Coup in Bolivia? Or a political revolution?

11 posts / 0 new
Last post
meerov21
Offline
Joined: 14-08-13
Nov 13 2019 20:38
Coup in Bolivia? Or a political revolution?

In Bolivia President Morales tried to falsify the elections, after which mass protests began (1). But, unlike Venezuela and Chile (today's), the police and army took the side of the demonstrators. They refused
protect the President and he escaped. The coup? What about Mubarak who was overthrown by a popular uprising, then the army in Egypt did not protect him and he left? Was it the coup? It can hardly be called a coup. These protests were massive and covered a number of cities in the country.

However, there is a famous game. If a mass uprising overthrows a left-wing President, the left-wing statists are outraged and call it a coup (and the right, on the contrary, call it a revolution). If a popular uprising overthrows a right-wing President, the left-wing statists call it a popular uprising (and the right-wing use the word "coup").

Moreover, all these "left-right" shit of statists is very questionable. For example, it is unclear why the Allende regime, which nationalized half of Chile's economy, is "left", or the Maduro regime, which nationalized half of Venezuela's economy, is "left", and the Kremlin regime, which did exactly the same thing in the economy ,is "right"? All these words of left and right about coups and revolutions in such situations are just propaganda in the interests of politicians, parties, clans fighting for power. If somebody overthrows their guy, they are dissatisfied, and if on the contrary you overthrow their opponent - they are happy, that's all.

As always, there will be room for exaggeration. The lef-wing will find photographs or other evidence of 3 fascists who participated in the uprising, as it was in Hungary in 1956, and the right-wing will find 5 Marxist-Leninists in the ranks of the demonstrators, as Pinochet's propaganda constantly did, criticizing the democratic opposition movement.

Personally, these events inspired me with a certain optimism. It's not because the political scum who replaces the scum-of- Morales in the government is better. It is because the voice of even peaceful protests can mean something.

As for the games of nationalization and privatization, this music will be eternal unless a third way is found - socialization: then factories and agricultural enterprises become an Association of self-governing communes.

1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qycXxQYTuYs

ajjohnstone
Offline
Joined: 20-04-08
Nov 13 2019 23:47

I'm not sure if it is as simple an analysis as you offer, Meerov, despite the truth of much of your post

Constitutionally, Morales was President until the end of January regardless of whether he lost the election or not. There were right-wing mob attacks upon Morales supporters and the police/military stood aside.

As always, without the support of the forces of the State no politician can prevail when that legitimacy of government rule is challenged successfully.

There is no doubt a wealthy elite in Bolivia (as in Venezuela) will manipulate any discontent to its advantage and they will maneuver into political office if they can. Foreign powers will align themselves with those it perceives will serve to their interests if there is no risk of blow-back. As you say, America did not engineer a coup against Morales. The lithium contract conspiracy is a red herring. The deal benefited Germany, not the US unless the fact that the cancellation once more put China in the running to get the contract influenced US foreign policy.

Morales was already losing the support and sympathy of his previous base. Protests against his rule were widespread and growing. He no longer could rely on the people unlike Chavez in the aborted coup against him and nor like Maduro could he retain the loyalty of the military.

You can't run chase with the hounds and run with the fox. Morales tried to serve two masters...the working people and Bolivia's businessmen. As we always try to point out, they are irreconcilable.

A summary of my blog posts on Morales

https://socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.com/2019/11/the-ousting-of-evo...

meerov21
Offline
Joined: 14-08-13
Nov 14 2019 00:06

Well... I will not talk about contracts, I am engaged in the Middle East studies and may not know the details related to the contracts of Bolivia.

I am sure that the situation there is difficult and that there are many different forces at work. All this can (and probably should) be analyzed. I just wanted to emphasize a few important things - the hypocrisy of left and right statisticians.

I don't think Morales ' opponents can be described fully as "right-wing mob". There may have been various groups of racists and nationalists among them, perhaps some were organized, but the movement itself looks like a typical multiracial democratic protest movement. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qycXxQYTuYs

Also I generally have difficulty with the definitions of " left" and "right", which I wrote about, I don't see the point.

Of course, this is a very stupid use of mass force. There is no point in changing one political leader to another. It is better to try overcome this and follow the path of socialization of industry and the system of non-party Councils, counter-power.

Partly I wrote it, partly it is clear to readers here.

But the only good thing I saw was that the mob was able to sweep away the regime and the police didn't intervene. That may change, but at least it's a good thing when crowds can so easily sweep away a dictator. Although, in this there is a minus-the police will retain some control.

Morales, among other things, was associated with the Kremlin. And it's a blow to the Russian oligarchs and officials who helped his election campaign. Morales is a great friend of Moscow.

ajjohnstone
Offline
Joined: 20-04-08
Nov 14 2019 01:27

Here is a Guardian article that tries to weigh up the evidence.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/13/morales-bolivia-mi...

Yes, I agree, we are experiencing the usual hypocrisy from "liberals" and "progressives" and their usual mantra, "enemy of my enemy is my friend".

We saw it in Syria with the leftist denial that the initial protests against Assad was not genuine grassroots protests related to the general aspects of the Arab Spring but always an imperialist scheme at regime change. The fact that outside powers later usurped the street protests does not take anything away from it.

meerov21
Offline
Joined: 14-08-13
Nov 14 2019 02:36

Well... Parliamentary democracy has no value for me as I under any regime earn little like most of people , and if power (no matter, democratic or authoritarian) does not like my opinion about it, they will try shut my mouth, as they do to participants of occupiers in NY or Barcelona in 2011.

On the other hand, I see the view that the military and some nationalist groups are involved in these events, and that they can attack opponents. I think it's true, although, this is not enough to define these events as a coup, as we have seen a massive protest movement against Morales.

But on the other hand, Morales rigged the election results, received protests, and to hold on to power he would have been forced to use the army, police and leftist militants loyal to him.

Therefore, it seems to me that in this regard, in any case, there would be some deterioration.

R Totale's picture
R Totale
Offline
Joined: 15-02-18
Nov 17 2019 16:33

"Personally, these events inspired me with a certain optimism. It's not because the political scum who replaces the scum-of- Morales in the government is better. It is because the voice of even peaceful protests can mean something."

I don't know how far the above is intended as deliberately provocative contrarianism, but it seems a bit silly to just cheer for "protests" without evaluating what their aims are, how far they're manipulated by various bourgeois factions and how far they express any kind of independent working-class perspective and so on, otherwise you could equally well be "inspired with a certain optimism" by any old anti-immigrant pogrom.
I don't know 100% what my analysis of the situation in Bolivia is, but everything I've seen from any kind of autonomous perspective, like the "They are not Evo supporters! They are Alteños, dammit!" text posted here, or "Kristallnacht in Bolivia" by Maria Galindo, seems very far from welcoming it as being any kind of "revolution".

meerov21
Offline
Joined: 14-08-13
Nov 17 2019 17:51

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qycXxQYTuYs I don't see any ethnic pogrom here. I see a public mass multinational protest, the participants of which shout that they have nothing to eat and demand the departure of the dictator who falsified the elections (and before that, Morales ignored the results of the referendum, where the majority of Bolivians decided that he could no longer run and should leave).

Another thing is that their leaders can stand on liberal positions and destroy some social programs and it may be that among them there are racists and / or ardent supporters of the United States.

On the other hand, Morales is a shitty dictator who is friends with dictator Maduro and with the Kremlin. He nationalized part of the industry, and we know, from the Soviet Union to Venezuela, that this leads to economic collapse in the end.

Also I don't think Morales ' policy was good, since the majority opposed him and he ignored the referendum and then engaged in electoral fraud.

And in General he is a government official who ruled the country for 14 years, a dictator or almost a dictator and let him die.

Of course, I do not think that it is good to support one or another political party, but at least there is a one good thing - thousands of people threw out the dictator, having received experience of struggle with a state.

I also think that for a part of the "anarchists" all this left-wing statist shit like Castro, Maduro, Chavez and Morales, it's "their guys" that's why they're so excited.

meerov21
Offline
Joined: 14-08-13
Nov 17 2019 18:05

Revolution? I think these events have nothing to do with the social revolution.
This is a typical political revolution that integrates the discontent of a large part of society, including some employees, and throws them into the streets against the dictator. Some totalitarian or authoritarian parties may participate in such movements: some nationalist groups and some Leninist groups (state socialists). But in General, I would not say that such Pro-democracy (predominantly) movements are of great interest. They can be good only because they give part of the workers people the experience of active participation in the struggle. But it is also true that this experience can later be directed to other purposes, such as the war of political parties - right and left statisticians.

meerov21
Offline
Joined: 14-08-13
Nov 17 2019 18:44


R Totale's "Kristallnacht in Bolivia" by Maria Galindo, seems very far from welcoming it as being any kind of "revolution".

I am not saying that this is a social revolution and I would not overestimate the significance of these events at all.

I'm reading one of the notes you referenced.

"Kristallnacht in Bolivia
Maria Galindo Front Page Feature, Story

Entering the Government Palace with a bible in your hand to kneel before cameras with no legitimacy from the people is a fascist act

What? Really? What about the fact that Morales introduced state support for the pagan cult of Pachamama in Bolivia? Then he is a fascist too? And in my opinion, both are exaggerations, and it would be more correct to say that both (the dictator and the opposition parties) played with religious ideas in order to populism.

"...Burning the houses of members of Evo Morales’ government is fascism".

There was not much violence during the protests against dictator Morales, they were mostly peaceful. But I want to ask R Totale. Are you kidding, advertising this statist propoganda that claims attacks on members of the bourgeois government as "fascism"?

R Totale's picture
R Totale
Offline
Joined: 15-02-18
Nov 17 2019 19:17

I don't think the way the author of that text uses "fascism" is particularly precise or helpful, but did you read beyond the first two sentences? It's really, really not a pro-Morales text, that's why I posted it.

meerov21
Offline
Joined: 14-08-13
Nov 17 2019 19:34

I agree that this text does not fully protect Morales.

And yet this text is clearly unfair. She obviously exaggerates the misdeeds of one party and defends the property of bourgeois politicians of Morales government !

She speaks of the use of the Christian Bible by some of the protesters and calls them on this basis a "fascists", and she is silent about the fact that the Morales regime did the same with the state's pagan cult of Pachamam.

It's exactly the same what I'm used to see. The atrocities of one side of the state conflict are hidden, in the other case the atrocities are exaggerated.

If you ask me, personally I am not a fan of political democratic movements or political revolutions at all, and I am more interested in socio-economic protests and attempts to create workers ' councils.