Re: [OPE] Venezuela is the most democratic country in LatinAmerica[MESSAGE NOT SCANNED]

From: paul bullock <>
Date: Fri Feb 27 2009 - 19:52:00 EST


you said : "In a general case, it is quite obvious that what citizens decide in a democratic manner can have anti-democratic consequences. For instance, the NSDAP was elected into power." Now certainly the vote rose for Hitler 30% to 37% , but getting into power was another story as I indicated. I think it very careless to talk of Hitler being voted in... it was a political fix at the top, with the help of the big banks.

IF the point was that many may vote for reactionary candidates, that is true. The German middle classes, unemployed labour aristocracy and small farmers made up a large constituency for the NSDAP. This is typical of imperialist states. Who voted for Nixon, the Bushes, Reagan, Thatcher, Le Pen..etc ? There is no need to use inappropriate and misleading examples.

What I find surprising in these exchanges related to Venezuela is that if matters had stayed the same as before Chavez's election in 1998 for 99, it is doubtful if the country would be being discussed here in this way. Why should that be? What is it in the extraordinarily democratic Constitution, the defeat of privatisation plans for PDVSA, the defeat of a neo fascist coup, or the building of a mass workers party and a vote for socialism by the mass of the people for the first time in Latin America History outside of Cuba, that has caused this anti-Chavez, fear of 'dictatorship' , analogies with Napolean etc??? The sudden appearance of 'democratic' sentiment directed against Chavez makes me thoroughly suspicious of the class interest that is actually being expressed. I hope you won't think me too blunt.

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Dave Zachariah
  To: Outline on Political Economy mailing list
  Sent: Friday, February 27, 2009 10:07 AM
  Subject: Re: [OPE] Venezuela is the most democratic country in LatinAmerica[MESSAGE NOT SCANNED]

  2009/2/26 paul bullock <>

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

  No Paul, I don't and I think you missed my point completely.

  My point was against Jerry's implication that what citizens decide collectively cannot have anti-democratic consequences.

  Citizens of varying class compositions can opt for authoritarian institutions if they *perceive* that the institutions that are supposed to channel their is incapable of doing it. The framework of liberal parliamentarism in Europe had failed to deal with the crisis following WWI. Large masses of citizens perceived some form of authoritarian rule as superior. A large share of the German population opted for NSDAP, no amount of revisionism can change that.

  //Dave Z


  ope mailing list

ope mailing list
Received on Fri Feb 27 19:54:04 2009

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