Chavez Unpopular In South/central America?

[Karl Marx's Camel]

Quite a few commentators has said that one of the reasons Ollanto Humala lost in Peru's elections, was due to Chavez's interference.

I remember reading yesterday that Calderon went higher up in the polls when he accused Obrador of being a an ally of Chavez.

And Fidel himself is not that popular in South America, either (although probably higher than in the West). I remember reading that 4,8 out of 10 South Americans approve of him (compared to Bush's 4,0).

I talked to a person today, and he mentioned that the most helpful way to win elections in South America today, must be to say that you are an opponent of Chavez.

And then I thought...

In Brazil, Argentina, Chile.. It seems that the people have elected more "moderate persons". And in Peru, Mexico and Colombia, more conservatives. Why do you think that is, in a continent where so many are poor and have a disdain for the status quo? Why is not Chavez and other radicals, more popular in South America? Why do the people keep electing capitalist reformers?

[ComradeOm]

Would these commentators happen to be bourgeois by any chance?

[Karl Marx's Camel]

I do not know.

What really matters though, I think, is if the commentators are correct or not. And If I recall correctly, it seems Ollanto tried, during the campaign, to get the focus away from his ties with Chavez.

Anywho, beside Venezuela, Bolivia, and Urugay which other South/Central American nations have chosen a radical party/coalition?

Most of the population in South America seems to have chosen pro-capitalist reformers (Think Lula, Garcia, Óscar Arias, Uribe, Vincente Fox, and now Calderon).

[Connolly]

Why do you think that is, in a continent where so many are poor and have a disdain for the status quo? Why is not Chavez and other radicals, more popular in South America? Why do the people keep electing capitalist reformers?

Good questions.

Could have something to do with the turnout amongst the working class in elections?

People could be voting based on a "family tradition"?

More funding, backed by USA and corporate billionaires to sway public vote away from the more progressive candidates?

Statistics would be needed to answer these questions.


Thats what I hate about this world - people vote with their arse. Here in Ireland, the same two party's get in time and time again since the foundation of the state :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry:
enough anger.


You have posted a message with more emoticons that this board allows. Please reduce the number of emoticons you've added to the message

Oh Fuck Off.

[bayano]

Originally posted by The [email protected] 7 2006, 08:21 AM
Could have something to do with the turnout amongst the working class in elections?

People could be voting based on a "family tradition"?

More funding, backed by USA and corporate billionaires to sway public vote away from the more progressive candidates?
yeah, i think these are some key points. firstly, with the rate of poverty and illiteracy in latin america, just as with the rest of the world the rich and middle classes (who are more often white) are more likely to vote, while the poorest are usually least likely to vote, excepting in venezuela itself right now hahahaha. even in panama, the poorest barrios have low election turnout, and its a truism that goes beyond the continent.

i dunno what you mean about 'family tradition', but it is a reality in different ways across the continent. mostly due to cronyism and corruption. in panama, most parties get most of their votes based on cronyism, paying people off, giving people jobs. political parties are often businesses more than anything else, and even when theyre not, their base is created and/or maintained by jobs and other benefits rather than any ideological support. i know this is true in much of the continent, tho my lil patria is a particularly sad case in this regard.

and of course it is important to realize these elections arent ever clean. maybe theyre cleaner than they were in the cold war and before it, but the NED, IRI and other usa government funded projects funnel money to parties like mexico's PAN and to uribe in colombia, and sometimes even 'assist with the electoral process'. beyond that, the established parties in these countries are well versed in frauding elections to begin with.

as for chavez's support in general? he has widespread support and widespread disapproval. the news media in most latin american countries is as right wing, capitalist, and bullshit as anywhere else. remember, the venezuelan news media is strong internationally, and they are vehemently anti-chavez. people across the continent get some venezuelan television, and it is overwhelmingly the anti-chavez stuff. the local news media businesses are also generally opposed to chavez.

on the other hand, large grassroots groups exist all over that support the bolivarian process, ive met people from across the continent who showed that. i did some interviews in panama last time with people who were in panamanian bolivarian circles, and they showed me some of their membership lists and petition lists, which include names of groups people were affiliated with, and it really is a wide swath of the population, much more than just the radical left or even the left. but in panama, we have no left wing party. in colombia, they are at war, and in mexico there is clear fraudulence in the election. in peru, thats a wild card, but ollanta was a shifty character, allegedly a graduate of the SOA, so his support from the left and the poor was spotty.

[Cheung Mo]

I wouldn't call Garcia a conservative though...He's not great for Peru or for Latin America, but he's no more conservative than Lula or Bachelet.