RE: [OPE] Venezuela is the most democratic country inLatinAmerica[MESSAGE NOT SCANNED]

From: Paul Cockshott <>
Date: Thu Feb 26 2009 - 18:16:49 EST

That last message was from me not from Dave Z.

Why do the range of historical examples I raise invalidate the point?
One needs to be willfully blind not to notice the tendancy towards
monarchy in 20th century revolutionary constitutions, and this is
something that has existed in past revolutionary processes as well.
There is a long historical trail associating popular movements with
monarchic outcomes. When faced with an observable fact like that the appropriate
thing to do is not to ignore it, but to seek to understand its underlying

Paul Cockshott
Dept of Computing Science
University of Glasgow
+44 141 330 1629

-----Original Message-----
From: on behalf of paul bullock
Sent: Thu 2/26/2009 10:58 PM
To: Outline on Political Economy mailing list
Subject: Re: [OPE] Venezuela is the most democratic country inLatinAmerica[MESSAGE NOT SCANNED]

I suppose you accept the point I made about German elections and Hitler.

With respect to your list of leaders. This is simply abstracting from
entirely different epochs and makes little sense.

Paul B.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Cockshott" <>
To: "Outline on Political Economy mailing list" <>
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 12:17 PM
Subject: Re: [OPE] Venezuela is the most democratic country in

> paul bullock wrote:
>> Dave Z says 'allowing officials'... etc
>> Gerry has already shown that curtailing the rights of voters to reelect
>> a President, is rare, and relatively recent in the USA. ie used to
>> prevent another FDR by the Republicans/establishment in 1952 once
>> re-established. Secondly no one is 'allowing' anyone to do anything,
>> rather, the voters are requiring actions from the elected. The abolition
>> of the two term limit is presented by the enemies of democracy as the
>> removal of some sensible constraint upon individual megalomania, rather
>> than the extension of rights to the electorate. Indeed it treats the
>> electorate as an unreliable passive amorphous manipulated mass without
>> any hope or political capacity.
> There is a more general issue here Paul.
> Popular movements have historically often relied upon strong leaders :
> Ceasar, Cromwell, Napoleon, Stalin, Mao, Castro etc.
> The death of the strong leader has often posed major problems for the
> survival of the revolutionary project, and even where the state survived
> that, as in the USSR and China, the concentration of great power in one
> leader means that subsequent leaders were in a position to
> radically change direction.
> Leaders like Solon or Washington who were willing to step back, left more
> lasting revolutionary legacies.
> _______________________________________________
> ope mailing list

ope mailing list

ope mailing list

Received on Thu Feb 26 18:23:47 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Mar 24 2009 - 20:30:37 EDT