PBH / Colombia / Forums (active) Travelguide Cheap hostels Pictures

Delegative Democracy: The Case of Colombia

The link to this article was posted somewhere else, yet I found the article quite interesting and will add nicely to the discussion we have been having about the state of democracy in Colombia.

http://www.worldpress.org/Americas/2949.cfm
Delegative Democracy: The Case of Colombia
Manuel Trujillo, research associate
Council on Hemispheric Affairs
October 3, 2007

In 1994, Guillermo O'Donnell, one of Latin America's most prominent political scientists, identified a "new species" of democracy that was now present throughout most of Latin America, and labeled this phenomenon "delegative democracy," a type that is neither representative nor institutionalized. The basic premise of a delegative democracy is that once an individual is elected president he/she is "thereby entitled to govern as he or she sees fit." Power falls into the hands of a single person, but, unlike authoritarianism, the leader is still held accountable at the ballot box by the electorate. O'Donnell has used his theory to describe accurately variants of democracies in countries such as Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Ecuador, and Peru. Colombia, though, didn't seem to fit the delegative democratic model comfortably. However, since Alvaro Uribe, a Liberal Party dissident, rose to power in 2002, Colombia's democracy has increasingly become more delegative, and thus less representative. The populace, tired of decades of corruption and complacency under an ineffectual bipartisan model, chose a leader who is the epitome of the presumptive delegative democratic model: a highly individualistic, paternalistic figure who sits above all other institutions as "the embodiment of the nation."

"On 'Uribismo'
The profoundly messianic movement that has surged in support of Uribe and his policies, known as "uribismo," has significantly deteriorated the country's capacity for horizontal accountability, mainly because it has become a majority force that will not challenge the president's authority. Despite the fact that "uribismo" is embodied in two of Colombia's most popular political parties (namely, the "U" Party and the Radical Change Party), their ideology is essentially empty if not meretricious. Disputes within these parties, which are nothing but a congregation of conservatives, liberals, and independents with different backgrounds, reveal that no one—not even Uribe—knows their guiding philosophy. The slogan of the "U" Party, for instance, invites Colombians to "stop criticizing, work with us," suggesting a permissive attitude with the singular goal of carrying out the president's agenda, not their own. It directly condemns critics of Uribe's policies, ignoring the fact that a loyal opposition is an essential ingredient in any respectable institutionalized democracy."

By Desideria (Moderator) (Trustee board) on May 7, 2009, 11:56 in Politics & the war.

Desideria (Moderator) (Trustee board) says on May 7, 2009, 12:38:

"Lack of Checks and Balances
Horizontal accountability refers to the network of agencies that serve as checks and balances to presidential power. In Colombia, these agencies do exist but nonetheless have progressively lost their tectonic edge throughout the years of Uribe's administration. O'Donnell further argues that if the institutions that make horizontal accountability effective are seen by a delegative president as "unnecessary encumbrances to their 'mission,'" he/she would make arduous efforts to hinder their development or simply abort their relevance. That is exactly what is happening in Colombia. For example, two directors of DANE, the country's center for statistics, have resigned in the midst of a scandal that has raised questions as to the legitimacy of employment data; a few months ago, Uribe publicly confronted and accused the Supreme Court, one of the country's most treasured institutions, of being biased against his law for granting pardons to thousands of right-wing paramilitaries. With expressions such as "cowards" and "terrorists disguised as civilians," Uribe and his inner circle—some of whom share the same hard-line posture—have tried to rule out of the system those who dare to question his administration, including credible members of perfectly respectable political tendencies. These attacks on Colombia's institutions represent a fundamental flaw in Uribe's governing style, which has resulted in the serious undermining of the institutionalization of democracy in his country."

A fronte praecipitium a tergo lupi

0 funny, 0 helpful.

tasco66 says on May 7, 2009, 13:03:

“The basic premise of a delegative democracy is that once an individual is elected president he/she is "thereby entitled to govern as he or she sees fit."

Well that describes perfectly Euro countries which are much worse in this regard than Colombia.

Some examples:

France:

François Bayrou was the "third man" in France's presidential elections in 2007. He just wrote a book about politics in France:

The book is already being likened to the late François Mitterrand's "Le Coup d'Etat Permanent" (The Permanent Coup), in which he branded Charles de Gaulle a dictator. Although this was clearly an exaggerated claim, the book helped Mitterrand go on to seduce the Left and later to clinch the presidency.

In his tome, Bayrou accuses Sarkozy of creating an "egocracy" in which money and profit are king. His plan to do away with the "republican model", which is "without mandate" and "against the will of the French", is "the most impressive confiscation of all the powers attempted in decades."

Sarkozy is described as a "barbarian child" who has "ill-advisedly been given the controls to a nice, shiny digger. Sitting at the wheel, he brrrms the engine, forward, backward, drives round the house, plays with the articulated arm. And, one after another, he uproots or he smashes the pillars that are holding the house up."

He follows an "ideology that has never dared speak its name in France openly, a model of society based on inequality, the widening of inequalities (that is) accepted and even sought after." This is based on a Bush-style "American model".

The President also promotes an "ideology of distracting citizens through 'peopolisation'" (glossy, celebrity politics).

He has the media "under control" and is far too cosy with big business, he writes: "It's no longer a conniving capitalism, it's a capitalism of incest," he claims with typical hyperbole.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/henry_samuel/blog/2009/04/30/_franois_bay...

Italy:

Books on Besrlusconi (who is on his 3rd term by the way):

All these writers have to hustle to find terminology to define a politician who is capable of (1) brazenly using his own and state TV channels for political purposes; (2) passing a series of disastrous laws that make it hard to convict him, including, in the age of Enron and Parmalat, one decriminalizing balance-sheet fraud; and (3) calmly disappearing from work for more than a month, as he did this winter, only to let it be known he had vanished to have a face lift. "Soap-opera democracy" comes to mind, but "totalitarian democracy" is the term Columbia University political scientist Giovanni Sartori settles on in his Mala tempora ("Evil Times"), a collection of his articles from the daily paper Corriere della Sera on the Berlusconi phenomenon.

If totalitarian democracy sounds polemical, consider what the Prime Minister has to say. Last year Berlusconi, who had up until then refused to appear in the courtroom, agreed to make a carefully prepared "spontaneous declaration" before the court in Milan that is trying him for corrupting several Roman judges. "All citizens are equal before the law," said Berlusconi in his declaration, but he argued that the court should not be allowed to deliberate his case because "some citizens are more equal than others." The nod to Animal Farm seems to have been entirely unintentional. Berlusconi's statement is reprinted in Peter Gomez and Marco Travaglio's useful Lo chiamavano impunità ("They Called It Impunity"), a report on one of several corruption cases in which the Prime Minister is charged and which recently led to the conviction of his longtime attorney Cesare Previti, a Forza Italia senator.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040621/randall/2

The trouble with free elections is, you never know who is going to win (Leonid Brezhnev)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) (Trustee board) says on May 7, 2009, 13:07:

Tasco, you want to discuss the state of democracy in Europe kindly start your own thread.

A fronte praecipitium a tergo lupi

0 funny, 0 helpful.

tasco66 says on May 7, 2009, 13:12:

Desi my point is, this is not a "new specie" of democracy as Guillermo stated. It is like that in Europe now and has been like that over there for most of the past century...

The trouble with free elections is, you never know who is going to win (Leonid Brezhnev)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) (Trustee board) says on May 7, 2009, 13:18:

No, tasco, that's not how it is in Sweden.

A fronte praecipitium a tergo lupi

1 funny, 0 helpful.

Darloup (☼Travelguide writer) says on May 7, 2009, 13:26:

Actually, Tasco makes some good, comparative points....

Good, but weak, but then I have to think.... ;-)

Better to have tried and failed than having regrets all your life about what you MIGHT have missed

0 funny, 0 helpful.

island girl says on May 7, 2009, 13:26:

Desi you're wanted on the Escobar thread.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Darloup (☼Travelguide writer) says on May 7, 2009, 13:45:

In most countries, the very notion of democratic elections entails that whoever gets a majority vote and is thus elected. This implies getting over 50% of the vote. And, and we all know, most "winners" don't get much over 50% (whether Obama, Uribe, Sarkozy or Berlusconi). Still, over 50% is enough to warrant a legitimate mandate.

Naturally, most elected candidates will ALWAYS say: "Hey; although you didn't vote me, I'll endeavour to the the president of ALL my country's citizens, even for those who didn't vote for me". And we all know this is utter rubbish.

Yet, those persons were democratically elected. - criticizing their democratic legititimacy is tantamount to saying that those voters who elected them were "stupid", that they didn't understand the stakes and that, at the end of the day, that they didn't deserve to vote.

This is a very arrogant position...

Better to have tried and failed than having regrets all your life about what you MIGHT have missed

0 funny, 0 helpful.

romy says on May 7, 2009, 13:56:

democracy is more complex than that

0 funny, 0 helpful.

tasco66 says on May 7, 2009, 14:06:

I wonder if Colombians would like a "Soap-opera democracy"?

The trouble with free elections is, you never know who is going to win (Leonid Brezhnev)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Darloup (☼Travelguide writer) says on May 7, 2009, 14:12:

Romy: "democracy is more complex than that"

It sure is but, on PBH, we're always trying to simplify things because the average IQ (mine included) is way below 105...

Better to have tried and failed than having regrets all your life about what you MIGHT have missed

0 funny, 0 helpful.

tasco66 says on May 7, 2009, 14:13:

"most "winners" don't get much over 50% (whether Obama, Uribe, Sarkozy or Berlusconi)."

Uribe got 62% in 2006

The trouble with free elections is, you never know who is going to win (Leonid Brezhnev)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Darloup (☼Travelguide writer) says on May 7, 2009, 14:30:

Tasco: "Uribe got 62% in 2006"

That's impressive enough, although SOME people (not me) will try to qualify this result (how many people actually voted)?

I always happened to think that, if you don't vote in an election, you can't really complain about its outcome - but then, that's me)

Better to have tried and failed than having regrets all your life about what you MIGHT have missed

0 funny, 0 helpful.

romy says on May 7, 2009, 14:31:

You're trying to simplify things.

There are many on PBH that are capable of having a reasonable discussion on such critical topics.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Darloup (☼Travelguide writer) says on May 7, 2009, 14:39:

Romy: "There are many on PBH that are capable of having a reasonable discussion on such critical topics."

I'm sure we'll meet them in due course.

Better to have tried and failed than having regrets all your life about what you MIGHT have missed

0 funny, 0 helpful.

romy says on May 7, 2009, 14:53:

Not many feed the trolls

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) (Trustee board) says on May 7, 2009, 20:59:

We have a number of people interested in discussing politics and some of them quite capable, some others more willing than capable. But it's like that with most topics. There are many people discussing Colombian cuisine who have never cooked a dish, the only thing they know is how to eat it.

That brings me back on topic:
A president elected by a any kind of legal margin is responsible of responding to all its citizens. You say it is rubbish, I say anything else is a travesty. Mr. Uribe is acting not like a leader of a country but more like a mayordomo of a finca. Politically, he and Hugo Chavez are fruits of the same tree, two different shades, the core being populist. None of them very democratic. Democracy is tough, it's hard, it's difficult. It takes more than be democratically elected. It's also what you do with all that power inyour hands.

A fronte praecipitium a tergo lupi

1 funny, 0 helpful.

tasco66 says on May 8, 2009, 04:14:

Maybe Colombia should adopt the "totalitarian democracy" style of Europe...that should make Euros happy...

The trouble with free elections is, you never know who is going to win (Leonid Brezhnev)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) (Trustee board) says on May 8, 2009, 05:23:

A free democracy? Isn't that what Colombia was supposed to be, or has been for the last 40 or 50 years anyways, since Rojas Pinilla's time? A little shaky and not so perfect example of Soputh American democracy but a lot better than the eternal merry-go-round of juntas that many other countries down there have experience4d in that same time period? The constitution of 91 had all the makings to safeguard the democracy in Colombia, make it better, make it steadier, had not Mr. Uribe happened to come along and started undermining the best that Colombia has to offer in the matter of political institutions: the checks and balances that the courts perform to his very power and the healthy opposition that is a necessity in any decent democracy.

A fronte praecipitium a tergo lupi

0 funny, 0 helpful.

makopp5 (☼Travelguide writer) says on May 8, 2009, 05:27:

Desi
"make it better, make it steadier, had not Mr. Uribe happened to come along and started undermining the best that Colombia has to offer in the matter of political institutions: the checks and balances that the courts perform to his very power and the healthy opposition that is a necessity in any decent democracy."

But exactly that kind of democracy want the Colombians. More of 50% support Uribe, so that´s real democray if you like it or not. They like it like Uribe leads the country. And that´s the most important if you like it or not. That´s the colombian style and adaptation of democracy.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

tasco66 says on May 8, 2009, 05:44:

At least Colombia has not gone as bad as the Euro democracy, where as Berlusconi described "All citizens are equal before the law," but "some citizens are more equal than others."…

Berlusconi pushes through law granting himself immunity from prosecution

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article4385427.ece

The trouble with free elections is, you never know who is going to win (Leonid Brezhnev)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) (Trustee board) says on May 8, 2009, 07:15:

Colombians just don't KNOW how a real democracy works. It's like the happiness barometer: Colombians are the happiest people on Earth, right! perhaps because they are so limited in their options to move to other countries they lack the experience on how other people live and they are the happiest because they don't KNOW any better.

A fronte praecipitium a tergo lupi

1 funny, 0 helpful.

tasco66 says on May 8, 2009, 07:20:

Desi says: “Colombians just don't KNOW how a real democracy works. It's like the happiness barometer: Colombians are the happiest people on Earth, right! perhaps because they are so limited in their options to move to other countries they lack the experience on how other people live and they are the happiest because they don't KNOW any better.”

Desi why are you so condescending with Colombians?

Colombian democracy is much stronger than in most Euro countries…and Colombia was already a democracy when most Euro countries where still being run by kings and ruthless dictators...

The trouble with free elections is, you never know who is going to win (Leonid Brezhnev)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

tasco66 says on May 8, 2009, 07:47:

How can one be upset that "Colombians are the happiest people"?

Colombians would be even more happy if they knew what was really going on in Euroland...

The trouble with free elections is, you never know who is going to win (Leonid Brezhnev)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on May 8, 2009, 07:57:

"Colombians are the happiest people on Earth, right! perhaps because they are so limited in their options to move to other countries they lack the experience on how other people live "

That's a pretty silly argument, you are either happy, or you are not, you don't need to know how anybody else lives to know if you are or not. The people in the Darfur don't travel much either and as such don't know how well other people have it by comparison, but I am willing to bet that they are not very high up on the happiness index. The Finns on the other hand, travel often and are economically well off, but they look like if they are the most miserable foks in the world, they walk around with a hangdog look, like if somebody just killed their puppy, how do you esssplain that Lucy?

"All I want to know is where I'm going to die, so I never go there" Unkown (at least to me) wise man.

0 funny, 1 helpful.

capt_j says on May 8, 2009, 08:20:

I'm not sure that O'Donnell is very descriptive. Once elected, yes, a leader is largely free to do what he wants. It depends on the system what kind of leeway he has-

-in the Westminster system once a government is formed, the PM pretty much does what he wants, for the full term of the government, short of a no-confidence vote. The government can also choose when to hold elections, which gives them the best chance of continuing. I believe a majority of the British electorate opposed participating in the Iraq war, but Tony Blair did it anyway.

- in the US system the president may have two, one, or neither house of the legislature of his own party, but even if he does, they are not elected with him and have thier own agenda. Still the president has complete control over what he does with the US military outside of the country. Neither Clinton or Bush II went into office with much interest in foreign matters but both started large military operations, at least partly because it gave them the opportunity to do what they wanted.

-maybe the president is supposed to represent all the people but in reality he represents who he needs to to maintain power, not even the people who voted for him. Party activists tend to be the people most disappointed with how a politician turns out.

-democratically elected or not, a politician has power if people support him or no one is willing to oppose him. If Uribe has power, it's because people like what he has done and they don't see any good alternative. Chavez suppresses dissent but still I think a very large portion of the population supports him because they were sick of Venezuelan politics as it had been conducted for many years and they think he delivers for them.

0 funny, 1 helpful.

makopp5 (☼Travelguide writer) says on May 8, 2009, 08:32:

"Colombians just don't KNOW how a real democracy works. It's like the happiness barometer: Colombians are the happiest people on Earth, right! perhaps because they are so limited in their options to move to other countries they lack the experience on how other people live and they are the happiest because they don't KNOW any better."

Desi
you say that the Colombians are stupid? Why do you think the democray is better in other parts? And why will you take the happines from them? What advantage do they have, when they copy another democracy, that they don`t want and then they are unhappy. That doesn`t sound very logic for me. You prefer unhappy people?? I prefer happy people and the rest is secundary. The most importance is the happines all the rest is secundary. I don`t want to live in another part of the world and live in a perfect (your opinion) democracy with unhappy people around me.

0 funny, 1 helpful.

romy says on May 8, 2009, 09:18:

Please, if you are serious lets discuss political pluralism, equality before the law, the right to petition elected officials for redress of grievances, due process, civil liberties, human rights, and elements of civil society outside the government. In addition to freedom of expression, freedom of the press, freedom of speech, judicial independence.
But then maybe you don't want to go there because that's were Colombia fails miserably.

1 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) (Trustee board) says on May 8, 2009, 09:26:

No, I'm not saying that Colombians are stupid. But just look at the statistics on happiness...the happiest people live somewhere in Polynesia or Togo or Nauru...simple lives, limited options, nowhere to go. Nobody wants to take it away from them. Innocence is bliss. Much wants more. Once your basic needs are satisfied and the society is permissive and laid back enough you describe yourself as "happy" without even thinking twice. OTOH, people who have a lot or have too many options to them are not happy with anything.

There is no way to describe a "perfect" democracy; but the way I see it (my personal opinion) is that a representative democracy with total transparency, with checks and balances and a healthy opposition is still the best form of government, for any country, anywhere. But if all you know is a pseudodemocracy of the national Front or the tainted, corrupted democracy of the eighties and nineties then perhaps you look at the populistic, authoritarian, abusive democracy of Mr. Uribe and his cronies and say wowww....at least he's doing something for the security of this country and the guerrillas are in retreat. So, the Colombians, with little knowledge on how a true democracy works and tired to the marrow of their bones of violence look the other way on human right abuse issues, on corruption issues, oin parapolitica issues, on the Fujimorian pattern of development of Mr. Uribe's political behaviour and say...this is the best president we've ever had.

A fronte praecipitium a tergo lupi

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on May 8, 2009, 09:33:

Desi, happiness is defined by how somebody feels, not by how somebody more enlightened than them thinks they should feel. If somebody is happy with their limited life in their isolated little village, who are we to say they are happy out of ignorance? Happy is happy. Now that kind of life is not for me either.

"All I want to know is where I'm going to die, so I never go there" Unkown (at least to me) wise man.

0 funny, 1 helpful.

romy says on May 8, 2009, 09:47:

BB- you're familiar with the allegory of the cave right? should people not be released from their chains?

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on May 8, 2009, 09:50:

romy, no I am not, refresh me.

"All I want to know is where I'm going to die, so I never go there" Unkown (at least to me) wise man.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

romy says on May 8, 2009, 09:54:

You're probably more familiar with The Matrix... same idea
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegory_of_the_cave

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on May 8, 2009, 09:55:

Romy, what if people don't believe they are in chains, what if the ones that are in chains are the sophisticated ones, tied down to a lifestyle they think they should aspire to, but that is not giving them anything but grief and anxiety, because they cannot maintain it, or doesn't fulfill them (btw, this not autobiographical, I am very satisfied with my my materialistic, unspiritual lifestyle :)? Is that happiness? I woudln't exactly correlate somebody living a happy simple life in a small village to your cave allegory. Some might think "wow this what i've been missing?" And others would say, "what's the fuss, that's what we've been missing?".

"All I want to know is where I'm going to die, so I never go there" Unkown (at least to me) wise man.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

tasco66 says on May 8, 2009, 10:16:

Desi, Maybe you should start a "Pirate Party" in Colombia, like the one in Sweden to oppose Uribe...I am sure Chavez would be glad to fund it.

The trouble with free elections is, you never know who is going to win (Leonid Brezhnev)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

romy says on May 8, 2009, 10:24:

BB-I don't know...
I think happiness is mostly relative of course. I have no problem with people being happy with their lives, however miserable I may think they are, me telling them that they are wrong would be arrogant most of the time. Though I think there are accesibility issues that limit people's perspectives of what happiness may entail.
But I'm not claiming to be enlightened. I could very much be the person with a happy life, with little perspective of reality, and I'm thinking no matter how depressed I may become with reality I would still want to know the truth. A life built upon lies and deceptions is a saddened existence, I think.

It's too early for philosophy though and I'm getting flashbacks of last week when after some vino with some friends we started debating if reality is perspective or if perspective is reality... Then we decided to embrace our realities, be happy and chase tail at the club.

1 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on May 8, 2009, 10:31:

"Then we decided to embrace our realities, be happy and chase tail at the club."

I think you made a wise choice.

"All I want to know is where I'm going to die, so I never go there" Unkown (at least to me) wise man.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

tasco66 says on May 8, 2009, 11:05:

“I believe a majority of the British electorate opposed participating in the Iraq war, but Tony Blair did it anyway.”

What about accountability in Euro democracy?

Remember how Blair stated that Saddam Hussein's was able to launch a WMD strike within 45 minutes in order to justify the invasion of Iraq?

Apparently in a Euro democracy you can lie to justify a war a get away with it….

The trouble with free elections is, you never know who is going to win (Leonid Brezhnev)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Darloup (☼Travelguide writer) says on May 9, 2009, 15:04:

Makopp:

"But exactly that kind of democracy want the Colombians. More of 50% support Uribe, so that´s real democray if you like it or not. They like it like Uribe leads the country. And that´s the most important if you like it or not. That´s the colombian style and adaptation of democracy."

That's the main argument I have been having with Desi ;-)

1) Desi argues that Uribe's government isn't THAT legitimate because so many people didn't vote in the last election...

I argue that those people who didn't bother to vote can't really complain...

A democratic election is about winning over 50% of the votes cast.

2) Desi also argues that Colombia doesn"t really KNOW about democracy...

So what? I don't really know how my car engine works, yet I rely on it as long as my car starts up in the morning and takes me to my destination. Democracy (like a car) is a MEANS, not an END...

3) I keep posting about Uribe's popularity (presently over 70% in spite of many scandals - pyramid schemes, etc...).

These independant popularity polls are carried by international organizations (such as Gallup) who have nothing to gain/lose from the results.

More importantly: Uribe is popular EVEN AMONG COLOMBIANS WHO DIDN'T BOTHER TO VOTE OR EVEN VOTED AGAINST HIM.

Desi has yet to answer on that one ;-)

True, Colombia has a very fragile democracy. And all the so-called "democratic" candidates (Uribe included) are certainly no angels.

But, so far, it seems to be working and seven Colombiano(a)s in ten appear to be happy with how it's currently working... And with Uribe too...

And MOST Colombians (at least the ones I know) feel MUCH safer now (if not richer) than 10 years ago... Time not to forget the safety factor, too, right?

Better to have tried and failed than having regrets all your life about what you MIGHT have missed

0 funny, 1 helpful.

makopp5 (☼Travelguide writer) says on May 9, 2009, 15:08:

Darloup

I couldn´t say this better. You can find everything somethink that you don´t like and you can put your finger on it. Nothing is perrfect. So let the colombians their democracy how they want to build it and live with it.

0 funny, 1 helpful.

romy says on May 9, 2009, 15:12:

Yeah I'm sure the millions of displaced people and the 1 in 5 able working people who are unemployed feel safer and richer. where do you find these guys?

1 funny, 0 helpful.

makopp5 (☼Travelguide writer) says on May 9, 2009, 15:22:

romy

ok and the other 38 mio. wich are not displaced can´t vote and have on opinion? I´m sorry, but in a democrcy the mayority says where is the way to go. Or you don´t like the democray? Unemployment is hard but it was getting much better in the last years for the mayority. You can´t make everybody a winner. There will be everywhere and anywhere losers.

0 funny, 1 helpful.

Darloup (☼Travelguide writer) says on May 9, 2009, 15:25:

INTERLUDE (before the main feature movie): Zimbabwe's LATEST 2009 banknote (it sure beats a Colombian peso, right?):

PS: That's a "quadrillion" (10 to the power of 15) dollars, right?

Better to have tried and failed than having regrets all your life about what you MIGHT have missed

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) (Trustee board) says on May 9, 2009, 15:28:

1) The legitimacy of Uribe's government is questionable. The campaign contributions coming from the paracos and the purchase of the votes to approve to referendum to alter the constitution would be reasons enough to impeach ANY leader in any modern, transparent democracy. Samper took a fall when the Congress produced the proof (Ms. Betancourt was instrumental in obtaining this proof) that his campaign was financed by the Cali cartel.

The low turnout at the polls is just an indication of the lack of interest and cynicism of the Colombian population with their leaders. The real winner at the polls is the absenteeism.

2) Colombian children are not taught the principles of working democracy at schools. They are taught calculus and foreign languages and lots of stuff, but not how to function as responsible citizens. An average Colombian has only a very vague idea of the political platforms of different parties. The philosophy of the average Colombian voter is perfectly parodized in a llanera song called "La Verdad Descubierta" : "si me preguntan a cual partido voy a votar les respondo la barriga está primero; si el jefe es azul yo tambien azul, si el jefe rojo como todo politioco me volteo tambien y voto por los rojos..."

3) The polls are conducted only in the cities and using landline telephones. This eliminates many families in the lower stratas and all people in the pueblos and out in the country. The people who are polled are the ones who have most to win with Uribe's policies and who are constantly exposed to Uribe-supporting media. The polls are only showing that a 60% of those who are polled support Uribe....not that a 60% of the polutation as a WHOLE support Uribe, thus we don't really know if people who voted against him or if people who stayed at home that day have become Uribe-supporters.

A fronte praecipitium a tergo lupi

1 funny, 0 helpful.

romy says on May 9, 2009, 15:38:

makopp- then you like a demagogy, not a democracy

1 funny, 0 helpful.

makopp5 (☼Travelguide writer) says on May 9, 2009, 15:45:

"1) The legitimacy of Uribe's government is questionable. The campaign contributions coming from the paracos and the purchase of the votes to approve to referendum to alter the constitution would be reasons enough to impeach ANY leader in any modern, transparent democracy. Samper took a fall when the Congress produced the proof (Ms. Betancourt was instrumental in obtaining this proof) that his campaign was financed by the Cali cartel."
Uribe got on the vote much more than 50%. If there was something not 100% correct, that must show the courts (and they are not in favor of Uribe). No court could proof somthing. So what? There are a lot of people which can´t accept that Uribe is correctly elected and the people aproof his work. Good luck that the Colombians took their decicions and not the foreigners which don´t live in Colombia.

"The low turnout at the polls is just an indication of the lack of interest and cynicism of the Colombian population with their leaders. The real winner at the polls is the absenteeism."
That´s not right. If you don´t vote it´s your fault. Let us see what happend to Colombia if he didn´t win the last elections: Carlos Gaviria president of Colombia, I´m sure Colombia would be a big disaster and mess.

"2) Colombian children are not taught the principles of working democracy at schools. They are taught calculus and foreign languages and lots of stuff, but not how to function as responsible citizens."
I´ve see the schoolbookk of the nice of my wife and they have some information that you say that doesn´t exist. And when you are grown up depends also on you, what you are doing, when you are just lazy and you have no interest in nothing it´s your problem. Democracy is that you have to be active not just sitting down and critizising.

Look for example Cartagena, there was a mayer (Curi) 3 times reelected. He was very corrupt. but now the people voted for a new mayor and there is a lot of money for social proyects. So people are learning, sometimes they need their time.

0 funny, 1 helpful.

Darloup (☼Travelguide writer) says on May 9, 2009, 15:45:

Desi:

1) Most voters aren't really concerned about Colombian campaign contributions or how the "system" works. They just vote for candidates. Trying to compare 'or, worse, impose, our own US/European definition of "democracy is pointless since both systems can't really be compared (although both use the name "democracy").

"The low turnout at the polls is just an indication of the lack of interest and cynicism of the Colombian population with their leaders."

That's one way to explain things... But are sure it's the only way? After all, MANY European countries also have VERY low turn-out in national elections (I'm sure you don't need the figures). Does this make the results of these elections any less "democratic"?

2) "Colombian children are not taught the principles of working democracy at schools"

So what? Again, we're back to the question of whether it's pertinent/relevant of knowing how the engine of one's car is working... I assume that most voters can make up their own mind without having attended "civic courses" at school. Watching TV, reading newspapers and discussing issues with their family and friends counts as much as any source of "school-taught" information and knowledge.

Furthermore, bear in mind that Colombia is, on the whole, a young country (age demographics). MANY voters (rightly or not) don't really care about events that took place 10-15 years ago when they were mere 5 years-old.

3) I can't really comment on that one. If you're going to state that international organizations such as Gallup can't conduct reliable polls in Colombia (would it be only to protect their reputation), then who am I to argue with you? You obviously have access to inside information that elude me.

Better to have tried and failed than having regrets all your life about what you MIGHT have missed

0 funny, 1 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) (Trustee board) says on May 9, 2009, 15:59:

2)"Watching TV, reading newspapers and discussing issues with their family and friends counts as much as any source of "school-taught) information and knowledge."

Yes, but only if you already have a working knowledge of how democracy is supoosed to be. If not, you're at the mercy of the public media. (The one that screams loudest is the best)

3) That's no inside information. It's stated every time they present the results of the polls ....as "methodology" (an example: the polls were conducted in the four largest cities of Colombia making random phone calls (landline telephones) to and then they say how many calls were made)

A fronte praecipitium a tergo lupi

1 funny, 0 helpful.

makopp5 (☼Travelguide writer) says on May 9, 2009, 16:02:

"Yes, but only if you already have a working knowledge of how democracy is supoosed to be. If not, you're at the mercy of the public media. (The one that screams loudest is the best)"
There are promotions on every TV channel from all political parties on TV. And voting is not that complicated that you have to study in University.

0 funny, 1 helpful.

Darloup (☼Travelguide writer) says on May 9, 2009, 16:10:

Desi:

I reluctantly agree with you on point (3) ;-) These polls (Gallup AND others) are indeed conducted by 'phones in the four largest cities of Colombia (with an error margin of +/- 5%).

But don't you reckon that the campesinos ALSO appreciate the reduced numbers of attacks? That they also don't appreciate/enjoy being able to travel by bus to visit and friends and relatives with MUCH less risk than 10 years ago? That, on the whole, they feel MUCH SAFER? That, to mention but one exemple, Santa Marta is no longer a no-go area (as it was 10 years ago)? That a new generation of mayors are (albeit slowly) starting to change/improve things (such as Char in Barranquilla)?

Desi, why on earth won't you accept that, right now, things may not be perfect in Colombia but that, at least, they're slowly changing for the better? And that things are MUCH better than 10 years ago?

Better to have tried and failed than having regrets all your life about what you MIGHT have missed

0 funny, 1 helpful.

billyb says on May 9, 2009, 19:53:

"Samper took a fall when the Congress produced the proof (Ms. Betancourt was instrumental in obtaining this proof) that his campaign was financed by the Cali cartel."

Wrong, Samper took no fall at all, he bribed congress and they exonorated him. Please explain, what "fall" did he take? The one who took a "fall' was la Monita retrachera, who was killed to silence her.

"All I want to know is where I'm going to die, so I never go there" Unkown (at least to me) wise man.

0 funny, 1 helpful.

billyb says on May 9, 2009, 19:56:

"The low turnout at the polls is just an indication of the lack of interest and cynicism of the Colombian population with their leaders. The real winner at the polls is the absenteeism."

Desi, you know that if Gaviria would have won the last election with the same turn out, you would not, in a thousand years, be, ever, questioning his legitimacy here.

"All I want to know is where I'm going to die, so I never go there" Unkown (at least to me) wise man.

0 funny, 1 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) (Trustee board) says on May 9, 2009, 23:11:

Yes, billy, you're right, but his reputation was damaged permanently and his political career as well. Everybody knows he is guilty as hell.

I'm not questioning the legitimacy of his government based on the turnout. That's just a side note. I'm questioning the legitimacy of his government because of the alleged campaign contributions from the paraco chiefs and because of the illegal favors for votes swapping that made it possible for him to change the constitution and run second time. (Yidispolitica)

A fronte praecipitium a tergo lupi

1 funny, 0 helpful.

Darloup (☼Travelguide writer) says on May 9, 2009, 23:14:

"I'm not questioning the legitimacy of his government based on the turnout."

Yes you are - and have...

Better to have tried and failed than having regrets all your life about what you MIGHT have missed

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on May 9, 2009, 23:17:

"Yes, billy, you're right, but his reputation was damaged permanently and his political career as well. Everybody knows he is guilty as hell."

Ok, yes, his reputation was damaged irreparably, but the mofo should be in prison.

"All I want to know is where I'm going to die, so I never go there" Unkown (at least to me) wise man.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) (Trustee board) says on May 9, 2009, 23:18:

Not my main argument, Loupe.

A fronte praecipitium a tergo lupi

1 funny, 0 helpful.

Darloup (☼Travelguide writer) says on May 9, 2009, 23:24:

It may not be your main argument, my wonderful Finn, but you have often used the low turn-out in the last Colombian presidential election to question Uribe's legitimacy...

Better to have tried and failed than having regrets all your life about what you MIGHT have missed

0 funny, 1 helpful.

Darloup (☼Travelguide writer) says on May 9, 2009, 23:31:

Furthermore, dodgy campaign contributions don't affect the outcome of an election... Although they may indeed affect the choice of candidates. It's a known, and accepted, factor that the more you spend on advertising in a campaign, the better your chances. Thus, I suppose that elections in the US are unfair because the "richest" candidates stand the most chances to be elected?

Surely, what matters most is to have a CHOICE when voting, no?

As if anyone ever "imposed" Uribe on the Colombian people...

Better to have tried and failed than having regrets all your life about what you MIGHT have missed

0 funny, 1 helpful.

billyb says on May 9, 2009, 23:36:

"(Yidispolitica)'

If your life depended on it, would you be believing anything that came out of that woman's mouth?

"All I want to know is where I'm going to die, so I never go there" Unkown (at least to me) wise man.

0 funny, 1 helpful.

Darloup (☼Travelguide writer) says on May 9, 2009, 23:41:

"If your life depended on it, would you be believing anything that came out of that woman's mouth?"

Not from a man's mouth either...

But, on the whole, I tend to trust women much more than men if only because, by definition, they're not "machistas" - but then, that's me...

Better to have tried and failed than having regrets all your life about what you MIGHT have missed

0 funny, 1 helpful.

Darloup (☼Travelguide writer) says on May 10, 2009, 00:09:

Mongo: If only she were a woman ;-)

Better to have tried and failed than having regrets all your life about what you MIGHT have missed

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) (Trustee board) says on May 10, 2009, 00:20:

Please, stop it here.

A fronte praecipitium a tergo lupi

1 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on May 10, 2009, 15:23:

"Not from a man's mouth either...'

Don't exactly get your drift, since in this case, we are talking about Yidis Medina, a woman, and a proven liar and piece of scum, even her lawyer called her a pathological liar, so to use her as the basis for any argument would, at best, be counterproductive.

"All I want to know is where I'm going to die, so I never go there" Unkown (at least to me) wise man.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Dolfi says on May 13, 2009, 04:30:

http://antiuribista.blogspot.com/

2 funny, 0 helpful.