In youth my wings were strong and tireless,
But I did not know the mountains.
In age I knew the mountains
But my weary wings could not follow my vision.
Genius is wisdom and youth.
(Alexander Throckmorton)
Edgar Lee Masters
The Spoon River Anthology
From a very superficial point of view, archetypes work as blueprints, like a map of the bottom of the sea. There are underwater mountains and valleys, coral ridges, things that are unchanging or that change quite slowly. If you don't have the least notion of those peaks and valleys you can't see, you'll surely flounder, no matter how much you pray or how sure you are of the route. One of those archetypes (again, superficially put) is the Shadow, which sums up all the things about oneself one is unable to see because one is too damn sure about oneself. The image is this: consciousness is like a lighted candle; it illuminates just a part of the whole, so the rest (that is still part of the room) is cast into shadows one cannot see. (Please keep that notion in mind).
But the archetype I wanted to talk about in relation to Venezuela's present predicament is quite another one, and a very difficult one at that, mostly because it's a two-sided one: the puer-senex archetype.
While a lot of attention has been given to the Puer Aeternus and its negative traits (Marie Louise von Franz wrote a whole book about it), James Hillman introduced the idea that both archetypes are in fact a double fronted image that works, psychologically, as an axis that joins what is under with what is over. On one extreme is the Puer, the divine child, pure energy, pure creativity. Like a winged creature, it jumps from one project to another; like a Messiah, it can bear the sins of the world as his cross; like a warrior, he can courageously go into battle without calculations, strategies, even weapons. On the other extreme is the Senex, the Old wise man, clinging to valued traditions and symbols, full of knowledge, hoarding wisdom. It mistrusts and dislikes change, so, like Kronos or Saturn, he eats his own children (they say the revolution devours its own children too). Working together, the Puer acts like a dynamo, a motor, while the Senex, with its knowledge, indicates the way, prevents the energy from being misused, gives the Puer's energy a purpose.
The problem with these polar archetypes is that, when both sides aren't working together, there is a split, and the polarity becomes a polarization. In that polarization the negative or destructive aspects of each part of this archetype come to the forefront. Each side takes on itself the rightness and the light, so the other becomes the shadow, the monstrous oppressor or chaos that has to be overcome. Try to remember the sixties and the so called generational gap and you'll see what it means socially. Some forces are proposing a change, and some are opposing it. Creativity and the idea of purpose and design are unconnected, working separately, so where there could be a kind of order there ensue chaos and strife.
Before Chávez came to power, we all knew that Venezuela needed a change. A form of government had grown old, petrified, leaving most people outside its dynamics (think Caldera and Alfaro Ucero and you'll get what I mean). In that bleak panorama appeared the figure of Chávez. He spoke a different language, spoke his mind, seemed energetic, sincere. He had many of the more charming characteristics of the Puer (as a matter of fact, many older women felt he was like their own son, the younger felt him as the man they wanted), which can be equated to the winged figure of Eros. He embodied the new against the old, and so was welcome by the majority that felt the older regime was exhausted, dying (la moribunda constitución). I'm not saying that Chávez created the schism, but we have to recognize he took advantage of it, with all his qualities as a charmer, to impose a one-sided proceso which he is unable to explain clearly. He was then (and is still, for himself and many that still believe in him) the "new kid on the block", the Messiah. Taking advantage of the "polarization" produced by the split inside the archetype he cast over all those who oppose him his own shadow: they are "fascists", "coup-mongers" (forgetting he was a "coup-monger" himself about a decade ago). That is exactly what the Shadow archetype means: as he embodies all that is good, new and desirable, all the negative epithets go to the other side. The same thing works for the opposition in its blindness: there have been several moments in which the solution, pure Puer style, had to be immediate, automatic: "Chávez vete ya".
Going back to Chávez: he had then, and has now, a lot of the "negative" qualities of the Puer. Creative he is; nobody can doubt it: there's a new project, a new "mission", a new "commando" every other day. That none of those impulses result into anything worth mentioning is none of the Puer's or Chávez's business: he is there to be creative, to be adored (as a newborn child), not to show results (surely you've met people always full of projects and big ideas that come to nothing because they cannot stick to things long enough to make them work). Think, for an instant, why on hell did Chávez won the elections: he had an old cunning man on his side! Luis Miquilena gave him all his experience, directing his "creativity" towards the goal: power.
As I said before, when the schism in the archetype happens, the "destructive" aspect of each side comes to the forefront. See who is Chávez's most valued ally now: Fidel Castro, a perfect image of an old mean Senex who can devour a whole country so to keep power to himself, to prevent any change. The image is so obvious it's appalling we didn't notice that before. James Hillman says, in "Puer and Senex", that the negative qualities of both archetypes are the same: in short, things don't move. Energy without purpose spends itself in its own expression; purpose without energy is simply like a rock standing by itself.
Hillman also says that when both faces of the archetype work together there comes a movement that in the Renaissance was called "Festina lente", to make haste slowly (though for some it can also mean "to feast slowly", "let's go slow 'cause I'm in a hurry"). I think we, in the opposition, have learnt something about "Festina lente". There is energy, one supposes (or expects) unquenchable, in the swarm of young and old volunteers pushing silently for a Referendum. There is also, and I have to stress that, a sense of purpose and of urgency, that makes us go slow when we are really in a hurry... So, maybe taking the flower path, and by that I mean the flower-eating path, has been a kind of learning how to "make haste slowly"... I hope it works, and, moreover, I hope this text makes sense, 'cause I'm trying to be brief so as not to tire you, and feel I'm not saying all I want to say clearly.
June 15, 2004
World's least convincing slur
[OK, I'd pledged to lay off the blog during my trip, but this one I can't resist.]
Dear Al,
I guess the effort it would have taken to slide your mouse all the way to the "about the author" link and then click might have given you a hernia - if you'd risked it, though, you would have found out I didn't come to Europe to go camping, I live here!
Just to set the record nice and straight, here's how it is:
Ryanair tickets from Brussels South Charleroi to Venice-Treviso.....44 euros(tax included)
Pitching a tent at an Italian Campground.....3euro50 (split two ways)
Bread, butter, cheese, ham and apples for today's lunch and dinner.....4euro80
Half an hour's net café access to post this.....75 eurocent
Getting slammed in NarcoNews as a bloodsucking oligarch for traveling like this.....priceless
Dear Al,
I guess the effort it would have taken to slide your mouse all the way to the "about the author" link and then click might have given you a hernia - if you'd risked it, though, you would have found out I didn't come to Europe to go camping, I live here!
Just to set the record nice and straight, here's how it is:
Ryanair tickets from Brussels South Charleroi to Venice-Treviso.....44 euros(tax included)
Pitching a tent at an Italian Campground.....3euro50 (split two ways)
Bread, butter, cheese, ham and apples for today's lunch and dinner.....4euro80
Half an hour's net café access to post this.....75 eurocent
Getting slammed in NarcoNews as a bloodsucking oligarch for traveling like this.....priceless
Beirut-Berlin-Caracas-Havana
A city is made of fragments. It is made of the memories we share as a community. Although individuals use, perceive and understand the city differently, there are common experiences, urban events that make the cities we live in, the cities we live in. It is hard, for instance, to picture the city of Caracas without the constant presence of the Parque Central towers in our midst as an urban landmark.
It is common to a lot of different perceptions and ways to use the city and it is a huge part of the quilt work that comprises the city of Caracas. A better example is the Avila Mountain which pervades collective consciousness of the city of Caracas and that of its individual inhabitants. Caracas cannot be understood and or experienced without the Avila because it serves as background and common thread too all our narratives. It is indeed what makes Caracas what it is.
Disclosure: I studied 10 years in a school that was smack dab in the Avila?s foot. I was never a climber or hiker, but I loved sitting around the school?s yard and watch the unobstructed view of the Avila the school had, for hours and hours.
Cities, of course, are affected by its inhabitants and their circumstances. Cities rise, grow and fall mirroring the destinies of their dwellers. And politics, especially political strife and war (which is no more than diplomacy gone wrong) affect cities in ways that are not always predictable. Beirut, Berlin, Havana amongst a long list of cities, are prime examples of how war and/or politics can affect a city to the point where those common narrative threads that give cities their texture and depth are simply obliterated or affected in such ways that any notion of the same city ceases to exist or is at least cast into oblivion. Berlin for instance spent at least two thirds of the XXth century being first capital to the Nazi State, then war prize for the Allied Forces and lastly more than 30 years as two completely different cities divided by a very real, very absurd and abusive act of political confrontation.
One Berlin became a recluse center of power for a Soviet proxy regime with the worst Political Police known to man after the KGB; the other one became a virtual island of capitalism in a sea of collectivist nightmares, it was indeed a billboard for the western way of life. The fall of the Berlin Wall, and the subsequent reunification of Germany presented Germans with a very curious situation: a single city so deeply torn, that it took years for people to accept the very possibility that they were all Berliners in the end.
Beirut still bears to this day the scars of a confrontation of decades between different factions of what was a very civilized francophone country torn from within by religious extremism. And Havana which once was the Bordello of the Caribbean has become after decades, well, the Bordello of the Caribbean. The clientele and the reasons behind prostitution have changed, but seems to be stuck in time: 1950's time. Well, a very distressed 1950's time. In fact, Havana seems to be crumbling under the pressure of its own failure, or should I say the failure of its tyrannical political model. Havana seems to be paying a revolutionary punishment for its dissolute fame in the arly 1900's.
In the 5 years this government has been in power - yes, despite their constant promising, this government has been in power for almost 5 full years - Caracas has suffered a process of visible decay that has turned the budding Metropolis of the 90?s into a city that is at best a nightmarish shadow of its former self.
I'm not implying, by any means, that Caracas was a perfect city: it was unsafe and violent, traffic was always terrible, and the city was a patchwork of crappy half-assed solutions to problems, addressed without regards for consequences.
Despite all of that, Caracas was "La Sultana del Avila" and "La Sucursal del Cielo". It was not perfect, but it was somewhat liveable. We cannot blame this decay solely on chavismo. It would be stupid to overlook the obvious responsibility of previous administrations, but under no other government had we been robbed of so many urban icons and common spaces that were once the playgrounds not only of the Venezuelan ?oligarchy? as Chávez likes to call everyone who does not agree with him, but by the disenfranchised poor he?d like to convince of his dedication. There are virtual walls in Caracas that have become quite real. They have even transmutated into barbed wire and armed soldiers, or into unruly groups which attack any person, group or thing which does not fit into their molds of revolutionary purity. Plaza Venezuela, the Plaza Bolivar, amongst others have become the turf of violent mobs and gang wars for domination of whole zones of the city.
I propose we take a deep look at ourselves, and decide if we want let this madness go on. I propose we steal this city back from them and make it liveable once more. Even if it takes destroying the Wall that crosses Caracas in all directions and separates the city that is from the city it could be.
María Lionza's last stand
Penultimate vision of Maria Lionza
by Federico Vegas
by Federico Vegas
That custom of leaving to chance and the Bible the solution to our problems, I exercise with the complete works of Jorge Luis Borges.
When something mortifies, astounds or confuses me too much, I open one of its tomes and can always find a good piece of advice.
Looking for enlightenment as a result of the tragedy of Maria Lionza?s repair, I came across one of Borges? first essays: The penultimate version of reality.
The title already has something to teach us: The story of María Lionza is missing its most important chapter. The word "version" also conveys a big load: in its medical meaning it refers to the "procedure to change the posture of a fetus that presents itself incorrectly for birth". For Maria Lionza that change in posture entailed an absolute torsion of her womb, while her birth continues.
Borges starts his essay referring to the theories of Count Korzybski. He adjudicated three dimensions to life: vegetable, animal and human. The vital style of plants is pure quietness and storing of energy. The vital style of animals is free movement and amassing space. Man hoards time, which is memory of the past and the prevision of the future.
This quote is pertinent to understand that the issue of the fragile Maria Lionza is perceived by the Mayor's office as an issue of space when its main significance lies in time. And space means nothing to us without the dimension of time. Without it, velocity and acceleration do not exist, neither do so haste nor slowness, and much less the memory of that we have visited. Without time we can perceive space but we cannot convert it into experience and reflection, thus losing the link with what's most human and humanist of our condition.
By defining this limitation to our perception to pure space as an animal facet, we do not want to qualify the labor of the Libertador Mayor?s office as an animal act, and we do not qualify it because it should be the exception and it is rather the rule.
We all become blind animals of prey slowly, so much that we've abandoned the visual in our urban travels and promenades. In our transit the aural is predominant and radio reigns. Sight, which has always been the principal sense in a stroll, has become opaque and indifferent, as if the glazing of cars and people's glasses were covered in butter. We concentrate ourselves in hearing and not in seeing. By stripping the city of time, i.e. its history, space loses its sense and is rendered indeterminate, tedious.
This is the reason behind the insistence for removal of Maria Lionza from the route for which it is paradigm and principal protagonist in the perception of space and the structuration of collective memory. The animal does not understand time and despises it. He thinks all spaces are equivalent for urinating or bury bones. Things are placed "where" they can be and it does not matter "when" they have been.
The animal does not perceive the value tradition gives to a specific place, does not comprehend the value of Maria Lionza's sculpture lies in the fusion with its surroundings, that it is inseparable from its landscape, that its stage is the freeway of which she is the principal episode.
Besides, Maria Lionza is a sculpture in which time predominates in its most caring and sentimental version. The disheveled works of Otero and Soto manipulate pure space. It is at least difficult, for those who pass these works to modify their feelings according to them; even being sentimentally involved with them. Conversely, Maria Lionza has born witness to a thousand things we have lived: she has seen us grow and has grown in front of us.
Thirty years ago I found her kitschy and démodé, later luxurious and tempting, then beautiful and emblematic, later still revealing and fundamental. I?ve come to feel for her tenderness and jealousy I don?t usually feel for inanimate objects. I believe today she is the best sculpture in this valley, and certainly the most loved, the most eloquent. Now that she has opened her interior to the sky and all of us, as symbol and sign of our profound division and incompetence, she deserves more than ever her sacrificial place: time and space we will not be able to forget anymore.
The ongoing argument on where to fix her is purely spatial and non-transcendental. Something tells me that she must be poured again to make her last another fifty years; it should be done where it can be done more practically and economically (and they should start repairing the other works of Colina as well).
But, where to place her? By God!
Let time speak and listen to it!
The sense of sight needs episodes to hang on to in a city that is sinking like a ship. Politics are not enough, we need to circulate and remember what we have been.
At this time I wonder what master Colina would say.
Perhaps his answer would be:
"Leave her, how and where she is!
She is finally alive and speaking to our times!"
June 14, 2004
Dilemmas for the campaign
The remake of the Comando Ayacucho is facing one dilemma after other in deciding a strategy for avoiding a considerable defeat in August.
1) To incite abstention or to attempt a massive vote in their favour.
2) To direct their message to the poorest ones or to get some possible votes from the middle class people.
3) To accept international observers or to reject them provoking doubts with regard to the results.
In my opinion, the opposition will have less problems to design a winning campaign.
PS. Just to test my posting attributes. Also to bring something new to the discussion
1) To incite abstention or to attempt a massive vote in their favour.
2) To direct their message to the poorest ones or to get some possible votes from the middle class people.
3) To accept international observers or to reject them provoking doubts with regard to the results.
In my opinion, the opposition will have less problems to design a winning campaign.
PS. Just to test my posting attributes. Also to bring something new to the discussion
June 13, 2004
From NarcoNews: See what the "Illuminated left" does...
por Al Giordano...
"When it comes to ex-New York Timesman Francisco Toro (remember his exit as a Times correspondent because of his conflicts-of-interest as an activist for the "opposition" in Venezuela?), watch what he does, not what he says.
Toro, who has been among the bloggers who have claimed they want a referendum in Venezuela, apparently got what he wanted, now that Venezuela goes to the polls on August 15th.
So, it would follow that with just two months left in the campaign, Toro would be working hard for the victory that he always claims is in sight.
Right?
Wrong.
No sooner did Toro and his troops "win" the establishment of the referendum that they say they wanted (but really did not), then he's leaving on a "camping trip" ...to Europe!
Toro writes to his blog buddies:
"I am preparing to leave town on a camping trip to Slovenia and Italy. (Rough life, I know!)
Now, there is a man really committed to his cause, eh?
Do you think that Toro knows what he won't admit to his readers? That rolling up his sleeves and campaigning - like he urges his readers to do - is useless because the "opposition" is a minority in Venezuela and he knows damn well it is.
I mean, if the referendum were really winnable by his side, don't you think he would stand and fight?
No. Instead he sends the gullible into battle, while he goes off on a camping trip... in Italy...
(Gee. I didn't realize that operating an opposition blog in English could bring such perques and leisure opportunities! Where does the money for his Italian camping trip come from anyway?)
Sigh. And they take such indignant exception when Chavez and others call them "the squalid ones."
Captain Toro of the Titanic sees the iceberg ahead and, rather than be honest with his sailors about the need to reverse course, has commandeered himself a lifeboat, sailed off to the Mediterranean, and waved "hasta la vista, suckers" to the troops he leaves to fight his battles for him.
Watch what they do. Not what they say.
Narco News, on the other hand, will be covering the historic August 15th vote live from Caracas".
por Al Giordano (link to this beautiful piece of "information" was provided by J. R. Mora...)
(By the way, you CC bloggers, Quico WILL be here for the RR, so get your facts right! A little attention to the comments section will do, but then, yes, you only want your side. This stinks of people like Eva "Golilla" Golinger and the likes of her.)
"When it comes to ex-New York Timesman Francisco Toro (remember his exit as a Times correspondent because of his conflicts-of-interest as an activist for the "opposition" in Venezuela?), watch what he does, not what he says.
Toro, who has been among the bloggers who have claimed they want a referendum in Venezuela, apparently got what he wanted, now that Venezuela goes to the polls on August 15th.
So, it would follow that with just two months left in the campaign, Toro would be working hard for the victory that he always claims is in sight.
Right?
Wrong.
No sooner did Toro and his troops "win" the establishment of the referendum that they say they wanted (but really did not), then he's leaving on a "camping trip" ...to Europe!
Toro writes to his blog buddies:
"I am preparing to leave town on a camping trip to Slovenia and Italy. (Rough life, I know!)
Now, there is a man really committed to his cause, eh?
Do you think that Toro knows what he won't admit to his readers? That rolling up his sleeves and campaigning - like he urges his readers to do - is useless because the "opposition" is a minority in Venezuela and he knows damn well it is.
I mean, if the referendum were really winnable by his side, don't you think he would stand and fight?
No. Instead he sends the gullible into battle, while he goes off on a camping trip... in Italy...
(Gee. I didn't realize that operating an opposition blog in English could bring such perques and leisure opportunities! Where does the money for his Italian camping trip come from anyway?)
Sigh. And they take such indignant exception when Chavez and others call them "the squalid ones."
Captain Toro of the Titanic sees the iceberg ahead and, rather than be honest with his sailors about the need to reverse course, has commandeered himself a lifeboat, sailed off to the Mediterranean, and waved "hasta la vista, suckers" to the troops he leaves to fight his battles for him.
Watch what they do. Not what they say.
Narco News, on the other hand, will be covering the historic August 15th vote live from Caracas".
por Al Giordano (link to this beautiful piece of "information" was provided by J. R. Mora...)
(By the way, you CC bloggers, Quico WILL be here for the RR, so get your facts right! A little attention to the comments section will do, but then, yes, you only want your side. This stinks of people like Eva "Golilla" Golinger and the likes of her.)
June 12, 2004
One last shout...
...before heading to the train station.
Chavistas find it hard to understand the opposition's accusations of authoritarianism as anything other than a slur. But the recent appointment of the Comando Maisanta should serve to illustrate a few of our concerns. As we saw, the President appointed two dozen assembly members, ministers, oil officials and state governors, among others, to its campaign effort. The Finance Minister will also be in charge of campaign finances, and the energy minister will be expected to contribute as well.
Now, the transit from democracy to authoritarianism starts with the corruption of basic conceptual differentiations that are at the center of the Republican system of government. The state, in any normal conception of democratic life, is different from the government, which in turn is different from the governing party, which is different again from the president. In Chavismo all these differentiations are blurred to the point of dissappearance. A government that campaigned on ending cronyism in the distribution of oil revenues finds its Energy Minister on the board of an electoral campaign! The conflict of interest is never discussed, or even explicitly acknowledged. The kidnapping of national resources for the express electoral advantage of one side and against all the others is something the country hadn't seen since 1957.
When state=government=governing party=president, the basic conceptual architecture of democracy breaks down. This may be defended on revolutionary grounds, but not on democratic grounds. So I find it especially galling that the Venezuelan government is now prosecuting Sumate's leaders on the grounds of "perverting the Republican system of government," under the creepily authoritarian article 132 of Venezuela's 70 year old penal code.
Chavistas find it hard to understand the opposition's accusations of authoritarianism as anything other than a slur. But the recent appointment of the Comando Maisanta should serve to illustrate a few of our concerns. As we saw, the President appointed two dozen assembly members, ministers, oil officials and state governors, among others, to its campaign effort. The Finance Minister will also be in charge of campaign finances, and the energy minister will be expected to contribute as well.
Now, the transit from democracy to authoritarianism starts with the corruption of basic conceptual differentiations that are at the center of the Republican system of government. The state, in any normal conception of democratic life, is different from the government, which in turn is different from the governing party, which is different again from the president. In Chavismo all these differentiations are blurred to the point of dissappearance. A government that campaigned on ending cronyism in the distribution of oil revenues finds its Energy Minister on the board of an electoral campaign! The conflict of interest is never discussed, or even explicitly acknowledged. The kidnapping of national resources for the express electoral advantage of one side and against all the others is something the country hadn't seen since 1957.
When state=government=governing party=president, the basic conceptual architecture of democracy breaks down. This may be defended on revolutionary grounds, but not on democratic grounds. So I find it especially galling that the Venezuelan government is now prosecuting Sumate's leaders on the grounds of "perverting the Republican system of government," under the creepily authoritarian article 132 of Venezuela's 70 year old penal code.
June 11, 2004
How the blog was won...
The story starts when Dr. Toro goes on a camping trip and lets some of his readers take his blog over... How will it end? Will he ever regain control over his lost kingdom?
(This was just to see if I could really post things)
(This was just to see if I could really post things)
Forero on the case
The New York Times (registration required) ran an in depth article about evoting in the recall referendum today. Lots of questions, very few precise answers.
The Smartmatic-Bizta-Cantv Offer
This was prepared for the regional elections. I've translated it from Spanish. I can't help but notice that the auditoria-en-caliente (on the spot auditing) is built into the system.
1-The elector registers at the voting table, as happens in every election.
2-The staff at the voting table introduces the voter to the voting machine, which shows an electronic ballot that looks exactly the same as the ballots that all Venezuelans are used to.
3. The voter selects his preferred candidate touching the sensitive parts of the screen on the electronic ballot. There is no need to use pencils, or to struggle to fill in little ovals. The use of the electronic ballot is extremely easy, including for people who cannot read or write.
4. The machine allows the voter to verify his or her choice, showing the selected candidates on a color screen. The voter may change his choice as many times as he or she wishes before confirming the vote.
5. When the voter is sure of having chosen the right candidate, he presses the "Vote" button on the machine's screen. The machine stores the electronic vote permanently and securely. Since there is no possibility of error, the new machine eliminates the possibility of numerical inconsistencies.
6. The machine prints a physical vote that allows the voter to conduct an on-the-spot audit of his or her vote, confirming that it has been registered correctly.
7. To conclude the voting act, the voter folds the physical vote and places it in a ballot box. The physical votes back up the electronic vote in case of an audit, and cannot be forged.
1. Automated and secure vote registry: Once the voter has made his choice, it is stored in the machine in a permanent and secure way. The security and encryption technologies used in the new machine prevent the vote from being erased or manipulated in any other way, either in the machine or once it is transmitted to the tallying system. The old [ES&S scanner] machines kept the information insecurely, which allowed anyone to access and manipulate votes at leisure.
2. Encrypted transmission and storage: At the end of election day, the machines transmit the results of the vote to the tallying system. This transmission is encrypted and authenticated over telephone lines, guaranteeing zero data loss or manipulation. The tallying system receives the results of the vote and stores them in an encrypted fashion. These results can only be decoded by the tallying software.
3. 100% automated tallying and adjudication: The new automated system guarantees that the tallying and adjudication will happen automatically and instantaneously, which will prevent results being modified in any way. Previous elections relied on manual tallying and adjudication, allowing the easy manipulation of results of the vote on the part of tallying officials, either by mistake or intentionally.
4. Publication of results via the web: As soon as the automated tallying results are produced, whether partial or total, they will be published directly on the National Election Council web page, for access by the general public
How do you vote with SBC?
1-The elector registers at the voting table, as happens in every election.
2-The staff at the voting table introduces the voter to the voting machine, which shows an electronic ballot that looks exactly the same as the ballots that all Venezuelans are used to.
3. The voter selects his preferred candidate touching the sensitive parts of the screen on the electronic ballot. There is no need to use pencils, or to struggle to fill in little ovals. The use of the electronic ballot is extremely easy, including for people who cannot read or write.
4. The machine allows the voter to verify his or her choice, showing the selected candidates on a color screen. The voter may change his choice as many times as he or she wishes before confirming the vote.
5. When the voter is sure of having chosen the right candidate, he presses the "Vote" button on the machine's screen. The machine stores the electronic vote permanently and securely. Since there is no possibility of error, the new machine eliminates the possibility of numerical inconsistencies.
6. The machine prints a physical vote that allows the voter to conduct an on-the-spot audit of his or her vote, confirming that it has been registered correctly.
7. To conclude the voting act, the voter folds the physical vote and places it in a ballot box. The physical votes back up the electronic vote in case of an audit, and cannot be forged.
What happens with the electronic votes?
1. Automated and secure vote registry: Once the voter has made his choice, it is stored in the machine in a permanent and secure way. The security and encryption technologies used in the new machine prevent the vote from being erased or manipulated in any other way, either in the machine or once it is transmitted to the tallying system. The old [ES&S scanner] machines kept the information insecurely, which allowed anyone to access and manipulate votes at leisure.
2. Encrypted transmission and storage: At the end of election day, the machines transmit the results of the vote to the tallying system. This transmission is encrypted and authenticated over telephone lines, guaranteeing zero data loss or manipulation. The tallying system receives the results of the vote and stores them in an encrypted fashion. These results can only be decoded by the tallying software.
3. 100% automated tallying and adjudication: The new automated system guarantees that the tallying and adjudication will happen automatically and instantaneously, which will prevent results being modified in any way. Previous elections relied on manual tallying and adjudication, allowing the easy manipulation of results of the vote on the part of tallying officials, either by mistake or intentionally.
4. Publication of results via the web: As soon as the automated tallying results are produced, whether partial or total, they will be published directly on the National Election Council web page, for access by the general public
Lunatics Take-Over the Asylum
Gentle reader,
Well, having just finished my dissertation proposal, I am preparing to leave town on a camping trip to Slovenia and Italy. (Rough life, I know!) Rather than leave the blog idle, as I had done in the past, I've decided to try a bit of an experiment: I'm turning this thing over to you, the readers. OK, maybe not you, you personally, but to a few of the readers who've contributed most actively in the comments forum.
Hopefully they won't get me sued or banned from the internet or condemned with a fatwa...
June 10, 2004
Pick-a-leader
So, clearly, Enrique Mendoza is the most popular of the opposition leaders among my blog readers - he had four times as much support as the next guy after 40 votes. But if the opposition is to have a real choice in a hypothetical primary, which of these opponents would you think would be best prepared to take on the transition?
Alberto Quirós Corradi talks to TalCual
Since March, Alberto Quirós Corradi has been one of the two lead negotiators for the opposition before CNE. Along with MAS leader Felipe Mujica, he negotiated the terms of the signature validation process that led to calling the presidential recall election. Quirós Corradi, a career oil executive and former CEO of Shell in Venezuela - in the Halcyon days before nationalization - he is usually seen as a walking encyclopedia of oil. His participation in the negotiations at CNE have hugely raised his political profile. Here I have translated most of an interview by Elizabeth Araujo, which appeared in Tal Cual.
Question: In three months, Felipe Mujica and yourself have convinced the unbelievers that the verb "to negotiate" is not for losers, but for winners. What other verb will we need to learn for the battle on August 15th (the presidential recall date)?
Q: In this whole recall saga, you have talked about two Chavezes: the one that is hellbent on revolution and the one who feels pressures to follow the rules of democracy. Which of those two Chavezes do you fear most?
Q: What happened to keep you from becoming a politician?
Q: What's the difference between the Generals who enjoyed the patronage of AD and Copei governments and the ones we have now, who feel strong and backed by the revolution?
On negotiating with the National Electoral Council
Question: In three months, Felipe Mujica and yourself have convinced the unbelievers that the verb "to negotiate" is not for losers, but for winners. What other verb will we need to learn for the battle on August 15th (the presidential recall date)?
Alberto Quirós Corradi (AQC): To dialogue. To dialogue face-to-face with the government, with the presence and help of international observers and, if it's an electoral matter, with the National Electoral Council as well.
On the signature validation negotiations, what we did is we talked to CNE, and CNE then went and talked with the [pro-Chavez] Comando Ayacucho, and then they would come back and talk to us some more. It's as though we were martians and they could not talk to us face to face. I think if we could talk to each other we could simplify the solutions, not just on the referendum but also with what is about to happen to the country.
We need a civilized dialogue with the government.
Q: Was there a critical moment when you wanted to strangle [pro-Chavez CNE member] Jorge Rodriguez?
AQC: No. The negotiation was cordial and respectful. I can't say there were odd surprises or frictions. Jorge [Rodriguez] had an ongoing concern: Sumate's stances. This was his headache, and despite this he would meet with them. Perhaps it was a pose. The hardest part was at the last moment, when [CNE Chairman and Chavista hardliner Francisco] Carrasquero read out the final numbers, and we understood they'd struck off 100,000 signatures from the repairs, contrary to our agreement.
That was a difficult situation, because after we had it all worked out, the regulations and everything else negotiated and ready, we had to return to the Coordinadora with official numbers different from those we had announced previously.
Somebody might have balked, and that could have compromised the negotiations. But that was the only low-blow.
Q: What path may the discussions have followed if your interlocutor had been Francisco Carrasquero?
AQC: Our negotiation was carried out mostly with Jorge Rodriguez. He is tough, intelligent and he did a good job with the process of conversation and accord.
Of course, he is not impartial, his heart is with chavismo and it was on that basis we had to negotiate with him. Perhaps he believes he is totally impartial, but he isn't; in the same way we can't be. Now, I don't know what might have happened if conversations had been with Carrasquero. I did not have the opportunity to negotiate with him.
Intuitively I think that it would have been impossible to reach accords with Carrasquero.
Q: What personal defect must a negotiator leave behind?
AQC: Haughtiness. Thinking he is always right and that his rightness will impose itself in the end. Sometimes you need to be flexible and negotiate to reach given benefits. As for a virtue, he must know how to prioritize.
Q: After this experience, you and Felipe Mujica are ready to go sell ice cream to eskimos...
AQC: And fur coats in the dessert.
But, remember, we're not about magnifying our role. There were other people involved, like Nelson Rampersad and Enrique Naime, who know CNE's inner workings much better and who helped enormously on technical aspects. Beyond that we had the backing of the Coordinadora Democratica itself.
On Chavez
Q: In this whole recall saga, you have talked about two Chavezes: the one that is hellbent on revolution and the one who feels pressures to follow the rules of democracy. Which of those two Chavezes do you fear most?
AQC: I fear the undecided Chavez, because when someone makes a choice it's easy to see his strategy and know which path he will follow. Notice that at the last minute people were saying he wouldn't accept a vote, while others said he would.
When he acts this way, it's hard to strategize because you're not sure which of the two Chavezes you need to respond to. That's his skill.
He will keep playing that game for a long, long time, he won't square off with either of the two sides, but at some point you'll run into the Chavez who wants elections, even if later he tries to do the opposite.
I've always said that Chavez's biggest frustration is to have become president through the ballot box.
Q: Over five years in government have taught chavismo that you can't dance tango alone or is it that their mistakes have forced them to recognize the opposition?
AQC: Chavismo has had to dance nice and tight with the opposition, and even switch partners. Everyone knows that chavistas have approached the financial industry, the agricultural industry and construction. There have been several stages; they even tried to launch their own Fedecamaras (business federation) and their own labor movement.
I would say that chavismo had quite a few crushes in this process, and we should also be fair: they've always found somebody ready to love them.
On Alberto Quirós Corradi
Q: What happened to keep you from becoming a politician?
AQC: Really what I like about politics is planning, analysis and strategy.
I'm an oil man but I was never a driller. Similarly, in politics, I'm not drawn to rallies. I am like Gonzalo Barrios: I like being the leader, but I don't like being a candidate.
Q: What has been your greatest extravagance?
AQC: I would never reveal that.
Q: What's your biggest fear?
AQC: That this government could turn into a repressive dictatorship, humiliating the opposition. I'm very scared of that.
On corruption, opposition unity, the cadenas and the future
Q: What's the difference between the Generals who enjoyed the patronage of AD and Copei governments and the ones we have now, who feel strong and backed by the revolution?
AQC: Perhaps the former generals were not involved in coups or anything of the sort. They learned how to live within the democratic system, with the prerogatives that it afforded them. But I see that the military leaders today want to have a more important role in decision-making, far beyond what is visible to the naked eye.
I think that, through these generals, Chavez has built his own Frankenstein monster.
Q: You say you are for a single opposition candidate, but already Salas Romer and Ledezma are out competing with Enrique Mendoza. Don't you think Quirós Corradi has a nice sound as a transition candidate?
AQR: I am one of those who believe we don't have time for a primary election before the referendum. Holding primaries is setting the opposition to fight with one another and will distract attention from the main goal: getting Chavez out. And there's just no time to hold primaries after the recall. We have to start to understand that what is coming is not a transition but a national emergency. It will not be a normal government, with its cabinet, its routines. We're talking about pulling out of the disaster Chavez has caused and try to patch up as much as we can in two years in order to start getting the country into a condition to one day advance.
Q: What benefits are there to the Cadenas presidenciales (national TV broadcasts on all channels)?
The only benefit is that everyone yells at me for watching them. But I watch them because, in a way, I enjoy Chavez's bravado for mocking other people's intelligence that way and even then retain some popularity.
That intrigues me. Though it's not like I'll spend 7 hours watching them.
Q: What do you see for Venezuela in your crystal ball?
AQC: Chavez is on his way out. If the recall is after the 19th and we need to keep the vicepresident, it will not be Jose Vicente.
That I'm sure about.
June 9, 2004
My mayor: still in jail
Henrique Capriles Radonski, mayor of Baruta municipality in Eastern Caracas, will spend another 2 weeks in jail pending an extension granted to the Prosecution to conclude the "preliminary investigation." Do bear in mind that the events alleged took place 26 months ago, and the prosecution needs just a bit more time to investigate events...
It's a sham. Danilo Anderson knows he has no case against Capriles. Still, if he can make him spend a month or two in a Disip holding cell while they lose the trial, they'll take their opportunity.
The good, the bad, and the ambiguous
The announcement was made by CNE chairman Francisco Carrasquero.
The good: The recall referendum date has finally been set. According to Descifrado, the opposition will get the "yes" side. Opposition negotiators are working out the details of the e-voting system with CNE.
The bad: The date is August 15th, not August 8th. There will be no on-the-spot verification of automated results.
The ambiguous: Ezequiel Zamora says there is an agreement that, if the "yes" campaign wins, Chavez's recall will be effective on August 15th - not on the date results are made public. Recall that this is important because if Chavez is recalled after the 19th, instead of a new election we get his vicepresident for two years. However, since only Zamora said this, and the CNE resolution calling the vote is not yet public, it's impossible to know if this will hold. Also, the vote on the date was 4 to 1, with the chavista hardliner - Oscar Battaglini - voting against.
June 8, 2004
One to make us feel tercermundistas...
AP: Venezuelans see broken statue as an omen
As one of Venezuela's most venerated religious figures, Maria Lionza has inspired hope and granted wishes to devotees for more than 200 years. So Venezuelans were shocked when a prominent 53-year-old statue of the mythical goddess split apart at the waist on Sunday and fell backward to face the heavens.
Disciplining the message
When chavistas pick up a propaganda line, you can tell. They're disciplined. Single-minded. Repetitive. Brutally effective.
As expected, vote-for-chavez-or-lose-your-misiones has become a cornerstone of the chavista campaign. It's repeated again and again on VTV, Vea, and on every government statement. A chorus. With a simple message: be scared. The opposition will take away your protections. Protect yourself and your family: vote against recall.
The question is not whether this line is right or wrong, or fair or unfair, the point is that Chavistas are effective campaigners because they are coordinated. They follow-the-leader. All of them. So their message comes through loud and clear, just the way they like it.
But will the opposition find a way to strike back just as effectively? Can they in fact coordinate anything like that effectively? Can they isolate simple, potent messages and hammer them home again and again and again no matter which spokesperson is behind the mike?
June 7, 2004
How to negotiate the e-voting issue...
Bizta, one of the Venezuelan companies hired by CNE to automate the vote-counting process, put its position across today. Though I'm not an expert, their explanation sounds plausible to me.
I don't think the opposition should be inflexible on automation. They should accept automation but with key security guarantees:
1-An independent auditor should be allowed to inspect the tallying software in the Smartmatic/Bizma/Cantv system and should be allowed to randomly inspect machines on the day of the vote, to ensure the inspected software is actually running on election day. If they have nothing to hide, the software code will be compact and transparent to an expert observer. You do not need 8 million lines of code to program a voting machine. Compact code=transparency.
2-Thre must be a paper trail, and on the spot verification of the automated totals. The experience with Diebold in the US makes this painfully clear.
In order for such guarantees to be credible, international observers must be present on voting day.
Pedro's Chart
Pedro sends in this chart that shows the same info as the previous ones, but more synthetically. If, in the referendum, the turnout/votes to revoke combination is above the blue line, the opposition wins. If it's below the blue line, the government wins. If it's above the purpole line, the opposition gets a bit of a safety margin (250,000 votes)
Note: On the flat part of the graph (right side), the vote totals are higher than the basis.
June 6, 2004
Spreadsheet fun
Time for some recall scenario-making fun. The key thing to keep in mind is that to recall President Chavez the opposition needs to meet two conditions:
1-They need to get more votes than Chavez received at the time of his election (3,757,773) votes
and
2-They need to get a majority on the day of the referendum. If the oppo gets 3,757,774 votes but the government gets 3,757,775, Chavez is not recalled.
So given that Venezuela has 12,330,902 registered voters, what does the opposition need to do to win? Well, they need to win the vote, but most importantly they need to get out the vote, they need to mobilize supporters to the polls. Turnout will be the key to this election. For reference, consider that in July 2000, turnout was 56.3%.
Assuming, conservatively, that the opposition gets 55% of the vote on Aug. 8th, they will need to mobilize just over 55% of registered voters to the polls to win:
But for a bit of a comfort margin, the opposition would far prefer a scenario with a few more votes and a few more voters.
If the opposition manages to get 60% of the vote, it can score a massive win even with relatively modest turnout.
Finally, if turnout tends to be high - which would not be odd given the level of political mobilization in Venezuela these days - and the opposition can perform towards the top of its polling range, it could crush chavismo decisively.
One final point: if turnout is above 61%, the government will have to win outright on the day to prevent Chavez's recall. Nothing in recent polling data suggests this is possible. So if the opposition can mobilize over 61% of voters to the polls, Chavez is toast.
Worried about touchscreen voting? You should be.
AP: Electronic voting: Can computers ever be trusted?
A growing number of federal and state legislators are expressing doubts about the integrity of the ATM-like electronic voting machines that at least 50 million Americans will use to cast their ballots in November.Computer scientists have long criticized the so-called touchscreen machines as not being much more reliable than home computers, which can crash, malfunction and fall prey to hackers and viruses.
Now, a series of failures in primaries across the nation has shaken confidence in the technology installed at thousands of precincts. Despite reassurances from the machines? makers, at least 20 states have introduced legislation requiring a paper record of every vote cast.
AP: Eyeing Electronic Voting Security
Concerned about the reliability of electronic voting, a federal panel is examining ways to safeguard polling from hackers and bad software to avoid another disputed presidential election this November. The first public hearing Wednesday by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission comes as many states consider legislation to require a paper record of every vote cast as a backup to technology they consider potentially faulty or vulnerable to malicious attack.
Tri-Valley Herald, California: E-voting hits speed bump in Alameda County
Thousands of Alameda County voters cast ballots Tuesday on computer software that state and county elections officials say was never certified for a California election. Same for last month's recall election. State and county officials were dismayed last week to learn that Diebold Elections Systems Inc. altered the software running in Alameda County's touchscreen voting machines yet neither submitted it for state testing nor even notified state authorities of the change.
AP: Tiny new agency ill-equipped for e-voting oversight
As alarm mounts over the integrity of the ATM-like voting machines 50 million Americans will use in the November election, a new federal agency has begun scrutinizing how to safeguard electronic polling from fraud, hackers and faulty software. But the tiny U.S. Election Assistance Commission says it is so woefully underfunded that it can't be expected to forestall widespread voting machine problems, which would cast doubt on the election's integrity. The commission -- which on Wednesday conducts the first federal hearing on the security and reliability of electronic voting -- laments its predicament in a new report.
San Jose Mercury News: Lax controls over e-voting testing labs
Forty-two states, including California, rely on three independent testing labs to safeguard elections. By holding voting-equipment manufacturers accountable to national standards and keeping copies of software programs in escrow, the independent labs are supposed to help stop defective computer code from reaching the polling place. But critics contend that the labs are too close to the elections industry to serve as effective watchdogs. ``The only thing they are independent from is state and federal regulators,'' Shelley told the U.S. Election Assistance Commission this month.
New York Times OpEd: Who Tests Voting Machines?
Whenever questions are raised about the reliability of electronic voting machines, election officials have a ready response: independent testing. There is nothing to worry about, they insist, because the software has been painstakingly reviewed by independent testing authorities to make sure it is accurate and honest, and then certified by state election officials. But this process is riddled with problems, including conflicts of interest and a disturbing lack of transparency. Voters should demand reform, and they should also keep demanding, as a growing number of Americans are, a voter-verified paper record of their vote.
New York Times: Demand Grows to Require Paper Trails for Electronic Votes
But in the last year election analysts have documented so many malfunctions, including the disappearance of names from the ballot, and computer experts have shown that the machines are so vulnerable to hackers, that critics have organized to counter the rush toward touch screens with a move to require paper trails. Such trails - ballot receipts - would let voters verify that they had cast their votes as they intended and let election officials conduct recounts in close races.
June 5, 2004
Insomnia post
3:45 a.m...can't sleep, might as well blog
The more I think about it, the more I think the standard opposition line on CNE makes no sense. People in the opposition tend to see the election council as more or less the equivalent of Miraflores Palace, because both are chavista institutions. But we know from our side that not all institutions in a coalition are alike. When chavistas treat the media barons, the bloque democratico, and the coordinadora democratica, all as one single undifferentiated mass of coup-plotting hysterics, we can see they failed to understand the internal dynamics of the opposition. But why is it so hard for us to accept that saying CNE=Comando Ayacucho could be just as wrong-headed, and for all the same reasons?
CNE was under heavy pressure to do something to derail the recall process by now. They stalled, yes, but in the end, they were not willing to derail the process entirely. Last March they were under serious pressure to simply declare the "planas" outright invalid and end the process, but they didn't do so. They then came under heavy pressure to produce an unworkable, unrealistic reparos process that left the opposition "as good as dead" - instead they chose a viable reparos process, praised by OAS as "expeditious and effective", that has led to activating the referendum. Even at the last minute they came under pressure to "slice" the signatures, and they refused to do that either. So, at some point along the line, we have to ask ourselves: is this really the pattern of behavior of an institution that just follows orders slavishly from Miraflores? It doesn't make sense to me...
What do you think?
Multiple choice?
Framework Law on Suffrage and Political Participation:
Article 182: To convoke a referendum the following requirements must be met:
1. The question must be phrased clearly and precisely, in the exact terms implied by the matter being cunsulted, and in such a way that it can be answered with a "Yes" or a "No"...
2. A brief statement setting out the justification and purpose of the consultation.
Notes for an effective Recall campaign
Over the last few months, the opposition has shown a remarkable unity of purpose in seeking the Recall Referendum. But the real fight remains ahead. A cash-flush government has already pledged, in the voice of the vicepresident, "to use all the resources of the state" to outspend its opponents. In a proper country, doing so would land you in jail for misappropriation of public property for party-political purposes. In Venezuela it just raises the bar for the opposition.
Believe it or not, the vote is just over two months away, so the opposition needs to get cracking right away. What is to be done?
First, a metaphore I've shamelessly ripped off from the GQR researchers: Chavez as your jolly, drunk uncle. Polling last year, the US firm was shocked by a strange inconsistency. Asked "do you personally like Chavez?" they would get over 40% of the voters saying yes. Asked "has the government done anything to improve your life, only a few percent would answer yes. Less than 10% give Chavez positive marks for improving health, education, street security, the economy, the whole gamut of issues.
The GQR conclusion was simple enough: to many of his supporters, Chavez is family. His supporters relate to him in familial terms. He is the nation's lovable-rogue uncle, the Tio Gonzalo who is a barrel of fun but has a bit of trouble holding down a job, or restraining his drinking, or whatever. Every family seems to have one of those. Like your lovable rogue uncle, you wouldn't stand for people attacking him in front of you. You would be personally offended. You would feel affronted. You demand respect for him.
The opposition's strategy so far has been to get outraged at Tio Gonzalo's behavior. We cried ourselves hoarse denouncing Tio's all night drinking binges, we've laughed ourselves to sleep mocking his inability to hold down a job, etc. We have, in other words, offended him. And to many of the president's supporters, a slight on Chavez is a slight on family, and for that reason, an attack on them. Personally.
The opposition needs to stop this rhetorical line. For one thing, the constituency that was liable to react favorably to this rhetoric is already on our side, already mobilized and not in need of convincing. All we achieve with the frontal attack strategy at this point is to further entrench chavistas, even chavistas who may be harboring doubts about Chavez's abilities to lead the country. Each time we call Chavez a castrocomunista extremista narciso cdm populista, we push voters away instead of attracting them.
The question is NOT whether you love your Tio Gonzalo. Of course you love him, he's your uncle! Nothing is going to make you stop loving him. This is a given. The real question, then, is whether you think Tio Gonzalo should run the family business.
Once you put the question in these terms, matters change. You can love your Tio Gonzalo to bits and still not think he is qualified to be running the family business. Convincing you to hand over the family business to someone better qualified does not require you to hate Tio Gonzalo, which you'll never do, it just requires you to accept the evident: that he isn't very good at the job he has now.
You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. This is why the opposition campaign needs to be militantly positive, bright, optimistic, future oriented, and 100% angry-rhetoric free. I've heard GQR's advice to Granier was to simply stop using the word "Chavez" on air - because 99% of the time the word is heard on RCTV it's preceded or followed by a mocking, angry attack, and those attacks became counterproductive a long long time ago.
The opposition does not need to be reminded again and again of the things Chavez has done. We'll remember. But just the hard-core opposition on its own cannot win a RR. We need to reach out to hundreds of thousands of anti-Chavez leaning NiNis, we need the votes of people who still like Chavez, who are still emotionally attached to him, but who no longer believe he's up to fixing the country's problems. To the extent we can attract those votes, we can bulk-up our totals from the current, too-tight-for-comfort projections of 3.5-4 million votes, into real trouncing territory.
Just imagine the morning of Aug. 9th, imagine the newspaper reporting 4,632,913 votes to recall Chavez. Picture it, pictre what that will do to the future of the country. Like that thought? Then lets get smart about targeting the swing voters!
June 4, 2004
Narcissist Rage
From Narcissism 101
by Stephen McDonnell
The narcissist who is frustrated, who is publicly humiliated, who can't get what he wants, usually will react with anger and rage. They are like frustrated children throwing a fit. Most adults can handle frustration, but narcissists have a low tolerance for denial. A narcissist is always boiling, always thinks others are conspiring against him. Narcissists are always conspiring against others, they tend to think other people are like them.
Paranoia is a problem with narcissists. They want it their way, they want their dream to come true and any deviation or anyone stepping on their toes sparks immediate anger. If they are in seduction mode, they will forgive for the moment, but years later the anger will come back in spades. They never forget a slight or an insult. They plan revenge. Or at least some of them do.
Other narcissists will act as though above the fray, not deigning to be upset. But they remember.
Think of a 6 year old child, think tantrum, remember how kids can say something terrible to you and then forget they said it, but if you reprimand them, they break into tears or they start breaking things.
For a narcissist, rage is the ultimate response to loss of control, and they use it to gain back control over the situation and others. They can be physically abusive and hurtful. If all their words of seduction and gifts do not work, then they will physically intimidate you. Rage can either be feigned or real. As long as it works.
Is it real? Is it a game? Even the narcissist doesn't know. He is playing out his life out of touch with his real self, so who knows what he's really feeling.
I have watched narcissists use rage to get their way, to vent their frustration on someone, then I have watched them walk away, cool as a cucumber, as if nothing happened. Other times, I have seen them break things. No doubt the prisons of the world are filled with narcissists who let their rage get the upper hand. The murderers and rapists with narcissistic disorders learned to like the rush of adrenaline, the loss of control that gave them more control over their victims in the end. If someone dies when a narcissist is angry, he blames the victim for "provoking him." Remember, the narcissist is never wrong, never remembers his own mistakes, and is always in control.
If you want to see them enraged, disagree with them, make fun of them or their opinions, fight back when they attack you. If they feel they're loosing, they will fly off the handle, in a desperate attempt at control. Or they will break down in tears and try to get attention that way; beware, they are experts at manipulation.
What is wrong with Narcissists?
"When people are driving themselves crazy, they have neuroses or psychosis. When they drive other people crazy, they have personality disorders. but Though there is plenty of narcissim without greatness, there is no greatness without narcissism." Albert Bernstein
From Narcissism 101
Now you may ask yourself what is wrong with being a Narcissist?
In fact most of them are fascinating, amusing, successful and a few are even famous. (And sometimes they are pure fakes and liars, so be careful.) They are fun to be around at parties, they dominate the conversation and will tell amusing stories, give their opinion on everything in the world as if it is the only one, until you get to know them. Then you are at risk of becoming one of their victims. They need you, they need what you can give them. Attention! They are spoiled children. They need some one to admire their image. If you become involved with one, because you are related to them, or you are a friend, or a business partner, or lover, you will suffer. And you will not know why.
Because they are actors playing a part, they can not tell the difference between the truth and a falsehood. They lie to themselves first of all; they modify their inner reality to fit their idea, their vision of themselves and then they will transform outer reality with their lies. They will take the past and re-arrange it to make themselves look good. They will never admit fault, they will never say they are sorry. If something goes wrong, they will play the victim. They will blame others.
They can not love, for they do not love themselves, they only love their image, an idealized person who does not exist. They cannot face themselves. If you ever see one fail, make a mistake, watch their faces; you will see a look of terror on it. Because you have seen behind the curtain, you have seen the real person who feels inferior and inadequate. They always have to be in control. They can not love normally. For them love is a loss of control, which they can ill afford. They can fake it, they can simulate it and even declare it effusively, but they can never make the sacrifices that true love demands. Love demands, even needs, truth to exist. A commodity in short supply in a narcissist who is looking for ideal, the perfect love or lover.
They do not think normally. They have a disorder that makes them process reality differently. Do not be fooled, they can function and pass for normal. That is what is so frightening, they are incredible mimics of human beings. Of human feelings. It is not even hypocrisy, for to them, they do not see any difference in their actions; as long as it works.
Many mental disorders have a chemical cause; such as a seratonin malfunction. In Narcissist, no chemical cause has been found. Yet. It seems to be a cognitive malady. I would even say a cultural one. For women, narcissistic display is almost natural if not encouraged. For men, certain societies demand that men put up a macho image. From that kind of behavior to a full blown NPD is not that far.
In the end, they want to own you. You must be their storm troopers, their faithful worshipers who never criticize them, never disagree with them. Never look behind their mask, you may see the wizard of Oz behind the curtain. If they do evil, you must approve, if they hate, you must hate as well. You cease to exist as you. You become just a projection of their image. You become a clone, a mindless puppet, with no idea of what they are thinking because you are under their charm.
You give up your self, your soul, to them. It is not violent. It can be so gentile, so subtile, so unseen. They can use the legitimacy of established institutions to achieve their goal; the office of the church, of parental authority, of a political party or of a garden club. They love having authority, it makes the job of co-opting you so much easier. You have to obey authority, you are brought up to follow, to love, your parents without question. The father or mother figure is used in their quest for hegemony. Or they may use sex, love, beauty, intelligence as a tool. Whatever it takes to get you in their grasp. Mesmerized.
In the larger sense, we are programed to follow such people. They use the voice of authority. Or social pressure, and eventually physical force if necessary to get their way - think nasty spoiled child. We are constantly bombarded by images in advertising and politics that sell us people, products, political messages. It is the packaging, the medium is the message; images are powerful, not the content. Historically, narcissists have tried and even succeeded in having millions of people follow them, like lemmings, to death and destruction.
The nadir of the comecandelas...
Today, I woke up peeved at all the radical opposition talking-heads who have been laughing at us comeflores for months for thinking there will be a recall vote. If you're a comeflor, you've doubtlessly met the haughty, "sobrao", style of people who stand around and scoff "por eso es que la oposicion nunca logra nada, está llena de gente comiendo florecitas...así no vamos a ninguna parte - es que acaso no te has fijado que Chavez es un totalitario neonazi barriga-verde asesino? Entonces? Que referendum ni que referendum? Bajate de esa nube!"
If I had Bs.100 for each time I've heard some variant on that little speech over the last few years...I'd have a few thousand Bs, anyway. It has been a leitmotif of comecandela thinking for years now...
It's particularly entertaining, in this regard, to read today's editorial page in El Universal. Obviously, the pieces were written a few days back, and María Sol Pérez Schael, Carlos Zubillaga and Carlos Raúl Hernández all unanimously and confidently predict that CNE will not acknowledge there are enough signatures. They then proceed to heap abuse on the "culprits" of a crime that was never committed. Wonder how they're feeling this morning. Only Gerardo Blyde, happily, gets it right - insisting on the importance of the secret ballot on Aug. 8th.
And the comecandela leaders, where are they now? Where's Salas? How about Weil, who I love but who kept editorializing that a referendum was a pipe-dream? Where did Robert Alonso scurry off to? How about Nitu Perez, and Ibeyise and Boccaranda and their ilk? And Rafael Marín, well, we know where he is (in hospital, after being badly attacked by chavista cabilleros last night) - but once he gets near a microphone, what is he going to say? "Sorry I pushed you towards an insurrectional strategy bound to lead to civil war when democratic means worked just fine"? It's the least we could hope for.
What last night shows, folks, is that comeflorismo is not just an ethical position. It's also, just as importantly, a pragmatic stance - one you adopt because it is more likely to actually work than any of the alternatives. We've learned since April 2002...well, some of us have learned...
There are lots of obstacles ahead - but over the last few days we've seen why the moderates had it right all along.
June 3, 2004
Elections Council Speaks: There are enough signatures for a Chavez Recall
Union Radio:
The President of the National Electoral Board, Jorge Rodriguez, announced at 4:15 p.m. today the preliminary results "which show a clear tendency" on the signature verification process to convene a vote to recall the president. He said there are 2,451,821 valid signatures to demand a recall, and 2,436,083 were required.
The President of the National Electoral Board, Jorge Rodriguez, announced at 4:15 p.m. today the preliminary results "which show a clear tendency" on the signature verification process to convene a vote to recall the president. He said there are 2,451,821 valid signatures to demand a recall, and 2,436,083 were required.
If this is so, there has to be a referendum: article 21 of the rules explicitly rule out any further verifications after this point. Chavez will give a speech within the next hour - think of it as a campaign launch.
Pro-Chavez Radicals Lash Out Against the Media
The situation at El Nacional is, for some reason, not being reported anywhere. Sources inside the newspaper's headquarters say journalists are trapped in their offices while aggressive chavista groups roam around freely inside the building. A truck was burned just outside, and the fire department has just arrived on the scene. There is also an unconfirmed report that the newspaper's printing press has been set on fire. (We'll know if it was true tomorrow morning!)
Globovision has just reported on the situation at El Nacional but says it is now "under control."
Earlier this afternoon, Pro-Chavez gunmen attacked the opposition-controlled Greater Caracas City Hall, downtown, using an submachine gun at one point.
A similar situation was reported at RCTV, the opposition controlled channel 2.
The anti-independent media incitement in the pro-government stations has been particularly intense over the last few days.
Gaviria remains convinced a recall will happen, but for now, the nation just awaits Chavez's speech on hooks ant tenters.
The government hardliners were never going to go down without a fight. But how far will it spread?
Update
Globovision has just reported on the situation at El Nacional but says it is now "under control."
Mixed signals
It's too confusing trying to read the decision process inside the government, there are too many mixed signals. Perhaps the debate inside Chavismo is swinging back against allowing a referendum. The police raids at CNE last night and the on-going novela with the Signators From The Other Side of The Grave all point that way, as do many of the caveats in government statements. Today, there is violence by chavista gangs reported at several locations in Caracas, including an assault against the opposition-controlled Greater Caracas City Hall where sub-machine guns were reportedly used to shoot up the building.
Radio Nacional de Venezuela is still sounding dovish, preparing its audience for a referendum, but VTV has reverted to Taliban form.
Chavez will speak to the nation in a little under three hours. At a public rally in front of his supporters. It's not the kind of platform one chooses to make retractions or concessions...is it?
One thing's for sure: the boss will set the line, and his underlings will follow it...
What Zapata knows
Juan Carlos Zapata, the guy who runs Descifrado, has been leaking priceless information from a high-up chavista source for three days now. If Zapata has it more or less right - which he certainly seems to - his version is a firm anchor for cautious but real optimism.
Zapata, a Tal Cual co-founder, is a kind of Venezuelan Drudge (minus the sleaze) - well-connected, agressive about posting everything he knows, and very often, the first with key stories too hot for others to publish.
His latest essay on the reparos drama inside the government (read it in the original Spanish or translated to English) again feeds my perception that the referendum is a reality. In Zapata's retelling, the reparos results have split the government badly, setting off what he calls "a political earthquake" within chavismo.
For the first time since 1999, Chavez faces a major political decision he cannot control - or not without very high costs. For the first time in recent memory, there appears to be an actual, living, breathing debate inside the government camp. There are factions and disagreements and discussions and scapegoat hunts. This is in complete contrast with the tradition of "democratic centralism" in the Chavez era - where all decisions are made personally by The Leader and communicated down the chain of command.
This is all good news. But there is still a huge amount of fear and rage among government supporters - aporrea.org's priceless foros make that quite clear. Bringing the extremists around may not be possible, but lessening their impact on society is.
One key fear on the chavista side is that the day after a referendum the "misiones" - the Chavez-led emergency social programs - will be dismantled. This is a source of real dismay to millions of honest Chavez followers.
It's time for the opposition to be magnanimous - to treat their opponents with the respect we have demanded from them for years. Enrique Mendoza should come forward and say that the opposition does not intend to dismantle the misiones if it takes power, and that instead, it will improve them. A statement like that could go a long ways in building bridges with honest people on the other side.
However much we dislike the government, we have to remind ourselves that it's crucial for rank and file chavistas to perceive that there is a future for them in an opposition-led future. If, like Garcia Carneiro, Diosdado, and the hardliners, they feel their entirely livelihood and even their lives are at stake, they'll fight. Who can blame them?
Over the last few months, the opposition has demonstrated uncommon coherence and single-mindedness in pursuing the recall option. But today, the best thing we can do to help bring about a referendum is to explain, very clearly, that we are a movement for National Reconciliation, not just a ploy to take back power.
June 2, 2004
Venezuela Edges Closer to a Chavez Recall Election
Venezuela is at an extraordinary juncture. After 30 months of intense political crisis, the nation waits anxiously for an announcement on whether or not there will be a recall referendum against President Chavez. After a contentious 6 month signature-gathering process marked by delays and unexplained rule changes, the National Electoral Council has started verifying hundreds of thousands of contested signatures that were reaffirmed by citizens this weekend. If more than 540,000 signatures are added to the total, the council must call a recall vote.
At their joint press conference at CNE yesterday, President Carter and OAS Secretary General Cesar Gaviria made all of this very clear. Gaviria said the main difference between this process and the original signature collection drive and this weekend's validation is that the checks built into this latest event will make it extremely clear if anyone cheats. President Carter said that while the observation mission has no legal authority, they reserve the right to comment on any discrepancy between the totals they've calculated and the ones CNE eventually announces. President Carter said he had firm commitments from CNE's board and President Chavez himself that no more surprises are in the horizon.
So far, the opposition's electoral strategy has been an amazing success. Never has the opposition enjoyed the international credibility it now has. While the government continues to scream bloody murder and label all opponents "coup-mongers" and "terrorists", hundreds of thousands of Venezuelan citizens have chosen to face down the regime in the civilized, legal way: by standing in line, again and again, under the rain and despite the intimidation, to sign their names on a petition.
Though they have not yet been officially announced, the signature verification totals are an open secret. In accordance with regulations agreed in advance by the government and the opposition, the elections' authorities distributed copies of verification tallies at each of the 2700 signing centers in the process at the end of each of the three days of signing to all sides. The government, the opposition and international observers all have access to the raw data that CNE is charged with tallying. And since CNE's role at this stage is limited to adding together those daily tallies, with further verifications explicitly banned, it's difficult to imagine what the government could do at this point to wiggle out of reporting the real results.
Carter's touch
At their joint press conference at CNE yesterday, President Carter and OAS Secretary General Cesar Gaviria made all of this very clear. Gaviria said the main difference between this process and the original signature collection drive and this weekend's validation is that the checks built into this latest event will make it extremely clear if anyone cheats. President Carter said that while the observation mission has no legal authority, they reserve the right to comment on any discrepancy between the totals they've calculated and the ones CNE eventually announces. President Carter said he had firm commitments from CNE's board and President Chavez himself that no more surprises are in the horizon.
Since CNE has not yet announced official results, the media are barred from talking openly about signature tallies, a rule both sides have sporadically broken. Leaks are inevitable in a situation like this, and while the sides report different tallies, even the government appears to understands that enough signatures were collected. Chavez knows he will pay a heavy price if it tampers with them.
Descifrado, the well-connected opposition-minded gossip site, has been leaking like a Venezuelan schoolroof since Sunday. Juan Carlos Zapata, a TalCual co-founder who now runs Descifrado, reports confidently that the government has accepted it must allow a recall go ahead.
President Chavez himself hinted as much during a spot of afternoon baseball at Fuerte Tiuna, where he acknowledged the possibility that the opposition might just have snuck by with enough signatures. At dinner the previous night, across from President Carter, he had apparently made the pledge directly.
So Venezuela, remarkably, appears headed for a recall vote after all. The possibility, which seemed distant just a week ago, now seems likely. Opposition distrust of the authorities now runs so deep that it's almost impossible for many of us to believe it, and many will certainly refuse to believe it until they see CNE head Francisco Carrasquero announcing it on an all-channel TV broadcast. Even then, Venezuela is "territorio de lo posible," it is still posible that the government will work to stop or sabotage the vote later on.
The Day of the Doves
So far, the opposition's electoral strategy has been an amazing success. Never has the opposition enjoyed the international credibility it now has. While the government continues to scream bloody murder and label all opponents "coup-mongers" and "terrorists", hundreds of thousands of Venezuelan citizens have chosen to face down the regime in the civilized, legal way: by standing in line, again and again, under the rain and despite the intimidation, to sign their names on a petition.
The cornerstone of the government's rhetoric - that they are poor beleaguered democrats holding off a conspiratorial cabal of rich businessmen and media barons with US-backing - looks ever more incongruous in light of the weekend's events. Venezuela, the government wants to convince us, is the only place on earth where the fascist terrorist coup-mongers stand in line, in the rain, to sign petitions, while the belleaguered democrats work tirelessly to keep them away from the ballot box. It makes less than no sense. It had some usefulness as a propaganda tool, but more and more the message is only believed by a hard-core of zealots.
The Venezuelan opposition has always been a grab bag of groups of all sorts of different sizes, attitudes and ideologies. The "dove" faction that urged a legal, electoral solution has not always been in control of things. Both on April 11th and during the two month National Strike of Dec-Jan 2002-03, opposition hardliners took control of the movement and made very bad blunders that have cost the opposition dearly in terms of credibility. It took perseverance, hard work, and real effort for the dove wing to impose its slogan - without violence, within the law.
Paradoxically, a government that had always urged the opposition to behave in this way now finds itself terribly outflanked and devoid of a clear target. Whereas it was easy to dismiss coup leader Carmona or strike leader Carlos Ortega as dangerous reactionaries, the line loses all meaning in an opposition led by people like Pompeyo Marquez, Chuo Torrealba and Felipe Mujica. The government, which has always thrived on picking a fight with hothead opponents, had no idea how to handle their approach: Negotiate continuously. Don't rise to provocations. Keep your eye on the ball. Don't let the government distract attention from the RR.
Today, that simple strategy, together with the invaluable work of the Carter Center/OAS observation mission, has put Venezuela closer to finding an peaceful, democratic, electoral and constitutional solution to its governance crisis than many opposition hawks ever dreamed possible.
The strategy could still collapse. The government could still choose confrontation over civilization. It could still all be for naught. But right here, right now, we know the opposition has gone the extra mile, and then some, to make viable a solution to the crisis that doesn't lead to civil war. And I think that's a very great achievement on its own.
June 1, 2004
Cátedra Carter
At his press conference today, Jimmy Carter showed what you eat "international pressure" with. His statement: plain, direct, devastatingly straightforward shows that the Descifrado leaks from yesterday were basically on the money. The government looked at its options, and decided to face the voters. I know it's hard to believe just now, but all the evidence points to that direction.
Carter oozed confidence as he announced that he had held long meetings with all the players over the last few days, that everyone knows what the tallies show, and that the international community awaits a CNE announcement of the real numbers, the ones all sides have. He made it plain, between the lines, that CNE and the government are quite clear on what's at stake, and has made a clear commitment to play ball.
The great thing is that when you are Jimmy Carter, you can tell it like it is, and people look very foolish if they get angry at you. Today, Carter very clearly and straightforwardly recalled the changing verification criteria in the previous round of signature checks, made it clear such nonsense was not acceptable, and emphasize again and again that the basic difference between the reafirmazo and the reparos is that this time around "any discrepancy" between the totals observers already have and any CNE announcement would be plainly evident. He stresses strongly that he has strong pledges from both CNE and President Chavez himself that the announced results match the information already available to all sides.
I should have a poll about which prominent Caracas street we'll eventually have to rename Avenida Presidente Carter...
*Now* I have time to blog!
My research proposal is signed, sealed and delivered.
If you want to print it, download this version (PDF).
If you want to print it, download this version (PDF).
May 31, 2004
Email from my country-girl former co-worker...
From: "Julia"
To: "Francisco"
Date: Fri, 30 May 2004 11:11 PM
Subject: para tu disfrute
Just wanted to share a little story you might like. Hey, I didn't hear it on Marta Colomina's show, it's a personal story.
One of my sisters, who still lives in the little sea-side town where I grew up, was persuaded by the people of another near-by town to help them out by working as a teacher for Misión Ribas, the government scheme to get poor people high school diplomas. She agreed because she visits this town often, and she knows nobody else in the town is really prepared to be a teacher, and they would really appreciate her help. Plus, she isn't a university graduate; she did only some semesters in the history faculty at the Universidad Central, and well, she doesn't have a job right now.
She sent in her resume, went to several Mision Ribas meetings in La Guaira, but she warned the people in town and later to the Mision Ribas Coordinator in La Guaira, that she had signed for a referendum on Chavez. The coordinator told her that it didn't matter because they couldn't find any other volunteer who wanted to go to such a remote place for the Mision. So they agreed she would start teaching high school out there.
A few years ago, she had a son who has spina bifida (he's in a wheel chair), she had asked for help from the Fondo Unico Social - another Chavez-controlled agency - to help fund an operation for her kid, which she never got.
This week, we find out the chavistas have been investigating her, finding out personal details about her, that she has three kids and no husband and one of the kids is in a wheelchair. On Saturday the 29th she got a call from the Regional Coordinator for Mision Ribas to ask her whether she would withdraw her signature, arguing that someone who is against the president cannot be accepted for a job with the Mision.
My sister replied that she had warned them and they had not posed objections. Five minutes later she got a call from the Army Captain in charge of coordinating Mision Ribas in the region. He told her that they could get her a good job with her CV, help for her sick kid and scholarships for her other two kids, but that she must withdraw her signature.
My sister said no, that if she did it she wouldn't know what face to show to her children, he kept insisting and asked her to call again. This Sunday, he called her again to insist and offer her a face-to-face meeting with him this Tuesday to give her a "direct donation" from PDVSA for her kids as well as a job, of course all provided she withdrew her signature. She told them no again. He called a third time and she decided not to pick up the phone, and asked her kids to say she was not home.
It sounds like a Marta Colomina story, but no, it's my sister!
un beso,
Julia
Square this circle...
It's a replay of last November! In so many ways! First the opposition exceeds its needed tally, and goes euphoric. The government, as soon as it notices the opposition has the signatures (but not earlier, never earlier) starts to allege a sophisticated fraud. Last time, it was the infamous planillas planas, this time, they're alleging "ID card cloning centers" running out of Sumate's voter ID centers. The opposition charges DISIP with seeking to plant this evidence in Sumate facilities all over the place.
I asked my Sumate volunteer sister about this last night and we had a good laugh about it. "So, Mari, did you hide the cloned cedulas well?" "Yes, of course Quico, we at Sumate are very proud of our organizational know-how - of course, it was hard to hide the masses and masses of fake cedulas, but we managed it..." [sarcasm alert: she was of course laughing her head off at the notion - once again, only someone who's never been to Sumate could believe an accusation so plainly contrary to the spirit of the organization.]
So yesterday, among these dark mutterings of cloned cedulas, someone actually asked Alberto Quiroz about the possibility of a further round of "reparos" to repair the repairs...suggesting the possibility of an endlessly regressing set of further verifications that would only, logically, be stopped by the laws of sequential halving: eventually your sample would be reduced to one single reparante and you could not subdivide him any further, barring mutilation or something extreme like that. Quiroz just smiled and said that such a "nightmare" is simply not in the cards.
Here's what the rules say about this latest bit of tropical kafkaism:
CONSEJO NACIONAL ELECTORAL
RESOLUCIÓN N° 040420-563
Caracas, 20 de abril de 2004
Capítulo VII: De la Totalización
Artículo 21. Órgano competente. La Junta Nacional Electoral totalizará el conjunto de actas originales recibidas diariamente de la totalidad de las Mesas de Reparo, en un lapso no mayor de tres (3) días continuos siguientes al último día de del evento de reparo correspondiente y procederá a hacer públicos los resultados definitivos.
[...]
Asimismo, luego de la totalización definitiva de los reparos queda excluida cualquier actividad de verificación posterior.
CNE Regulations
National Electoral Concil
Resolution No. 040420-563
Caracas, April 20, 2004
Chapter VII: On Tallying
Article 21: Relevant agency. The National Electoral Junta shall tally the set of original actas received daily from all of the Reparo Tables, in a period no longer than three (3) consecutive days after the last day of the corresponding reparo event and will proceed to publish the results.
[...]
After the definitive tally of the reparos, any further verification activity is ruled out.
Call me a romantic, but I don't see how they can cheat here. The Junta Nacional Electoral - the operational arm of CNE - is a mere arithmetic body here, a "counting instance", a glorified abacus. And after the tally, any further verification is explicitly ruled out. Not that I doubt their creativity in bending the rules, just that this rule is particularly straightforward and lacking in ambiguity - so the Creative Jurisprudence Squad will have to work extra hard this time around.
May 30, 2004
Ineffectual Authoritarianism
This weekend, we've seen that the press has been unfair in its treatment of CNE. I realize opinions are so hardened on this subject by now, I'm most unlikely to convince anyone, but think about it: the entire chavista drive to screw up the reparos this weekend happened outside CNE. Whether it's the military or civilian supporter groups, in the vast majority of cases the trouble was outside the CNE jurisdictional line. If the government was so confident it could order CNE around, why would it have gone through all the trouble, all the bad publicity, all the grief of violently attacking the signing centers, when an inside job would've been so much smoother and less evident?
The reparos have underlined once again just how ineffectual Chavez is as an authoritarian. Watching the news yesterday, it seemed quite clear that someone high up in Miraflores had given the order to go out and screw up the reparo centers. And they tried. They even managed to mobilize a few groups which managed to get to a few centers and make life extremely unpleasant for a few people, including Globo's Marta Palma. But the Chavistas simply did not come down like a great locust swarm to erase the referendum from the face of history, like some feared (and others apparently hoped.)
The government once again flubbed it. They thought they had enough popular support to cause a very serious problem in signing centers throughout the country. But when the order was given, they found out that they actually only control a fairly limited number of chavista extremists.
Worst of all, from their perspective, the attempts at intimidation or obstruction failed. Faced with the obdurate determination of the oppo signators, the chavista intimidation attempts barely scored above flash-in-the-pan status. Probably the most remarkable element of watching Globovision yesterday was seeing the way that the small lines of people waiting to sign simply never give up! Even when dozens of government activists came by on motorcycles firing roman candles into voting centers and shouting Viva Chavez, people simply stayed put, waited for them to leave, and hung on to their places in line! Gente arrecha!
Which, frankly, makes me proud to be Venezuelan. There's something wonderfully irreverent and rebellious about this attitude, a kind of principled stubborness in the face of intimidation that has and will continue to serve the nation well. It's the story of the grandmother in Los Palos Grandes who saved Rosendo all over again.
But if I'm proud of the bravery of grassroots antichavez signators, I'm also proud of the rank-and-file chavistas. Because, folks, Chavez's 30%, the vast bulk of the normal, decent, honest, hard-working Venezuelans who support Chavez did NOT heed the call for violence. (Believe me, if one in three Venezuelans had poured out onto the streets to rip things up, we would've noticed!) Instead, many of them were inside the reparo centers serving as witnesses, collaborating without any problems with the opposition witnesses as well as the CNE personnel and the soldiers. The dirty little secret here is that the bulk of rank-and-file chavistas don't want a war any more than we do.
It's not the first time. In late 2002, after TSJ refused to try the April generals, we saw chavistas calling their supporters out on the street. Only a handful did.
Poor Chavez. Now he knows what it is to be isolated. Alone in Guadalajara. Alone in the streets of Venezuela. Able to raise a raucus in 20 or 30 signing centers, but just not powerful enough to put serious obstacles in the way of the remaining 99% of them. His power is crumbling visibly around him. In the end, my feeling is he'll fall not because of how authoritarian he is, but because of how sadly ineffectual he is at it, how oddly unable to translate his personal magnetism and his hold on his supporters' imaginations into the real acts of day-to-day brutality that keep authoritarians in place.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)