Investigation of Oaxacan leftist org APPO requested, evidence of Hugo Chavez ties surfaces (Trans)

El Universal ( Mexico City ) ^ | October 31, 2006 | Jorge Teherán ( translated by self )

[bboop]

Fascinating, thanks. I hope they expose this for all it's worth. Was Chavez involved in Chiapas those few years ago, when Comandante Marcos got things all whupped up? Whatever happened with him anyway? (moved to Cuba?)

[Victoria Delsoul]

This should be interesting.

[Thunder90]

They are getting ready for riots when AMLO's election challenge is tossed.

[SAJ]

I suspect you know your history quite well. What appears to be happening, or has happened but didn't happen, so to speak, is something very nearly identical to the Bolshevists' takeover of Russia in 1917-1918. True, the Mexican gov't is less helpless than was the Tsar's, and later Kerensky's, at that time, but the similarities are remarkable.

No (evidently) coherent plan on the part of the national gov't to deal with revolutionists (check!). No competent civil authority able to cope with the revolutionists in X different areas (check!). Revolutionists brought in from foreign nations (check!).

The only significant differences I can find (and you better than I, to be sure) are: A) the lack of a charismatic leader, and B) the lack (temporarily, it would appear) of a paramilitary to enforce the revolutionists' aims.

How say you? ''Reasonable comparison, SAJ''? Or, ''You're full of kwap!''

In either case, best regards to you, Saint, and thanks again!

[Alia]

Thank you majorly, StJacques. I am glad PRI is looking into this. They are going to need some assistance from allied foreign countries to reveal the money flows, I think. The funds have no doubts been mirrored and passed a few times around certain parts of the world. This particular investigation and topic interests me greatly.

[StJacques]

"How say you? ''Reasonable comparison, SAJ''?"

Well I have a different take, though I very much appreciate that you're pondering the historical significance of all of this. Basically; what I see is a cultural transformation of Mexican political life underway as a necessary step to complete the transition away from a One-Party Corporate State into a Democratic Welfare State.

Most people who've taken the trouble to learn anything about Mexico's recent political history understand that in the late 1990's electoral reforms were put in place which created a competitive electoral process and which enabled the PAN Party to win the presidential election in 2000, bringing an end to decades of PRI Party rule. But what I believe is either not well understood or still not yet fully examined is the transformation of Mexico's political culture which must accompany this new electoral reality. The development of a competitive political process in Mexico is the necessary precursor to the unraveling of the Corporate State the PRI put in place in the late 1930's and through the 1940's to bring an end to the violent nature of Mexico's previous two decades of political life. When it was constructed the Corporate State which was PRI-dominated Mexico kept the political peace through cooperation and compromise. All sectors and interest groups within Mexican society, with the single exception of Mexico's indigenous minorities, were effectively represented in the state in some way. Confrontation was avoided through compromise as competing sectors and interest groups of Mexican society dealt with each other within the state in which they were "incorporated" as legitimate players in the system. It all sounds very good in theory but it is a system which kills competitiveness and innovation and which results in an under-performing economy with all its attendant social problems. Which is why Mexico made the decision in the early 1990's to embrace proven capitalist enterprise and to make the necessary reforms to their political system to sustain it.

Right now Mexican political culture is caught at a crossroads. Everyone who is a player was brought up and nursed within an environment that prized cooperation and avoided confrontation. But with the elimination of a one-party state, confrontation in the political arena becomes inevitable, and it's more that just confrontation within an election cycle. I think the Mexican Left has understood this much better than has the Center or the Right, the latter two of which still believe that cooperation and compromise are still an answer -- just look at the vacillation and repeated pleas for negotiation that have characterized the Fox administration's behavior over the past few months. But the Center and the Right are learning as I write, given everything that has occurred over the past two years, and I'm going back to the Desafuero scandal and crisis of 2004 when Lopez Obrador, for the first time in Mexican political history, began to turn out public crowds either reaching or approaching a million at a time and continuing through his recent challenge to the July 2nd presidential election. Throw in the crisis surrounding APPO's takeover of Oaxaca over the past five plus months and there is every reason to believe that the Mexican Left is ready for confrontation. This is a cultural process at heart in my opinion.

So the question which remains to be answered as I see it is "at what point will the Center and the Right in Mexico realize that they cannot meet confrontation with compromise?" Or perhaps "will they ever realize it in time?" That is pretty much the historical context I believe I am watching as I examine this process.

[ApplegateRanch]

Just looking at that picture, I have to ask:

Does Hugo have a little North Korean in his ancestry?

[nopardons]

bttt

[StJacques]

NOTE TO EVERYONE -- PLEASE CLICK THE LINK BELOW TO KEEP PAGE CACHED ON GOOGLE:

I have been informed that the page on the Oaxacan news site A Diario I have translated above is not accessible without a logon id to some of you. I have tested the link for it and found this to be true -- at least in my instance.

If you want to see the Oaxacan page Google has it cached at this link

I would appreciate it if some of you would click on this link just to encourage the Google server to save a copy of it so the resource in its original remains accessible to everyone. And of course it doesn't hurt the authenticity of this story to make sure the proof is available to everyone, which is also my motivation in sending out this ping.

[Kenny Bunk]

.....as a necessary step to complete the transition away from a One-Party Corporate State into a Democratic Welfare State.

Mexico was long a full-blown welfare state ... on paper. As the fortunes of the country improved, some of the "cradle to the grave" "benefits" even accrued to selected citizens, such as the workers in the state-owned oil company. The fact that distribution of the goodies continues to be so uneven is a major cause of the tension.

The lure of the Corporate State has appealed to many a Latin American dictator. Even Fidel ... and I suspect Chavez, Morales, and Lula ... is rumored to be a secret admirer of Mussolini. They view it as method for industrial and commercial development through state-owned enterprises. PRI rather neatly bridged the gap between this theory and democracy with one-party rule ... which from this side of the border looked a lot, or at least sort of like, like representative democracy.

Latin American intellectuals will apparently never fully buy into free-market capitalism. Their models will always be more European. Unlike the Europeans, they never seem to notice that these models have serious problems. They don't seem to realize the European intellectuals they admire and want to be like, have spent a century or so working on the problems ... usually without success!

I agree that in this move away from the Corporate State, we are witnessing an historic event of global proportions in Mexico. Unfortunately for us, given the size of Mexico's population, the scale of euro-style welfare benefits envisioned, and the realities of budget, .... the only way Mexico will become a Euro-model welfare state is on the US tab ... one way or another!

[Alia]

Done.

[JCEccles]

The development of a competitive political process in Mexico is the necessary precursor to the unraveling of the Corporate State the PRI put in place in the late 1930's and through the 1940's to bring an end to the violent nature of Mexico's previous two decades of political life. When it was constructed the Corporate State which was PRI-dominated Mexico kept the political peace through cooperation and compromise. All sectors and interest groups within Mexican society, with the single exception of Mexico's indigenous minorities, were effectively represented in the state in some way. Confrontation was avoided through compromise as competing sectors and interest groups of Mexican society dealt with each other within the state in which they were "incorporated" as legitimate players in the system. It all sounds very good in theory but it is a system which kills competitiveness and innovation and which results in an under-performing economy with all its attendant social problems. Which is why Mexico made the decision in the early 1990's to embrace proven capitalist enterprise and to make the necessary reforms to their political system to sustain it.

Bump.

[DaoPian]

I've archived that article here:

Sospecha de injerencia extranjera en conflicto (jpg)

and I'm saving the link here:

Oaxaca - Watch Links

[StJacques]

Thank you very much for archiving and linking the article, especially the archiving of it. I did a "screen save" of the entire page and created a .jpeg of my own to save, which I did.

I'm actually a little puzzled as to why the article was available when I first found it and not so later on. I wonder if someone made a phone call to A Diario and threatened them over the issue? And I'm not being facetious in that comment either. That's explosive stuff.

But thanks again DP. I do appreciate it.