A Second American Revolution?
Is the US losing its grip on South America? Noam Chomsky thinks so. And by "reasserting its independence," Latin America is becoming a threat to the ruling elites not only in countries like Ecuador and Bolivia, but in America as well:
They have sought to construct democratic systems based on popular participation rather than elite and foreign domination.
Democratic systems, based on popular participation? Outrageous.
Chomsky illustrates the kind of democracy he sees emerging in some Latin American countries by contrasting the election of Evo Morales in Bolivia last year to the 2004 US presidential election:
In the 2004 U.S. presidential election, voters had a choice between two men born to wealth and privilege, who attended the same elite university, joined the same secret society where young men are trained to join the ruling class and were able to run in the election because they were supported by pretty much the same conglomerations of private power. Their programs were similar, consistent with the needs of their primary constituency: wealth and privilege.
For contrast, consider Bolivia and Evo Morales' election last December. Voters were familiar with the issues, very real and important ones like national control over natural gas and other resources, which has overwhelming popular support. Indigenous rights, women's rights, land rights and water rights were on the political agenda, among many others. The population chose someone from its own ranks, not a representative of narrow sectors of privilege.
Imagine that. Voters in the "poorest country in South America" are savvy enough to vote for "someone from [their] own ranks," unlike voters in their wealthy, sophisticated North American neighbor. We have a lot to learn from a country many of us look down on as an inferior banana republic.
Comments
Interesting, but I don't see how someone from the ranks stands a chance in against millionaire opponents. As long as money is in the equation and people educate themselves about the candidates via commercials and soundbites, the rank and file are doomed to failure.
There is one change that could help. I think all candidates should get an equal number of commercial minutes free per election season. That might cut down on some of the dirty politics and force them to sharpen their messages and sell themselves.
Posted by: Kathy | October 4, 2006 06:08 PM
Good idea. The airwaves are ours, supposedly.
You've put your finger right on the problem - money. Remove money as a factor (strict limits on campaign spending is one way) and we've got a shot of taking our country back.
Posted by: abi | October 4, 2006 07:59 PM
Well, that is the case over here in the UK. Before elections, all parties standing in more than a certain number of seats (can't remember how many) get a free 5 minute broadcast, at different times on all channels. We've even had the BNP (British Nationalist [not Nazi, honest] Party) get a broadcast, although that had to run as voice only as no broadcaster would take their unpleasantness unedited. Doesn't stop the parties running up millions in advertising anyway, though.
Posted by: Paul Watson | October 6, 2006 06:46 AM
Thanks for the comments, Paul. Yes, the equal airtime is only part of the solution. The other part is strict restrictions on how much can be spent on ads. Money has become more important than ideas in campaigning. We've got to reverse that.
One thing I really admire about the British system is the proportional representation in parilament.
Posted by: abi | October 6, 2006 09:55 AM
abi,
Sorry to disappoint you, but we have the same system you do: first past the point. It's just that we have more parties to choose from so we've got more choice as to who's the least evil option rather than just the lesser.
Posted by: Paul Watson | October 7, 2006 03:27 PM
Thanks for the info, Paul. A Brit explained to me once the way elections to parliament work, but I guess I misunderstood him. And all this time I thought you were so much more advanced than we were. ;-)
Posted by: abi | October 7, 2006 09:26 PM