TOO MUCH NOISE; NO ISSUES!

As I have mentioned before I like visiting and commenting in a most interesting and, I must add, very popular blog called “Venezuela News & Views”.

While I do read many interesting blogs every day, VN&V is kind of exceptional when it comes to attracting a very challenging and intellectually rich crowd that for the most part is concerned with the pervasive influence of Hugo Chavez, President of Venezuela, in the Latin American region as well as the social and political destruction he is causing inside Venezuela.

One of the regular visitors of VN&V is a gentleman called Kepler. He is a bright Venezuelan professional that lives overseas for whom I have the utmost respect. He is a true liberal with a strong European influence and I still have to find a topic of discussion that he is not well versed on.

Kepler is not a man who will run away from a good intellectual skirmish and I have to say that I treasure dearly all of our online encounters. Recently I found myself discussing with him over a comment I made to a posting on VN&V about the nomination and election of Sarah Palin to the Republican Party ticket.

I have written here a number of posts, perhaps too many, about Mr. Chavez and Venezuela but not a single word on the US presidential election. The reason for this is that even though I have been following closely and even avidly the US presidential election I still have not decided who I will vote for coming November.

I am one of those voters that have traditionally supported Democratic candidates but whose vote is not a “gimme”. Call me old fashion, slow or whatever you want but the fact is that I am a voter whose vote can not be taken for granted. I expect the candidates to make the putt; meaning, I expect them to earn my vote.

This has not happen yet and therefore I could not write about the election because I had nothing to write about. That is, nothing to write about until Kepler challenged me into answering his comments on VN&V.

Kepler has triggered in me a need to start putting my ideas and concerns in perspective and to come up with a short list of particular issues that may not be important for most voters but that are pretty important to me. Issues and concerns over and above the ones I share with most voters and that both candidates, hopefully, will start addressing now that they have been officially nominated by their parties.

VENEZUELA: TO VOTE OR NOT TO VOTE? THAT IS THE QUESTION!

In the comment thread of the popular Venezuela News & Views blog I engaged in a discussion with a fellow blogger (Citizen Feathers) about the current political situation in Venezuela. After posting comments back and forth we were able to iron out our discrepancies and agree on everything except for one issue. I promised Feathers that I would address this issue in a separate comment but due to unforeseen circumstances I was not able to keep my word.

Even though late, I am herewith posting my comments on that issue not only because I gave Feathers my word but because I believe the issue is today more relevant than ever.

I believe that to answer the vote/not vote question we need to take into account two different considerations. One is the constitutional and legal implications of the decision and the other is the personal implications of that decision.

VENEZUELA: VOTES WILL NOT MAKE THE CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM LEGAL

Democracy is not a one size fits all kind of concept. There are many kinds of democracy. There are Monarchical Democracies, Parliamentary Democracies and even Imperial Democracies such as the Japanese. Since 1999 we also have a Bolivarian Democracy. All of these democracies though share one same characteristic; they are all Republican Constitutional Democracies.

In a lighter note you could say that they are different kinds of “Arepas” (Reina Pepiada, Carne Mechada, Queso de Mano, etc.) but they are all “Arepas”.

There are also Popular Democracies (Cuba) and I would even venture and say that we now have what could be considered Religious Democracies such as Iran. They also hold elections but they are completely different systems of government.

These democracies are not “Arepas”; they are “Tortillas”; and, while both are made of corn flour, millions of Mexicans and Venezuelans can attest to the fact that they are absolutely different.

VENEZUELA: COUP D' ÉTAT TO THE FEDERAL SYSTEM

In the last couple months I have been collaborating with the blog "Venezuela News & Views". The editor of this blog, Daniel Duquenal, had the idea to invite his readers to write comments on the modifications to each and every article of the ill conceived constitutional reform being proposed by the government.

Venezuela is at the brink of becoming a totalitarian country under the Presidency of a tyrant who wants to stay in power for life. I can not think of any other issue in Latin America that is more important than this one and therefore I offered Daniel to write comments to the modifications being proposed to Articles 11, 16 and 18.

The following are the comments I wrote and the dramatic conclusions I have reached.

Article 18

Preamble: While reading the text of the proposed amendment to article 18 I remembered a conversation once held with the elected President of a Latin American country who is now deceased. We talked about the sad role of some armed forces in Latin America and how they have become the nemesis of democracy and individual freedoms and in many cases the “jail keepers” of their people. He said that while the armed forces have a congenital tendency to misread the social and political expectations of the people and therefore, most of the time, end up in the wrong side of history, the good thing is that they are slow.

He liked to say that most people believe that bullets kill people when in fact they don’t. If I put a bunch of bullets in your hand they will not kill you. It is the combination of factors and “speed” what makes a bullet lethal.

VENEZUELA: A POLITICAL "CHIMERA" TO KILL DEMOCRACY

In the last couple months I have been collaborating with the blog "Venezuela News & Views". The editor of this blog, Daniel Duquenal, had the idea to invite his readers to write comments on the modifications to each and every article of the ill conceived constitutional reform being proposed by the government.

Venezuela is at the brink of becoming a totalitarian country under the Presidency of a tyrant who wants to stay in power for life. I can not think of any other issue in Latin America that is more important than this one and therefore I offered Daniel to write comments to the modifications being proposed to Articles 11, 16 and 18.

The following are the comments I wrote and the dramatic conclusions I have reached.

Article 16

Preamble: When I first asked the editor of "Venezuela News & Views" to allow me to comment on the constitutional modifications of articles 11, 16 and 18, I was totally aware, from the first reading, of the dangers that the modifications to article 11 posed to the Venezuelan democracy.

At that time, I also thought that commenting article 16 was a waste of time because the text of this modification is the closest I have ever seen a constitutional text come to the legendary dyslectic speech of that beloved character called “Cantinflas” brilliantly portrayed by the Mexican actor Mario Moreno throughout his life.

I decided to write comments on all three articles though because they are part of Title II of the Bolivarian Constitution of 1999 that deals with the territory and the political division of that territory.

Far was I then from realizing that, as much as the implications of the modified text to article 11 where frightening, the implications of the modifications to the text of article 16 are by far, and I mean far, worse than those of article 11. Further, I was wrong and presumptuous by dismissing and labeling the text of the modifications to article 16 as “Cantinflesco”.

VENEZUELA: ABSOLUTE POWER FOR AN ABSOLUTE TYRANT

In the last couple months I have been collaborating with the blog "Venezuela News & Views". The editor of this blog, Daniel Duquenal, had the idea to invite his readers to write comments on the modifications to each and every article of the ill conceived constitutional reform being proposed by the government.

Venezuela is at the brink of becoming a totalitarian country under the Presidency of a tyrant who wants to stay in power for life. I can not think of any other issue in Latin America that is more important than this one and therefore I offered Daniel to write comments to the modifications being proposed to Articles 11, 16 and 18.

The following are the comments I wrote and the dramatic conclusions I have reached.

THE POWER AND LEGACY OF OUR CULTURE IS OUR CONCEPT OF INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM

The following is my answer to a comment posted by "Bauta" in the blog of Andres Oppenheimer from The Miami Herald. It touches some of the points of my previous two postings but here again, it does provide further insights as to my thoughts on the immigration issue. Enjoy!

Bauta said...

When you have millions of people coming from the same region, the result is that they don't feel the need to assimilate to the new society and they don't learn the language. Hispanics in America and Muslims in Europe don't want to assimilate, they want to impose their culture. Now the US is going to bring 7,000 more Muslims from Irak. Wonderful ah? Bauta

Mousqueton said....

Dear Bauta:

That is not quite true. Let me explain.

1) At a certain point in our history over 74% of the New York population was foreign and they eventually assimilated. Further, in the 1900’s the foreign born population of the United States was higher than in the year 2000 and they have assimilated as well.

In the process we also assimilated some of their customs and traditions. A token of that is the Saint Patrick's Ball held in the White House and certainly the bagpipes that are today an American tradition at the funeral of any policeman and/or firefighter who dies in the line of duty.

2) While numbers do have an impact on the assimilation process, it is the endurance and fortitude of the principles that eventually determine which culture prevails.

If you make a list of everything you believe to be American and do some research you will find that none of it, except as I mentioned before arguably Baseball and certainly Rock and Roll, is indeed American.

The logical question then is; how can there be an American culture if everything we regard as American is indeed foreign?

IT IS HARD TO BE AN AMERICAN

The following is a comment posted in the blog of Andres Oppenheimer from The Miami Herald. It is in a way a little redundant with my last posting but it does add some additional concepts to the immigration debate. Enjoy!
Mousqueton said ...

It is pretty clear, from the reading of some comments in this blog, that many of you do not understand what America is all about.

IMMIGRATION OR ETHNIC CLEANSING DEBATE? THAT IS THE QUESTION

The immigration debate in the US is so biased that there is little chance that any intelligent discussion can take place.

To some neo-conservatives immigration is the mother of all evils and blamed for everything that is wrong except, at least for the time being, the war in Iraq. On the other side of the spectrum we have those who believe that immigration is good for the US and that since we are a nation of immigrants everyone should be welcomed.

Behind the slogans, self serving names, the posturing and of course the profiteering by some dubious and certainly biased media personalities, the truth is that everyone in both sides of the argument are simply human beings; human beings that react as such when confronted with real and/or perceived threats.

In the end, everyone in this epic confrontation shares the same primal calling and motivation; survival!

In the US, the anti-immigration zealots are not really concerned with jobs, welfare and the economy. Why should they? If there is something that the US has proven through out its history is that we are the best there is when it comes to assimilating and adapting. We are extremely good at thriving in adverse conditions and certainly a couple million immigrants are not going to change that.

Further, immigrants are both producers and consumers and that is what our economic system is based on. We might need to tweak a little thing here and there to help immigrants adapt and produce more than they consume, but that is not a problem for a strong and creative economy such as the US economy.

The real concern that conservative zealots and other xenophobic fanatics have is that they perceive Hispanic immigration as a threat to the survival of their particular brand of American culture. Further, most of them are really advocates of a policy of ethnic cleansing disguised as an immigration policy.

THE CHAVEZ SAGA II - "leftside"

The Chavez saga continues. I am herewith including additional excerpts of comments in this regard written by bloggers who visit the interesting Miami Herald blog of Andres Oppenheimer (link in this page).

leftside said:

Mousqueton: I don't quite get ya. You quote a wonderful T. Roosevelt paragraph about the need to get rid of our country's divisions but justify the "biggest house" in the barrio being able to control the others.

You urge Americans to "understand socialism as a civilized political alternative for many of our neighbors," but treat Chavez as the antichrist.

I have to ask which specific Chavez position do you disagree with? Beyond style, what exactly has he done that you thought was a mortal sin, worthy of "rubbing" our friends like Chile and Ecuador with some of our heaviest sandpaper possible?

You, like even the LA Times, seem to take for granted that Chavez is an enemy of democracy. But Chavez's real enemy is clear = neo-liberalism and capitalism. His democratic credentials are actually stellar in many ways (today's Venezuelans rate their democracy highest in Latin America). He's been elected more, by higher margins than about anyone. Participation is through the roof and the press and NGOs are as developed and oppositional (and free) as anywhere. And local participatory democracy is blossoming.

Is it just young idealism to want to eradicate illiteracy from your country (like Venezuela and now Bolivia)? Is it just irresponsible to want to earn the maximum value on your country's natural resources?

mousqueton said:

Off course you don’t get me!

THE CHAVEZ SAGA I - "leftside"

The Chavez saga in Venezuela is becoming more and more interesting. I am herewith including excerpts of some comments in this regard written by bloggers who visit the interesting Miami Herald blog of Andres Oppenheimer (link in this page).

By the way, we need to get those arrogant Washington idiots out of office and bring in people that think and are capable of designing a sensible, realistic and intelligent Latin American foreign policy. Enjoy!
leftside said:

It's laughable to hear some of you rant about the irrelevancy and anti-US bias of the OAS. It shows your contempt for democracy and regional diplomacy. The OAS' history as a US dominated institution is not debatable.

Because the region preferred a moderate Chilean over a Washington stooge is no reason to "cut them dead”. That type of bullying will get the US nowhere even faster.

Mora, you're proposal to boycott the OAS until they replace its leadership to suit your radical Cuban friends is revealing. And your shock at the "back scratching" that goes on in international foray is hypocritical and naive. Or are you unaware of the much more crude arm-twisting the US utilizes behind doors?

NOTHING IS MORE DANGEROUS THAN A THICK WHO THINKS!

I believe it was Mario Vargas Llosa, the famous Peruvian writer, who, while attending a literary gathering in Madrid, said; “In literature, reality is a lie and fiction is the truth”.

This quote came to my mind while writing a comment on a very interesting Venezuelan blog (link on this page) and before I knew it, I had written a full and very long article.

I have indicated before that the future of America will not be found in far away lands. The future of America is here and now, and it is called Latin America. A region that we have neglected for far too long and that we have treated with very little respect

Regardless of what we do today (Immigration laws, fences, etc.), the United States of our children will be a little country, a little salsa and a little blues.

Therefore, it is time to wake up, drop the "Know nothings" attitude and start working to make the best out of it.

The following article belongs to the realm of fiction and, since literature and politics are twin brothers, I will leave up to you to decide how truthful it might be. Enjoy!

After reading many comments about Chavez I have concluded that people give him far too much credit. Maybe we should try to explain Chavez from a new and different angle.

It is most likely that in the coming years the world will reach what has been called the "Peak Oil" breaking point. This is, the point were the growth rate of oil consumption outpaces the growth rate of oil reserves. In economics this point is also known as the point of inflection.

The most conservative annalists, including Dick Cheney, Vice-President of the United States, have acknowledged that this will create a 3% annual demand/supply gap in the oil trade.

We should remember that the oil crisis in the 70’s was generated by a temporary and speculative demand/supply gap of 5% and that this was enough to send oil prices up 400% and the world economy into a tail spin.

Moderate and liberal annalists believe that this gap will be more like 7% the first and 10% the latter though there are some that have utter the figure of 13%. This is, 7%, 10% or 13% every year from “Peak oil” forward.

Of course you do not have to be a brain surgeon to realize that, when, rather if, this happens, the consequences of even the moderate predictions to the world economy are going to be mind boggling. This also begins to give us an insight as to why is the United States spending over 300 billion Dollars in Iraq.

Fidel Castro, whom I do not know and therefore can not objectively give an opinion about how intelligent he might be, seems to be at least pretty street wise and very politically savvy. He certainly is aware of the catastrophic consequences that “Peak Oil” could bring to the Cuban economy.

I am sure Fidel Castro has also realized that Chavez fits perfectly into that very spicy Latin American say, full of popular wisdom, that reads; “nada es mas peligroso que un bruto que piensa” (nothing is more dangerous that a thick who thinks).

THE STATE OF THE AMERICAN ENGLISH LANGUAGE IS SOUND AND WELL!

There are many language zealots out there that seem to think that the American English language is under attack and needs a law to protect it. There are also some who resent the way some minority groups use our language. Do not worry, the state of the American English language is sound and well.

English is a Germanic language an as a matter of fact the name of the language itself derives from “Englisc” which is the name of the language that the Angles tribes, originally from Engel, spoke during the fifth century.

Throughout the Norman Empire and up until 1362 the language of the British monarchy was French and Latin. At that time, the English underclass spoke four different English dialects. In 1399, King Henry IV became the first king of England whose mother tongue was English.

English has always been a bastard language and that is why the majority of modern English words come from foreign not old English roots. As a matter of fact only about 1/6 of known old English words have descendants surviving today and only about 5,000 or so words from this period have remained unchanged.

Languages that have contributed words to English include Latin, Greek, French, German, Arabic, Hindi (from India), Italian, Malay, Dutch, Farsi (from Iran and Afghanistan), Nahuatl (the Aztec language), Sanskrit (from ancient India), Portuguese, Spanish, Tupi, Quechua (from South America) and Ewe (from Africa). William Shakespeare himself coined over 1600 new words.

So, do not be alarmed if the Latinos or Blacks, for that matter, continue to enrich American English with their own creative use of the language.

That is what English is all about and why it has become the fastest growing and most widely published language in the world. There are at least eight main different regional standards of English and within each of these regional varieties a number of highly differentiated local English dialects.

More than 300 million people throughout the world speak English as a first language. One in five of the world’s population speak English with a good level of competence and within the next couple years the number of people speaking English as a second language will exceed the number of native speakers. In Latin America alone, English is a mandatory second language course in most schools throughout the region.

English is not under attack and certainly does not need to be protected by a law.

What you should be concerned though is with ignorance. Over 45% of Europeans can take part in a conversation in a language other than their mother tongue as can 77% of their students while less than 10% of our college students learn foreign languages.

If at all, we should be encouraging our people to learn foreign languages and certainly Spanish. In Brazil for example, both English and Spanish are now part of the elementary school curricula.

THE ENEMY WITHIN!

I believe it was Goethe who once said “Nothing is more terrifying than ignorance in action”. We have become an ignorant society that is governed by slogans without even questioning what those slogans mean. Even worst; we act based upon those slogans with no regard for the consequences. The concept of Democracy just happens to be one more casualty of the slogan vortex.

There is no democracy if people do not have a clear concept of “freedom”. The problem is that this “God given right”, which is also a slogan, has been given in different measures and by different Gods.

For Christians, the freedom granted to us by God has no limit or boundaries. So much so that we believe we are free even if we are agnostic. To say it in other words, our concept of freedom allows us the right to even negate God himself.