DeAsia was looking down the barrel at two felony counts of assault on a
police officer. The proceedings went before Magistrate Jeffrey Ehrbar and
were held in a dank, cramped courtroom of the Juvenile Justice center.
Juvenile proceedings are usually closed to the public, but due to the
high-profile nature of the case, the family asked and was granted an open
trial. Flanked by her mother Tina and backed by a small group of supporters,
DeAsia quietly sat at a desk in the courtroom throughout two days of
testimony.

The trial only got as far as the state’s case. Key to the charges was the
prosecution’s assertion that during the struggle with police DeAsia
attempted to kick one of the officers in the face. The prosecution called
school security guards and the arresting police officers on the stand to
bolster the claim.

Well-known courtroom vet Terry Gilbert handled the defense. With his
amped-up cross-examinations, he pretty much tapped danced over testimony of
police; much of the back and forth focused on whether or not DeAsia actually
intended to kick the officer or if her foot just happened to be dangling in
the vicinity. Maupin’s video was repeatedly played in slow-motion. Things
got wonky, like an extended bit on what may exactly constitute a “kick.”

By the time the state was finished, Gilbert made a motion to dismiss the
charges on the grounds that the prosecution failed to make its case against
the girl. Ehrbar agreed and tossed the charges.

“ We’re exuberant,” Tina Bronaugh told* Scene* in the hallway after the
trial. “We’re just so happy for our DeAsia. Now we have to worry about
Destini.”

Destini, 19, goes on trial later this month.

Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Behind the coup in Ecuador | Green Left Weekly

[Louis Proyect]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


On 10/9/10 8:21 PM, glparramatta wrote:
>
> The attempted coup d’etat in Ecuador on September 30 against the
> left-wing government of Rafael Correa was defeated by loyal troops and
> the mass mobilisation of Correa’s supporters. The event underscores the
> turbulent history of the small Andean nation.
>
> It also exposes some of the weaknesses of Ecuador’s revolutionary
> movement, which is part of a broader Latin American movement against US
> domination and for regional unity and social justice.
>
> Full article at http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/45682
>

I am usually opposed to one-line comments on a Marxism list message, but 
will break the rule using my moderator's privileges to say that this is 
the best thing I've read.


Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Behind the coup in Ecuador | Green Left Weekly

[glparramatta]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==




The attempted coup d’etat in Ecuador on September 30 against the 
left-wing government of Rafael Correa was defeated by loyal troops and 
the mass mobilisation of Correa’s supporters. The event underscores the 
turbulent history of the small Andean nation.

It also exposes some of the weaknesses of Ecuador’s revolutionary 
movement, which is part of a broader Latin American movement against US 
domination and for regional unity and social justice.

Full article at http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/45682



Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] book for review

[George Snedeker]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


Socialism and Democracy is looking for someone to review 
DEBT, THE IMF AND THE WORLD BANK BY Eric Toussaint and Damien Millet , Monthly 
Review Press.



If you are interested in reviewing this book, please send me a sample review 
you have published. Just paste your review into a message. Please do not send 
attachments. 



For information about Socialism and Democracy, go to www.sdonline.org



George Snedeker

Book Review Editor

Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] re statement by CONAIE

[Greg McDonald]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 11:06 AM, Néstor Gorojovsky  wrote:
> ==
> Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> ==
>
>
>> Nestor, Correa has said publicly the USA was not behind the coup
>> attempt. I tend to agree. It was too disorganized to have been
>> arranged by the US embassy, IMO. BTW,  Do you think Correa is lying?
>>
>>
> I say Correa is smarter than US intelligence and policy makers, and won´t
> buy a red herring.
>
>
>> "Serious case?" You must be joking.  I have a second cousin who once
>> worked for military intelligence. Do you think I should be strung up?
>>
>>
> You are not a national organization whose policies have been tending to
> split the Ecuadorean society along lines which may be too perilous for the
> Ecuadoreans and too useful for the US Embassy. There is no comparison. At
> any rate, if you have a second cousin who once worked for military
> intelligence, and just in case, I will check anything you send me with a
> political comissar from Cuba (joke, joke, joke, joke!!!)


Nestor, the policies of the CONAIE are in line with the new
constitution; it is Correa who is deviating from the consensus, as
Acosta expressed in his view that Correa's re-interpretation of the
constitution represents a legal counter-revolution. Correa's decision
to open up the country to 12 multinationals for open pit mining is
what has split the country in half, that more than anything else,
because Correa only sees the bags of money floating into the Central
Bank. Decentralized economic programs benefiting the small producers,
along with ecotourism and appropriate agriculture, would bring more
money into the countryside. But Correa is not interested in that; he's
more interested in the government making money, because the government
is in debt. The national government is stuck in the old
developmentalist , dare I say USAID mentality?  It is not taking
seriously the idea of buen vivir except as a campaign slogan.

Moreover, Correa is too fearful of the right wing to shut down the
legislative assembly. Hell, he wouldn't even nullify Bechtel's water
contract, because he was afraid that in doing so he would ruffle too
many right wing feathers and lose too many votes on the water bill,
which, as Acosta points out, benefits the large agribusiness concerns
at the expense of both the rural communities and the working class
city-dwellers.

Correa's big mouth and big stick have done more to damage Ecuador than
any number of peaceful indigenous protests.

Greg


Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Ecuador: Air Force and Navy Reluctantly Backed President

[Greg McDonald]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 11:06 AM, Fred Feldman  wrote:

> It is clear that the claims that CONAIE and other opposition groups in
> Ecuador are bought agents of US imperialism has no  substantial basis in
> fact and is pure speculation.

Thank you for saying so.

>
> It is also clear that Ecuador lacks the unified national front that has made
> advances possible and poses a strong obstacles to reactionary coups.
> Correa's failings probably contribute to that problem but I very much doubt
> he is the sole cause. There seems to be an array of leadership problems.

I agree. I think that since last spring, the animosity between Correa
and Santi has taken on a very deep and personal dimension, and I think
it is negatively affecting decisions on both sides. But I also think
that the lion's share of the blame lays with Correa, who, as Acosta
has pointed out, has all the diplomatic skill of a steamroller.
>
> Meanwhile, I fear that Greg is heading toward the deep end in his crusading
> against Correa. Now he suggests that we accept on the basis of one article
> and an alleged citation of Correa, that the armed forces and the cops were
> just poor working-stiffs, simply exercising their right to protest for
> better wages and working conditions, which are being denied them by the
> Correa government.
>
> What a pretty picture, where every prospect pleases, and only Correa is vile.

Yeah, yeah. I still think it was a coup attempt, albeit poorly organized.
>
> However, Marxists take a dimmer view of these special bodies of armed men
> when they injure the president, hold him prisoner, capture the minister of
> defense, surround the presidential palace  and the legislature,shut down the
> airfields,  shoot at the president as he is escaping and kill one of his
> guards. We tend to assume they are up to no good.
>
> Greg's version is good pr for the next coup attempt, which will probably be
> much better planned and  executed. After all, if the recent  unpleasantness
> was caused by Correa's oppressive denial of pay and perks to the armed
> forces, would they not be justified in rising up against the tyrant and
> freeing the nation from his savage grip. It would not be hard to present
> it that way.

Oh please. Now who's overstating their brief?
>
> Now Greg insists, and I believe him, that CONAIE and other groups do not see
> the institutional role of the armed forces that way. If so, that shows
> CONAIE has learned some things from its two experiences with alliance with
> Gen. Lucio Gutierrez. He sold them out both times, and in short order. I
> think that repeating that course in the more polarized situation in Latin
> America  today would likely be suicidal.
>
> But I am not addressing CONAIE's position here, but Greg's. It is Greg who
> has actually moved toward a position that could present the military
> establishment (just working folks oppressed and exploited like everybody
> else by the tyrant Correa) a part of what he regards (and may even be) the
> progressive movement against Correa's policies.

I'll let you know when agents of the Ecuadorean military get in touch
with me Fred.
>
> Finally, it seems to me that Greg is not completely satisfied with his
> literary war against the Correa regime in Ecuador. He has now opened a
> second front against the regime of Evo Morales in Bolivia, where the
> relationship between the indigenous peoples and the government is radically
> different than in Ecuador. But Greg's contribution presemts them as
> identical.

I thought the Zibechi piece was quite good, especially the part where
one of Morales' ministers reminds him it was AID money which helped to
finance the Constituent Assembly in 2004. Zibechi, BTW, is a
Bolivarian supporter.
>
> How long at this rate before we get the formal McDonald declaration of war
> against Cuba and Venezuela?

pppffftt.

>
> Really, I have always tended to appreciate your posts, which usually, if not
> always, contain some valuable thoughts and information. But perhaps carried
> by some of the negative dynamics of argument on the list, you are arching
> out for not in a bad direction. I hope you can find it in your brain, heart,
> and spine to contain this process.
> Fred Feldman

Duly noted Fred. I sincerely wish neither Correa nor Morales any harm.
Truth be told, it would warm my heart if a few top flight mediators
could sit Santi and Correa down in a room together so they could work
out their differences, but I honestly don't think it would be of any
use, because what is dictating government policy is the budgetary
shortfalls. They need to make some big profits to stay afloat, and so
what better way than making the switch from oil to ore?

It really is too bad that Correa dumped Acosta and Larrea.

Greg

Re: [Marxism] Red Hill; Samson and Delilah

[Gary MacLennan]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


Thank you for this Lou.  I have yet to see either film, but I will make an
effort to catch *Samson and Delilah*.  I am though familiar with the
political debate around the films.

Since Aboriginal Australians got some land rights in the 70s there has been
a drive to assimilate them. this has been  led by the Right Wing Think Tanks
The Bennelong Society  and The Centre for
Independent 
Studies.


The real issue here is that Indigenous control of Indigenous land is awkward
for mining companies. they have to negotiate with people who traditional
viewed the land not as a commodity to be plundered but as habitat.

Something of the importance in political terms of Samson and Delilah can be
gathered from this hostile
review
by
Gary Johns the CEO of the Bennelong Society.  Johns is a nasty piece of
works.  A former minister in the Labor Government of Paul Keating, Johns has
spent his post parliamentary career bashing Aboriginal culture  for rich
whites.  The mining companies probably love him.

That he hated Samson and Delilah is sufficient recommendation for taking the
time to see it. The film's message that redemption for Indigenous Australia
is possible outside the parameters of assimilation to white society is what
Johns hates.  Like the right wing rabid Christians who continually preach
that to be gay is to be miserable and then proceed to make every gay as
unhappy as they can, Johns preaches that Aboriginal culture is inferior and
that only when Aboriginal Australia vanishes into whiter society will all be
well.

comradely

Gary



comradely

Gary

Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] imperative mandates

[Mark Lause]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAaWvVFERVA

Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] imperative mandates

[S. Artesian]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


I like the random method for handling these political issues, no so much for 
major surgery, air traffic control, or hazardous materials transportation.


- Original Message - 
From: "Paul Cockshott" 
To: 
Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2010 5:06 PM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] imperative mandates


> ==
> Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> ==
>
>
> I really do not see the point of imperative mandates.
>
> If it is possible to gather all the population of an electoral district 
> into one place to debate issues and mandate their delegate, then on those 
> issues they people might as well vote in a referendum and have their vote 
> recorded. The whole point of representation is to save on labour time, 
> freeing the majority of the population from having to debate everything. 
> If you elect people to be representatives, whatever recall provision you 
> theoretically have in place, you are establishing an oligarchic 
> constitution. The only scientificly reliable way to achieve a 
> representative sample is by random sampling, anything else is a piss poor 
> compromise attempt to get round the inbuilt bias of elections.
> Why on earth are you concerned to retain the basically aristocratic 
> constitutional principle that elections represent?
>
> The University of Glasgow, charity number SC004401
>
> 
> Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
> Set your options at: 
> http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/sartesian%40earthlink.net 



Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] imperative mandates

[Paul Cockshott]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


 I really do not see the point of imperative mandates.

If it is possible to gather all the population of an electoral district into 
one place to debate issues and mandate their delegate, then on those issues 
they people might as well vote in a referendum and have their vote recorded. 
The whole point of representation is to save on labour time, freeing the 
majority of the population from having to debate everything. If you elect 
people to be representatives, whatever recall provision you theoretically have 
in place, you are establishing an oligarchic constitution. The only 
scientificly reliable way to achieve a representative sample is by random 
sampling, anything else is a piss poor compromise attempt to get round the 
inbuilt bias of elections.
Why on earth are you concerned to retain the basically aristocratic 
constitutional principle that elections represent?

The University of Glasgow, charity number SC004401


Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Imperative mandates

[Daniel Koechlin]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


>>Any system of elections is oligarchic, it favours the best educated
and most
> articulate, and thus favours those of a higher class.
>

>>And even worse, it favors those inclined towards politics. 

Which was the whole point of my post.

This is why those who are entrusted with performing
 a specific task by a body of people (direct democracy in assembly)
should :
a) have an "imperative mandate" from the people who chose them, a
mandate which clearly states the task to be performed and the limits (in
time and scope) which cannot be overstepped without specific
authorization by the assembly.
b) have to account for the way they performed the given task before the
assembled people who entrusted them with it.
c) can be recalled at any moment by the assembly if it appears they have
not adequately followed their "imperative mandate".
d) give regular updates to the assembly on the way the task is being
performed.
e) cannot carry out a given function (and especially not a co-ordination
and organizational function) for more than say a year, in order to avoid
specialization and the dangers of bureaucracy.
Of course, the precision with which an imperative mandate is drafted by
the assembled people depends on the nature of the task (which may
require quite a degree of freedom to accommodate for unseen
circumstances). But in any case, all those who have been entrusted with
a mandate are always accountable before the people who chose them. 
  





Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Red Hill; Samson and Delilah

[Louis Proyect]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


Two Australian movies dealing with the aboriginal experience:

http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2010/10/09/red-hill-samson-and-delilah/


Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] A coup against Obama (Liberty or death)

[Waistline2]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==




>> The subject of the relationship between to struggle to support and  
extend democratic reforms and the "maximum program" of revolutionary movements  
has always been of great interest to me. It would be much easier to adopt 
the  DeLeonist approach of the single demand, "unconditional surrender of the  
capitalist class" and then never worry about the effects of compromise or 
the  taint of reformism. << 
 
Comment 
 
What is the "revolutionary movement?" If revolutionary movement means a  
communist or Marxist group we are in trouble. If revolutionary movement  means 
the spontaneous movement of people drawn into action against a backdrop of  
changes in the means of production . . . now here's a movement that makes  
sense. 
 
Has a "maximum program" helped anyone in the past 70 years? Old formulation 
 with no market value ought to be jettisoned in favor of new product. 
 
The past century did not present us a choice between reform and revolution, 
 except as a theoretical equation and ideological disposition. Belief in 
social  revolution of the proletariat is fine. Everyone did was in front of  
them  trying to preserve the tradition  of Marxism as they understood it. 
 
Some believe reform is the result of winning enough people over to a cause. 
 From this belief flows the concept of a minimum and maximum program or 
better  yet, "the transitional program," as the device for "winning the 
masses." Here  "the transition program" speaks of consciousness of the 
proletariat 
and  enhancing its fighting capacity so that it proceeds as a class for 
"itself," to  the glorious future of communism. 
 
This is not my point of view, although it once was. 
 
The impulse for/of reform ought to be stood on earthly soil, or we end up  
in the "battle for ideological purity" and the correct "transitional 
program." 
 
Reform means reform-u-late "something" of the system.  By system is  meant 
the economy and political superstructure. Economy means the production and  
distribution of material wealth and in our case the world of commodities. 
 
The impulse for/of reform flows from continuous expansion and development  
of the means of production.  As the means of production evolve, a  
corresponding, deepening contradiction develops within the unity of the  
political 
superstructure and the more mobile developing means of production, and  the 
classes connected to means of production. As favorable conditions emerge,  
social struggle develops that ends with a quantitative leap in the social  
relations, which bring a reformed society into line with the level of  
development of the means of production. 
 
Reform restructures relations within and between classes and social  
grouping in society to conform to each other as everyone is compelled to 
conform  
to changes in the productive forces. The industrial trade union movement was 
an  expression of an objective "reform of the system movement."  The system 
and  era of "Fordism" is recognized as a reform of the world bourgeois 
order within  every the world communist movement. 
 
By "objective movement" is meant the internal compulsion of necessity  
flowing from growth and expansion of productive forces or the interaction  
between classes in society. Then the flesh and blood combatants fought to 
reform  
the new features of the system in their favor. Craft unionism did not just 
"die"  and "roll over" but was displace in its importance as "mediation" 
between and  within classes. By "mediation" is meant "social prop" of the 
system. 
 
Revolutionaries from the left and right fought and led the charge for  
reform of the system, with neither being able to transform the quality that is  
"reform" into the quality that is "social revolution." Consciousness cannot  
change a quality, as "quality" is used in this context. Facing the 
objective  material logic of a changing economy and changing form of the 
laboring 
process  (organization of labor), sensing social revolution was not immanent,  
revolutionaries spoke of a minimum and maximum program. 
 
This made sense under conditions of a living fight against feudal  
structures. I believe this point of view to be obsolete. 
 
The need to reform "the system" in a radically new environment of  
production, recast all "old things." 
 
When society is leaping - transitioning, from one quantitative boundary to  
another the spontaneous struggle of the proletarian masses helps reform the 
 system as rationalization of production and allows all kinds of auxiliary  
organizations of the masses to come forth  seeking to reform the system in  
ones favor. That is to say, when an existing technology regime is 
undergoing  revolutionizing, quantitative enhancement of its technology regime, 
the 
end  result is

Re: [Marxism] A coup against Obama

[Waistline2]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==



>> You would have to see some sizable numbers of extreme right wing  
fanatics, with leaders of national standing, convinced that Obama was not only  
the most radical president in American history and that he was personally  
committed to destroying both capitalism and Christianity. 
 
These nut jobs would then have to make sizable inroads into elements of the 
 military and police with agitation and then pledges from cops and soldiers 
not  to obey the orders of the president in crises. On top of all that, 
this same  proto-fascist movement would have to find support from a major 
political party  as well as stockpile a sizable number of weapons and begin 
training paramilitary  units. No offense to anyone on this list, but this is 
not 
Argentina. 
 
This is (North) America and I simply can not envision troops on the streets 
 after a contested election or in the event of a national security crises  
compounded by a botched administration response. << 
 
Comment 
 
There is no split in our imperial bourgeoisie, only sectarian politics and  
opportunism of getting re-elected. I see no material reason for a coup  
against Obama and his administration - at this time. Maybe things will shift 
for  2012, but that is like a decade away for me, with events running at a 
maddening  pace.   
 
Obama is creating a new political form for capital under the title  
"bipartisanship." Obama is leader of the Revolutionary Right but so is Leroy -  
Newton Leroy "Newt" Gingrich. What separates them are the political 
institutions  through which they have come to power. Both are attacking the 
system and  
constitution from different directions. Leroy is a historic Southern 
Redeemer.  Obama is not. Leroy says ""Restore (Redeem) America." Obama says 
"Yes 
we Can,"  but "No I won't,  unless you make me." This in turn means defeat my 
 political opponents.
 
Neither can advance the cause of their class detached from their different  
political - not economic, base. Hence, their sectarian politics. 
 
II. 
 
Some liken Bush W. ascendency to President as an American form of the  
"palace coup" with rumors of him lining up support of key sections of the  
military.  As I understand matters the Hayes-Tilden Agreement set the  
parameters 
for the "extra-legal" political secession in America. The Hayes  Tilden 
agreement did not create fascism in the American South but set the stage  for 
the ascension to power by the most reactionary, chauvinistic and imperialist  
elements of finance capital. Rather than placing troops on the streets,  
Hayes-Tilden removed federal troops from the South. 
 
The illegal and extra legal overthrow of the democratic government of the  
South, ending the Reconstruction era, ushered in the world's first 
"Redeemer" -  fascist, government or fascist state form. History, or rather 
"European 
 history," and the curve of development of the Marxist movement, colored 
our  vision with a concept of fascism in its military or German form. 
 
The world's first fascist states in the core South did not and could not  
assume a military form because the armies of Southern reaction had been 
defeated  on the battlefield. For the success of the fascist "Redeemer" 
movement 
federal  troops stabilizing Reconstruction had to be removed from the South. 
Reaction in  the form of the Klan stepped forth as the hangman of 
democracy, or as it is  often called, "government on horseback." American 
fascism as 
a historical  current, assumes an "illegal" and "extra legal" form as 
distinct from the German  military form. 
 
III. 
 
By all standards and reckoning, the American peoples are armed to the  
teeth. Corporations have built up private police force as national police force 
 
functions are in fact privatized into "personal armies," and more than less 
 autonomous "military units." The post-industrial prison complex is state  
machinery deployed as a murderous fascist "fishers net." The concentration 
of  power in the executive branch and the President as head of government and 
head  of state is not a good sign. The Revolutionary Right, rather than a 
"section of  capital" seeks a fascist solution to stabilize its new form of 
private property;  symbolic wealth detached from surplus-value. 
 
One aspect of the fascist movement is expressed in the anti-immigration  
movement, which is armed, conducts and carries out illegal and extra legal  
violence. The state of Arizona seeks to legalize "illegal" and "extra legal"  
violence in defiance to citizen's rights. "Extra legal" morphs into 
"illegal"  when you are caught in the act and a social movement pushes for your 
punishment  and achieves this goal. 
 
One need not be locked into a "European conception" of fascism as  
corporatism or the corporat

[Marxism] The Lost John Lennon Interview

[Dan DiMaggio]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


I can't read this enough:

Power to the People: The Lost John Lennon Interview - Tariq Ali and Robin
Blackburn
http://www.counterpunch.org/lennon12082005.html

Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Imperative mandates

[Dan]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


>>Any system of elections is oligarchic, it favours the best educated
and most
> articulate, and thus favours those of a higher class.
>

>>And even worse, it favors those inclined towards politics. 

Which was the whole point of my post.

This is why those who are entrusted with performing
 a specific task by a body of people (direct democracy in assembly)
should :
a) have an "imperative mandate" from the people who chose them, a
mandate which clearly states the task to be performed and the limits (in
time and scope) which cannot be overstepped without specific
authorization by the assembly.
b) have to account for the way they performed the given task before the
assembled people who entrusted them with it.
c) can be recalled at any moment by the assembly if it appears they have
not adequately followed their "imperative mandate".
d) give regular updates to the assembly on the way the task is being
performed.
e) cannot carry out a given function (and especially not a co-ordination
and organizational function) for more than say a year, in order to avoid
specialization and the dangers of bureaucracy.
Of course, the precision with which an imperative mandate is drafted by
the assembled people depends on the nature of the task (which may
require quite a degree of freedom to accommodate for unseen
circumstances). But in any case, all those who have been entrusted with
a mandate are always accountable before the people who chose them. 
  




Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Ecuador: Air Force and Navy Reluctantly Backed President

[Fred Feldman]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


It is clear that the claims that CONAIE and other opposition groups in
Ecuador are bought agents of US imperialism has no  substantial basis in
fact and is pure speculation.

It is also clear that Ecuador lacks the unified national front that has made
advances possible and poses a strong obstacles to reactionary coups.
Correa's failings probably contribute to that problem but I very much doubt
he is the sole cause. There seems to be an array of leadership problems.

Meanwhile, I fear that Greg is heading toward the deep end in his crusading
against Correa. Now he suggests that we accept on the basis of one article
and an alleged citation of Correa, that the armed forces and the cops were
just poor working-stiffs, simply exercising their right to protest for
better wages and working conditions, which are being denied them by the
Correa government.

What a pretty picture, where every prospect pleases, and only Correa is vile

However, Marxists take a dimmer view of these special bodies of armed men
when they injure the president, hold him prisoner, capture the minister of
defense, surround the presidential palace  and the legislature,shut down the
airfields,  shoot at the president as he is escaping and kill one of his
guards. We tend to assume they are up to no good.

Greg's version is good pr for the next coup attempt, which will probably be
much better planned and  executed. After all, if the recent  unpleasantness
was caused by Correa's oppressive denial of pay and perks to the armed
forces, would they not be justified in rising up against the tyrant and
freeing the nation from his savage grip. It would not be hard to present
it that way.

Now Greg insists, and I believe him, that CONAIE and other groups do not see
the institutional role of the armed forces that way. If so, that shows
CONAIE has learned some things from its two experiences with alliance with
Gen. Lucio Gutierrez. He sold them out both times, and in short order. I
think that repeating that course in the more polarized situation in Latin
America  today would likely be suicidal.

But I am not addressing CONAIE's position here, but Greg's. It is Greg who
has actually moved toward a position that could present the military
establishment (just working folks oppressed and exploited like everybody
else by the tyrant Correa) a part of what he regards (and may even be) the
progressive movement against Correa's policies.

Finally, it seems to me that Greg is not completely satisfied with his
literary war against the Correa regime in Ecuador. He has now opened a
second front against the regime of Evo Morales in Bolivia, where the
relationship between the indigenous peoples and the government is radically
different than in Ecuador. But Greg's contribution presemts them as
identical.

How long at this rate before we get the formal McDonald declaration of war
against Cuba and Venezuela?

Really, I have always tended to appreciate your posts, which usually, if not
always, contain some valuable thoughts and information. But perhaps carried
by some of the negative dynamics of argument on the list, you are arching
out for not in a bad direction. I hope you can find it in your brain, heart,
and spine to contain this process.
Fred Feldman





Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] re statement by CONAIE

[Néstor Gorojovsky]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


> Nestor, Correa has said publicly the USA was not behind the coup
> attempt. I tend to agree. It was too disorganized to have been
> arranged by the US embassy, IMO. BTW,  Do you think Correa is lying?
>
>
I say Correa is smarter than US intelligence and policy makers, and won´t
buy a red herring.


> "Serious case?" You must be joking.  I have a second cousin who once
> worked for military intelligence. Do you think I should be strung up?
>
>
You are not a national organization whose policies have been tending to
split the Ecuadorean society along lines which may be too perilous for the
Ecuadoreans and too useful for the US Embassy. There is no comparison. At
any rate, if you have a second cousin who once worked for military
intelligence, and just in case, I will check anything you send me with a
political comissar from Cuba (joke, joke, joke, joke!!!)


> Greg
>
> 
> Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
> Set your options at:
> http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/nmgoro%40gmail.com
>



-- 

Néstor Gorojovsky
El texto principal de este correo puede no ser de mi autoría

Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Ecuador: Small-Scale Miners Questioning Large-Scale Interests in Southern Amazon

[S. Artesian]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


That from Greg describes the role and function of the "national" 
bourgeoisie-- primitive accumulation- dispossession of the small producers, 
of the subsistence producer-- from the land, from the land as an instrument 
of production, in order to convert it into an instrument of value-- on 
behalf of the international bourgeoisie.

And because imperialism is what it is, uneven and combined development where 
the most advanced capitalism manifests in fully developed form all the 
inabilities, weaknesses, incapacities of underdevelopment, no longer can the 
dispossessed flood the cities and find employment as workers, yielding up 
value from their labor power.  They can flood the cities all right, to live 
on the margins, to search through garbage dumps for a "means of 
subsistence"-- to be dispossessed of everything without even their labor 
power having a value in exchange.  A mass at the margins, that's the promise 
of advanced capitalism, a promise kept by the local bourgeoisie.

- Original Message - 
From: "Greg McDonald" 
To: 
Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2010 7:30 AM
Subject: [Marxism] Ecuador: Small-Scale Miners Questioning Large-Scale 
Interests in Southern Amazon


==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


Another example of Correa's heavy-handed tactics. Small wonder the
CONAIE sees him as dictatorial. Not only does he send in the military
at the drop of a hat, he insults local indigenous leaders and tries
them on trumped up charges of terrorism. The guy's a fucking douche
bag. If I were a member of CONAIE I would be among those calling for a
national uprising to run the SOB out of the country. Maybe he could go
back to Illinois, or be a mule for the narcos like his dad was.

http://upsidedownworld.org/main/ecuador-archives-49/2703-ecuador-small-scale-miners-questioning-large-scale-interests-in-southern-amazon-

Ecuador: Small-Scale Miners Questioning Large-Scale Interests in Southern 
Amazon
Written by Jennifer Moore
Wednesday, 22 September 2010 15:38

Only days after small-scale and artisanal miners pronounced themselves
in favor of land use planning and against large scale mining in
Ecuador's southern Amazon, a heavy deployment of police and military
was ordered to evict a group of these miners for alleged environmental
damages. Approximately 1,500 police and military officers took part in
the September 15 operation, or roughly one officer for every resident
of the small county of Paquisha in the province of Zamora Chinchipe,
where confrontations took place.





Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Marxism Digest, Vol 84, Issue 24

[Joseph Catron]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 6:00 AM, Paul Cockshott  wrote:

Any system of elections is oligarchic, it favours the best educated and most
> articulate, and thus favours those of a higher class.
>

And even worse, it favors those inclined towards politics. Anyone who has
ever observed, for example, the inner workings of a student union should
instinctively understand the dark implications of this. Yikes! I had as
little do do with mine as possible, and my few brief memories of it still
give me the chills.

-- 
"Hige sceal þe heardra, heorte þe cenre, mod sceal þe mare, þe ure mægen
lytlað."

Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Marxism Digest, Vol 84, Issue 24

[Paul Cockshott]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


" So what's the answer ? IMHO, direct control over production and
distribution through workers' councils, through direct democracy,
through imperative mandates, through constant renewal of
representatives, through direct accountability, and through everything
that enhances class consciousness and empowerement of the proletariat."



I strongly disagree, the only way that the people can rule themselves rather 
than be ruled by a group of professional politicians is selection of 
representatives by lot for short terms of office of no more than a year. That 
way the supreme legislative assembly is an assembly statistically 
representative of the class composition of the society. Any system of elections 
is oligarchic, it favours the best educated and most articulate, and thus 
favours those of a higher class. Recall makes not one blind bit of difference 
to this, it is at best a partial constraint over personal corruption.
Selection by lot is the key for representative bodies, but all major issues 
should be settled by direct popular referendum using telephone voting.

The University of Glasgow, charity number SC004401


Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] “Rafael Correa nos invita a violar l a Constitución” Alberto Acosta

[Greg McDonald]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


http://www.expreso.ec/ediciones/2010/06/27/nacional/actualidad/rafael-correa-nos-invita--a-violar-la-constitucion/

“Rafael Correa nos invita a violar la Constitución”
Alberto Acosta / Ex presidente de la Asamblea Constituyente




Roberto Aguilar

La tarea que dejó a la legislatura la transitoria primera de la
Constitución de Montecristi está resultando ardua, penosa e
interminable. El texto constitucional fija un plazo de 360 días para
la elaboración de una serie de leyes (de Participación Ciudadana, de
Educación Superior, de Comunicación, de Recursos Hídricos, entre
otras) juzgadas fundamentales para garantizar la vigencia de la Carta
Magna. Pero el plazo se cumplió, el trabajo está lejos de terminar y
los resultados parciales son poco estimulantes, pues los consensos
lucen inalcanzables y no ha faltado quien los considere innecesarios.
Hoy, con cada nueva ley que empieza a ser discutida en el seno de la
Asamblea, la crispación política en el país se incrementa y las
posibilidades de debate real se diluyen. Alberto Acosta no ha
participado de este proceso pero, como presidente que fue de la
Asamblea Constituyente y artífice de la primera transitoria, resulta
una voz autorizada para juzgarlo.



Da la impresión de que el país se encuentra estancado en la
transitoria primera. ¿Cuál fue la idea original de la Asamblea
Constituyente sobre las leyes contenidas en esa transitoria?

Esas leyes fueron definidas como fundamentales para la cristalización
de la Constitución. Una constitución que no cuente con las leyes para
que se enraíce su texto en la vida cotidiana, no tiene futuro. La
Constitución del 98 y muchas otras fueron expedidas pero no entraron
prácticamente en vigencia porque no hubo las leyes. Había conciencia
de ese riesgo, que todavía está presente. Algún rato dije que se debía
fijar un plazo más rígido con una amenaza concreta para los
asambleístas: señores si ustedes no aprueban las leyes en un plazo
determinado, se convoca a nuevas elecciones de asambleístas.

¿Por qué no se cumplió el plazo de un año?

Hubo un proceso electoral de por medio que frenó la discusión en la
Asamblea Nacional. Muchos de los miembros de esa comisión de
legislación y fiscalización a la que llamaban congresillo fueron
candidatos. Quizás fuimos demasiado optimistas en Montecristi al creer
que se podían aprobar los textos legales previstos en doce meses. Hay
un elemento importante: Alianza PAIS tuvo en Montecristi una mayoría
absoluta, 80 de 130 asambleístas, que no volvió a tener desde agosto
de 2009. Eso le ha impedido avanzar. Antes Alianza PAIS podía por sí
sola aprobar las leyes.

¿Cuáles son las consecuencias y los riesgos de esa demora?

Que tengamos una Constitución con muchos puntos de vanguardia pero inaplicable.

El hecho es que el presidente Rafael Correa haya dicho que al menos
dos de esas leyes, la del Agua y la de Comunicación, no son
fundamentales...

Cuando el Presidente dice que no son leyes fundamentales está
invitando a romper la Constitución. La transitoria es categórica.
Dice: estas leyes son prioritarias, tienen que ser expedidas dentro de
un plazo. Decir que no son leyes fundamentales ni prioritarias es como
decir que la Constitución no es fundamental ni prioritaria. ¿Será
acaso que la Constitución comienza a convertirse en una suerte de
camisa de fuerza para el presidente Correa? Ahora que aseguró el poder
político, ¿será que comienza a dejar de lado las transformaciones que
estaban planteadas desde el inicio?

En el caso de la ley de Comunicación, la alternativa parece ser que
continúe vigente la ley actual …

Esa ley, en primer lugar, es inconstitucional, y tiene algunos
elementos que son incluso más represivos de lo que se anuncia podría
tener la nueva Ley de Comunicación. Habría que preguntarse a quién
beneficia que no haya nueva ley de Comunicación.

Esa pregunta ya la contestó Betty Carrillo, cuando dijo que al
Gobierno le conviene que continúe vigente la ley actual porque con
ella tiene más control...

¡Pero es inconstitucional! ¡Y no se puede incumplir el mandato de
expedir una ley nueva! El caso de la Ley del Agua es exactamente
igual. El manejo del agua se ha caracterizado por un maltrato
generalizado, en términos de uso y de distribución. Los campesinos
indígenas y no indígenas que representan el 87 por ciento de los
usuarios controlan apenas el 13 por ciento del caudal de agua,
mientras que los terratenientes que tienen el 1 por ciento de las
unidades productivas agrícolas controlan el 67 por ciento del caudal.
Un campesino paga entre cien y 150 veces más de lo que están pagando
los grandes empresarios del banano o los grandes ingenios azucareros.
El ingenio San Carlos consume una cantidad de agua superior a toda la
ciudad de Quito, con los valles aledaños, y paga unos pocos

[Marxism] Ecuador: Air Force and Navy Reluctantly Backed President

[Greg McDonald]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


One of the arguments which had been put forth in favor of seeing this
as a coup attempt was the supposed coordination between different
elements of the military, and different commentators have stated that
the shutting down of the airport was one of the key pieces of evidence
to support that view. But in the report below, Correa states that the
air force personnel who shut down the airport were doing so in an
entirely peaceful and apolitical manner, and that their protest was
not against the government, but was rather associated with a salary
dispute. In other words, they were not part of a coup attempt. In any
event, an investigation is under way. What is most clear, however, is
that events of that day are still unclear. It is not clear that this
was a coordinated coup attempt across the different branches of the
military.

What is perfectly clear, however, is that the CONAIE and the
indigenous movement were not part of a coup attempt. Whether or not
they decide to spark an uprising against Correa in the future,
however, is also unclear. One thing is for sure. If they do decide to
organize an uprising, it will be as non-violent as the ones in the
past which toppled successive governments, and it will not involve a
military putsch.

People who argue otherwise, and who see a nefarious connection between
the CONAIE, the military, and the USA, have got their heads firmly
planted up their asses.

Greg

http://upsidedownworld.org/main/news-briefs-archives-68/2726-ecuador-air-force-and-navy-reluctantly-backed-president

Ecuador: Air Force and Navy Reluctantly Backed President
Written by Gonzalo Ortiz
Friday, 08 October 2010 00:13

(IPS) - Besides the hundreds of police who were rioting, Ecuador's air
force and navy were the biggest headaches for the government of Rafael
Correa in the 11 hours that the president was held captive on
Thursday, Sept. 30, IPS was told by civilian and military sources
close to the action.

The uprising ended at 9:30 PM local time when the president was
rescued from the police hospital where he was being held, next to the
police station he visited that morning after hearing that a revolt had
broken out, where he was insulted and attacked by angry police.

The media reported that 10 people were killed and 274 injured that
day, although the government says five people died. The uprising, or
attempted coup -- the heated debate on which one it was continues --
also left doubts as to how strong a grasp the government has on the
security forces.

The rescue, which was broadcast live to the world, was carried out
amid gunfire by elite soldiers and police loyal to the government.

A high-level government source who asked to remain anonymous told IPS
that "while the army showed loyalty to Correa from the very start,
things were more complicated in the other two branches, and it was
necessary to negotiate."

However, Defence Minister Javier Ponce said in an interview with IPS
that "I spent the entire day with the military brass, but without
negotiating a thing. We evaluated the situation as the hours went by,
and then we focused on planning the rescue operation."

Ponce expressed surprise when IPS told him a senior official had
stated that "The defence minister was the second person held captive
on Thursday."

The defence minister said "That's not true; the high command were
meeting with me, and I decided not to leave their side, not even for a
moment," said Ponce.

But he acknowledged that "There were problems of misinformation among
the air force and naval troops."

The stated reason for the revolt, which included police barricades
around Congress and roadblocks, was the approval the day before of a
law on public services that eliminated some of the bonuses that
accompany police and military promotions, and extended the period
between promotions from five to seven years.

But journalist Juana Ordóñez, assistant director of the economic
publication Gestión, told IPS that Correa "was right when he said he
has doubled police wages, because rank-and-file police earned 355
dollars (a month) in 2006, and today they earn 750 dollars."

By comparison, the minimum monthly wage is 240 dollars.

The defence minister, who confirmed on Tuesday, Oct. 5 a raise for
captains, majors, sergeants and corporals in the armed forces and the
national police, insisted that there was no relation between the Sept.
30 police mutiny and the salary adjustments, which he said were being
studied since August.

But an army colonel who did not want to be identified said "It was
obviously one of the measures demanded in Thursday's negotiations with
the military brass. (The authorities) had offered the salary increases
several times, but they were taking too long to implement them, and
there was discontent."

The sal

[Marxism] 2008--CONAIE Indigenous Movement Condemns President Correa

[Greg McDonald]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


{Finally, the CONAIE declared its solidarity with the people of
Bolivia and President Evo Morales. They condemned the Bolivian
right-wing's attempt to declare wealthy regions like Santa Cruz
"autonomous" and warned against pro-autonomy statements by Ecuadorian
opposition leader Jaime Nebot. Although this resolution represents the
indigenous movements' strongest public condemnation of Correa to date,
the CONAIE makes it clear that they are not part of the right-wing
opposition and oppose Correa on their own terms.}

Ecuador: CONAIE Indigenous Movement Condemns President Correa
Written by Daniel Denvir and Thea Riofrancos
Friday, 16 May 2008 05:55

The Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador (CONAIE)
declared itself in opposition to the government of Ecuadorian
President Rafael Correa on May 12. The CONAIE accused the president of
continuing right-wing neoliberal economic and racist social policies.
The harsh condemnation focused on Correa´s opposition to two key
demands: the recognition of Ecuador as a plurinational state in the
new constitution and the requirement that communities must offer prior
consent before large-scale mining and other major extractive projects
take place.

Ecuador is currently governed by a Constituent Assembly, which is
writing a new Ecuadorian constitution as well as performing all
legislative functions. The Assembly was convened after voters
overwhelmingly approved a constitutional referendum in April 2007.
Members of Correa´s Alianza Pais party won 74 of the 130 seats.
Patchakutik, the CONAIE's electoral arm, has four representatives in
the Assembly.

While the CONAIE has supported a number of Correa`s programs, most
social movement activists in Ecuador say that this conflict was
foreseeable. Correa`s support for large scale mining and his
opposition to plurinationality run up against the indigenous
movement's top political priorities.

Plurinationality is a broad framework that encompasses a number of key
indigenous movement demands, including cultural rights—such as
bilingual education and culturally appropriate healthcare—and
collective economic rights such as the requirement of affected
communities' consent before any exploration or extraction of
non-renewable resources, whether by State or multinational
corporations.

The CONAIE's strong position against large-scale mining and for prior
consent is a boon to Ecuador`s anti-mining movement, led by the
National Coordinator in Defense of Life and Sovereignty. Over the past
several months, the Coordinator has organized massive road blockades
in Southern Ecuador, sparking government condemnation and repression.
In response, a large pro-mining march took place in Quito in early
May, apparently organized by government and industry forces.

The environment is a central issue for the Ecuadorian indigenous
movement, as they see cultural rights as closely tied to territorial
rights and the preservation of biodiversity. The CONAIE's
environmental demands extend beyond the indigenous movement and
involve close collaboration with local and international environmental
organizations. The CONAIE, along with a wide range of regional social
movements, rejects the South American regional integration plan known
as the Initiative for the Integration of Regional Infrastructure in
South America (IIRSA). The development program, funded by the
Inter-American Development Bank and other regional financial
institutions, such as the Brazilian Development Bank and the Andean
Development Corporation, consists of mega-development projects such as
dams and hydroelectric plants. According to the Bank Information
Center, the IIRSA "poses one of the greatest challenges to
environmental sustainability and social justice today." In Ecuador,
the main IIRSA project is the Manta-Manaos multimodal transportation
axis between Ecuador and Brazil, which includes building a port and
the construction of several new roads leading to and from the coast.
In the words of the Ecuadorian government, this transportation project
will achieve the "dream of joining the Atlantic and Pacific oceans
through a terrestrial-river route," and will facilitate the creation
of a new East-West trade axis.

The CONAIE also strongly criticized the negotiations for a Free Trade
Deal (misleadingly called "Association Agreement") between the
European Union and the Andean Community, which took place three weeks
ago.

The CONAIE's leadership is now visiting and holding consultations with
its constituent base communities throughout Ecuador. The leadership
will reconvene at the end of the month to make decisions about what
actions to take next. It is widely rumored that the CONAIE will launch
a national indigenous uprising, events that have in the past shut down
the entire count

[Marxism] Bolivia and Ecuador: The State again st the Indigenous People – by Raúl Zibechi

[Greg McDonald]

==
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
==


Full: http://www.cipamericas.org/archives/2810

“These people are gringos who are coming here with NGOs. Take it
somewhere else. These people’s stomachs are full enough”, said the
president of Ecuador, Rafael Correa, in reference to the protesters
who belong to the National Confederation of the Indigenous in Ecuador
(CONAIE) [1]. Evo Morales said almost the same thing: “Since the Right
can’t find arguments for opposing the process of change, it’s using
rural, indigenous or original people leaders who have been paid off in
special favors by NGOs”.[2].

It seems the presidents of both countries have neglected to realize
that they are using the same arguments as their enemies when they
accuse social movements of being part of the “international communist
subversion” or of being financed by “Moscow gold”. They’re making two
mistakes in one: believing that the indigenous can be manipulated, and
believing that the manipulation comes from outside the country. It
isn’t surprising that the indigenous have interpreted the statements
of their presidents as insults meant to distract attention from real
problems.

However, it is possible that USAID, a United States aid organization,
has infiltrated some social movements and encouraged actors to protest
against the government, as per statements by the Vice President of
Bolivia, Álvaro García Linera. He notes that, of the 100 million
dollars that USAID invests in his country, 20 million is used for
technical costs and the rest “for their friends and their political
clients, for sponsoring courses, publications and groups that promote
conflict”[3].

The social organizations involved in the protests refused funding from
USAID, though what is most striking is that this critique hasn’t come
to light before, but just when people have begun to demonstrate
against the government. The head minister of Hydrocarbon in Morales’
administration went even further and reminded the president that he
owed everyone an explanation as to why he allowed USAID, the World
Bank and European ONGs to design the current Plurinational State. In
fact, “In 2004, USAID financed the Coordinating Unit for the
Constitutional Assembly”, among other official activities[4].

--clip--


CONAIE versus Correa

The presidential summit of The Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of
Our America was held on June 5. The eight presidents convened in
Otavalo, about 60 kilometers north of Quito, a city with a Quichua
majority. Despite the issue at hand, indigenous organizations were not
invited to attend. This is why the CONAIE decided to install their
Plurinational Parliament in the same city, with the intention of
insisting that there can be no plurinationality without indigenous
peoples.

Around three thousand people participated in a peaceful march through
the city. They sang and danced in honor of the Inty Raymi, the Andean
New Year, and they also remembered the twentieth anniversary of the
first Indian uprising, which began the mobilization process which
finally brought Rafael Correa to presidency. Mounted policemen stood
guard over the building where the summit was held, and their horses
were frightened by the arrival of the protesters when they reached the
door to deliver a letter to their “brother” Evo Morales.

The indigenous are in opposition to the government over water laws and
concessions to mining companies. This has caused numerous
demonstrations, strikes, blockades and uprisings[13]. The conflict
between the CONAIE and the government isn’t new, though it has now
acquired a more serious tinge due to judicial accusations against the
leaders. On the next day of the summit, the Public Prosecutor’s Office
of the Province of Imbabura, where Otavalo is located, began an
investigation against the indigenous organizations.

According to this investigation, “a group of citizens of indigenous
race” broke the police barrier around the ALBA meeting “shouting
slogans which disturbed public order”, and the main damage occurred
when a policeman was “robbed of his handcuffs”. On these grounds, the
leaders of the CONAIE and Ecuarunari (the Quechua organization of the
highlands) are being accused of nothing less than “sabotage and
terrorism” [14]. This is a very serious accusation which aims to
intimidate the leaders.

According to lawyer and university professor Mario Melo, at the heart
of the problem is that the CONAIE’s presence outside of the meeting
grounds “made evident, before national and international public
opinion, that the organizations which represent the many nationalities
and peoples of Ecuador are being excluded from the process of defining
the political policies that concern them” [15]. There has been a
political response disguised as legal action in order to “intimidate
and demobilize” the mo