Saturday, January 24, 2009

Bolivia votes, hacks squirm

That's right, it's the big day when Bolivians will go to polls and handily approve their new constitution after decades of demands, marches, organizing, and years overcoming the death throws of fascist attempts to subvert democracy. But not everyone is so happy with the Bolivian people getting what they have struggled for. The BBC doesn't want to admit the violent golpista opposition is finished, except they totally are and this referendum will only stick it to these loser even further. Even the Wall Street Journal is laughing at their crazy Jesus "Vote No" TV ads.

So what is a western news bureau to do facing the afoul truth? Dig deeper down that denial ditch and find some shameless hacks to pile on the bullshit. Here goes:

AFP claims the constitutional referendum is "divisive" because Evo only has a 67% proven approval rating.

The Economist is bitter Evo continues to be so popular and has guided the Bolivian economy to unarguable success so they claim the new leftist constitution empowering indigenous self-governance "owes rather more to the corporatism of Spanish colonial rule than Marx"

CNN writes utter trash and peddles lies while introducing us to a new hack Peter Hakim from the Inter-American Dialogue Institute, claiming Evo is one "who use democracy to concentrate power." Except the new constitution decentralizes power to local authorities more than any previous Bolivian constitution.

The Financial Times also cites a Inter-American Dialogue hack, Michael Shifter who thinks the constitution will only bring more instability. Go ahead and trust that assessment from an article which unashamedly quotes fascist scum Branko Marinkovic in calling the new constitution "racist".

The Christian Science Monitor's resident idiot Sara Miller Llana managed to paste together an article with random nutters in Santa Cruz, the joke Human Rights Foundation, and some Bolivian academic hack Carlos Toranzo who claims the new constitution is not a legitimate social pact because "There was no agreement. After Jan. 25, we will have more violence." Just the agreement between the majority of elected Constituent Assembly members who drafted the text, two-thirds of Congress who approved and redrafted the text, and the voters who will vote on it Sunday... Besides that, it is totally authoritarian.

Bloomberg found a US academic hack Nicholas A. Robins to claim, “The new constitution is a massive structural exercise in affirmative action, using discrimination to try to end discrimination,” I know! Those fucking Indians don't deserve anything, the white man stole this shit fair and square.

But the LA Times gets the hackyist of hack awards. They manage write an entire article based on interviews with professional hack Eduardo Gamarra, the recalled corrupt Prefect of La Paz Lupe Andrade, ex-Prez hack Carlos Mesa, and former opposition congressman hack Luis Eduardo Siles without one word from a pro-government voice. Now that's "objectivity".

Take these names down because it won't be long before we get to officially call them idiots for their false predictions of impending "chaos" and "instability" with the new constitution.

3 comments:

memoria historica said...

well, I cast my Yes vote. the maximum land tenancy part was difficult, as I have no idea really whether 5.000 or 10.000 hectares is enough land to bring justice to campesinos who have none and also allow efficient production. based on a discussion I saw back in October with Agriculture Secretary Carlos Romero and PODEMOS Senator Bohrt, two builders of the national compromise, I chose 10.000 as it is a far cry from the 100.000's of hectares that crooks such as Marinkovic have usurped from the Bolivian state and people, but might lessen the the problem of "surcofundios", very small and unproductive plots of land that was a partial result of the multiple hereditary divisions of land in the altiplano following the land reform of 1953.

it appears that the government decision to not make the new land holding limits retroactive has settled many stomachs in Santa Cruz, and this will allow for the completion of necessary land reform according to the 1990's INRA law, which had all the correct provisions already but was simply never enforced by the neoliberal partidocracia.

of course the hacks won't shut up, but this is it... now our new opportunity begins.

And as the Aymara cosmovision teaches us, we must only remain vigilantly watching the past, as we walk facing it with heads high, our backs and our hopes moving steadily into the future

Anonymous said...

This blog is great! Thanks for your hard work on it.

Anonymous said...

Webmaster, I love your site. Thank you sooo much for working on it.