Yesterday's March for Democracy

Submitted by fyl on 28 June, 2008 - 10:37.

In today's El Nuevo Diario (END) there is an article titled Oposición a Ortega está en las calles" (Opposition ot Ortega is in the streets). It's an interesting read. Some of you, get your translation software ready.

What I found interesting (and, to the best of my knowledge, accurate) is that while it is clearly a political event, it is not a political party event. That is, it is all about anti-Pacto. The banners you saw were Nicaraguan flags. The participants were clearly scattered about the political spectrum.

Now, to a certain extent, we see the issue of rising food prices being capitalized on. Coming up with an affordible and equitable solution is not easy. But, the general point seems to be that it is up to Nicaraguans in general to address the problem rather than have an Ortega-only solution.

Many of the names you see in the article from the brothers Godoy to Sergio Ramirez have a long Sandinista history but have all distanced themselves from the FSLN. But, again, it doesn't seem to be about a "Sandinista takeover" but, rather, let's do things democratically. Or, again, an anti-Pacto focus.

One obvious question is going to be "should I be scared" where "I" just means someone that is in or may be in Nicaragua in the future. My personal feeling is no. What is happening seems pretty typical in Latin America (I saw lots bigger events in Costa Rica). It is much more a matter of people actually being willing to express themselves rather than just sitting around watching TV.

This is just another data point related to my Pacto vs. Anti-Pacto article of a few days ago. To me, it is positive. People are asking for something to be fixed and I cannot see that Ortega has any choice other than to address the issues.

‹ Democracy or An Alternative? Thousands of Nicaraguans March Against Ortega (La Prensa) ›
( categories: )

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

reflection

Submitted by 1st Capt. Ron on 29 June, 2008 - 17:42.

I do not want to raise any buried pain or passions, but I think there is a question that needs to be asked. Let me preface this question by stating I joined the Navy in 1985, and have no personal direct experience with the Contra and Sandanista war.

As evidenced by the recent protests, does this mean the US and Contras had a legitimate reason for concern over Ortega in the 80's? Does it mean the US\Contras were correct?

1st Capt. Ron (Title by Miskito Alan)

Long story short... HELL YES!

Submitted by CoolYak on 2 July, 2008 - 16:50.

Sorry too hard to bite my tongue.

I spent up to 9 months at a time in the Nueva Guinea area during 86, 87, 88.

Contras in southeast Nicaragua were 1000% correct in defending their families, homes, religion and country. Now it sounds like same ol' same ol' from Ortega.

I guess nobody on this site was living with campesinos in 80s else they can't speak out since still living there. Don't believe any of the crap you read on wikipedia. Head to Nueva Guinea and then due south, east, west or north and ask anyone over 40 how it was.

NYT article on Sandinista Murder and Looting of Campesinos in Southeast Nicaragua http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0DE0DE1530F93BA15755C0A...

NYT article on Sandinista "Resettlement Camps" in Southeast Nicaragua http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0DE3DB1330F934A25755C0A...

Nicaraguan Opposition Routs Sandinistas http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0CEFDF173DF934A15751C0A...

Just the opposite

Submitted by fyl on 29 June, 2008 - 18:30.
My opinion is just the opposite. That is, the US/Contras allowed the Ortega brothers to consolidate power in the 1980s. If the US threat had not been there, I feel you would have seen three political parties formed from what was "the Sandinistas". While we will never know, some indications are:
  • The writings of Gioconda Belli and, in particular, The Country Under My Skin. In it, she talks about the three factions (and her dislike for the Ortega faction).
  • The Wikipedia entry for Sandinista offers some further insight into the three factions. Of particular interest is:
    In early 1979, President Jimmy Carter and the United States no longer supported the Somoza regime, but did not want a left-wing government to take power in Nicaragua. The moderate "Broad Opposition Front" (Frente Amplio Opositor - FAO) which opposed Somoza was made up of a conglomeration of dissidents within the government as well as the "Democratic Union of Liberation" (UDEL) and the "Twelve", representatives of the Terceristas. The FAO and Carter came up with a plan that would remove Somoza from office but left no part in government power for the FSLN.[26] The "Twelve" abandoned the coalition in protest and formed the "National Patriotic Front" (Frente Patriotico Nacional - FPN) together with the "United People's Movement" (MPU). With this action the FAO lost its legitimacy in front of the people that didn't want a "Somocismo sin Somoza" (Somocism without Somoza). This strengthened the revolutionary organizations as tens of thousands of youths joined the FSLN and the fight against Somoza. A direct consequence of the massification of the armed struggle in Nicaragua was the official reunification of the FSLN that took place on 7 March 1979. Nine men, three from each tendency, formed the National Directorate which would lead the reunited FSLN. They were: Daniel Ortega, Humberto Ortega and Víctor Tirado (Terceristas); Tomás Borge, Bayardo Arce, and Henry Ruiz (GPP faction); and Jaime Wheelock, Luis Carrión and Carlos Núñez (Proletarian faction).
After the victory, you had a group of people that understood how to run a revolution but not a country. So, the next step (again from Wikipedia) was
To begin the task of establishing a new government, they created a Council (or junta) of National Reconstruction, made up of five appointed members. Three of the appointed members belonged to FSLN, which included – Sandinista militants Daniel Ortega, Moises Hassan, and novelist Sergio Ramírez (a member of Los Doce "the Twelve"). Two opposition members, businessman Alfonso Robelo, and Violeta Barrios de Chamorro (the widow of Pedro Joaquín Chamorro), were also appointed.
I don't think anyone will claim this was balanced representation but, if there had not been strong opposition on the part of the U.S. for the new government, it seems unlikely that the three Sandinista factions would have held together. Once again, a common enemy—before, Somoza and now U.S. intervention acted as the glue. So, it may be absolutely true that Ortega is trying to do what he tried to do almost 30 years ago but the country and political pluralism have matured in that time. My prediction is that as long as the U.S. (and I single out the U.S. here because of what it has done historically here) just lets Nicaragua "work things out", it will. On the other hand, U.S. pressure—in any direction—will force a backlash.

power vacuum

Submitted by 1st Capt. Ron on 30 June, 2008 - 06:53.

If your comments are accurate (Wikipieda), this sounds like yet another instance where the US supports a change in Government, but does not have any plans to stabilize the situation once the Government has been removed. Afghanistan during the Soviet era, and Cuba would be other examples.

Since the removal of Somoza was a populist movement, does the US have any responsibility to the people of Nicaragua? I do not know the details of Samoza's demise, but if the US in anyway manuvered to remove him from office, then I would think they do.

1st Capt. Ron (Title by Miskito Alan)

Naive

Submitted by bluewater on 29 June, 2008 - 20:32.

Today in the print edition of CONFIDENCIAL, Rosario Murillo is quoted as saying that popular power and participative democracy is only embodied in the Frente Sandinista, ie... the party and the government are one in the same. Taking her at her word, Nicaragua is confronted with a presidential couple with the full power of the state seeking control of the entirety of the government to the exclusion of all other pluralist elements. There is also evidence of increasing levels of reprisals against dissent, including elimination of political parties, destruction of radio transmitters of opposition broadcasters, use of INSS audits against the IMF and now physical violence against Dora Maria Tellez. Absent international support Nicaragua runs the risk of lurching into a repeat of the 80's. This week I was watching the Zimbabwe situation and it is striking to view the parallels in discourse between the two governments. Would it be best to just let the Zimbabweans just work things out as you indicate here?

More on Zimbabwe

Submitted by fyl on 30 June, 2008 - 07:57.

After I made my last post, I read a Zimbabwe Guardian article. The fact that it came up on an alert about Bolivia was interesting.

Comparisons

Submitted by fyl on 30 June, 2008 - 06:55.

Let's take the Murillo quote: "Rosario Murillo is quoted as saying that popular power and participative democracy is only embodied in the Frente Sandinista". While I don't happen to agree with it, I don't see it as wacko. Let's say Fred Farkle, member of the "We the People" party in the U.S. and husband of the current U.S. president said "popular power and participative democracy is only embodied in the We the People party".

You could have a knee-jerk reaction or you could think about it. That is, you could think about a war in Iraq based on lies to the people that was supported by "all the other parties". You could think about how your elected representatives of all those parties didn't seem to be listening to the position of the people.

Now, for your Zimbabwe comparison, if you consider the 1979 triumph as being the equivalent of independence, both countries have been "free" for about the same amount of time. And you can certainly draw some parallels between what Ortega wants and Mugabe appears have. I am no Zimbabwe expert but beyond those basics, I see a very different situation. Let's look at some points.

  • Inflation in Zimbabwe is totally out of control. Inflation in Nicaragua can be explained by rising energy costs and the falling value of the US$ in the world market (which the cordoba is indexed to).
  • The media is almost all state run in Zimbabwe. That is clearly not the case in Nicaragua and you even see opposition media that disagrees with each other defending each other.
  • I don't know about communications infrastructure in Zimbabwe but I am reasonably sure what you find in Nicaragua is far superior. That means many people have access to the internet, radio and television from outside the country. Even the state shutting down or taking over opposition media would not cut off the flow of information in Nicaragua.
  • Nicaragua has been integrated into the world economy and becomes more so each day. It is certainly not isolated.

You say "Absent international support Nicaragua runs the risk of lurching into a repeat of the 80's." That statement seems like a serious contradiction. In the 1980s, Nicaragua had lots of international support. It was only the U.S. that was trying to isolate it. For example, the US CIA decision to mine Corinto harbor seems to have been a result of the failure of the U.S. to get other countries to join the embargo. (As I remember, most of the ships damaged were from "U.S.-friendly" nations.)

I see no danger of Nicaragua sinking into an isolated one-party state unless Nicaraguans decide to let it happen. I assert that what you see today is Nicaragua actually trying to work out how democracy should work here after a revolution. Unfortunately, it has paid a big price for the last 30 years to get here.

Now, as for Zimbabweans just working things out, I think they are. It's pretty clear that Mugabe is losing control. It is not a pretty picture but it is not clear to me that "trying to fix Zimbabwe" is any better than "trying to fix Iraq".

Fred Farkle

Submitted by bluewater on 30 June, 2008 - 07:59.

The hypothetical Mr Farkle has nothing to do with the power of Rosario Murillo, she is not a simple member of the Frente but a super minister with the power to hire, fire and move ministers and party delegates at her will. I also note with interest your complete failure to respond to the increases in governmental reprisals to dissent and the immediate obligatory blame the U.S. response. Please stop the sophistry and face the argument at hand. Finally, the inflation comparison is the worst support for your argument you can muster. Remember the restamping of the cordoba on a weekly basis during the first Ortega administraton due to hyperinflation? Have you been watching the inflation numbers for Nicaragua during the last two years in Nicaragua in comparison to it's neighbors? Hurray for benign neglect!

How to Lie With Statistics

Submitted by fyl on 30 June, 2008 - 08:20.

Ok, that is the name of a book from the 1960s. As I remember, the biggest example was analysis of the facts used by Kennedy and Nixon in a debate.

In any case, I will address "Have you been watching the inflation numbers for Nicaragua during the last two years in Nicaragua in comparison to it's neighbors?" as an example.

The majority of the electricity produced in Central America comes from hydropower. In addition, Costa Rica produces power with wind energy. Two years ago, Nicaragua was buying relatively cheap electricy from Guatemala. Then Guatemala decided they no longer had the needed capacity to sell it.

In contrast to the other Central American nations, 80% of Nicaragua's electricity comes from petroleum-fired plants. Now, one other fact we need is that median income in Nicaragua is much lower, for example, than in Costa Rica.

As I said, energy costs are what is driving inflation. Combine a lower median income with more dependence on petroleum-based electricity generation and you get a lot more inflation. Even ignoring in-country electricity production issues, the increased cost of chemical fertilizers and transport costs will have a greater impact on a lower-income individual.

There you go again

Submitted by bluewater on 30 June, 2008 - 09:09.

Still no response to the growing repression of dissent. Still no response to the Farkle comparison.

How do you respond to the Honduras case with inflation about half of NIcaragua? Moreover, knowing that there is an inordinant dependency on oil fired generation in Nicaragua, what does El Pueblo Presidente do? Scuttle COPALAR the largest hydropower project in the history of the country and buy more oil fired generators. The other particular cause of Nicaraguan inflation as postulated by independent economists (Nestor Avendano and Luis Medal) is that the parallel budget derived from the black hole Venezuelan oil money is being spent on publicity and nonproductive consumption.

I have a job ...

Submitted by fyl on 30 June, 2008 - 13:49.
Actually, I have a more than full-time job so I am not trying to engage in a detailed debate with you. I would just like readers to be aware that while you present information to support your position, there is clearly room for a lot more research. To briefly address two of your points:
How do you respond to the Honduras case with inflation about half of Nicaragua?
Honduras gets about twice as much of its electricity (38%) from renewable sources and per capita GDP in Nicaragua is only 63% of that of Honduras ($2600 vs. $4100).
Still no response to the growing repression of dissent.
This thread is actually about dissent taking place in the streets. There was no indication of organized goverment repression. In other threads there is a discussion of what appears to be repression (cancelation of the Persona Juridica of the MRS, for example) which, of the surface, looks bad but that discussion is a lot more complicated and belongs in that other thread. Every day we see and hear dissent being voiced. The transportation strike was a recent good example.
Again, I am not saying Nicaragua is perfect but I can still eat my meal on an airplace between Nicaragua with a metal knife and fork. Try to put things in perspective.

Workers Of The World Unite

Submitted by bluewater on 30 June, 2008 - 16:24.

FYl, I work as well, probably as much as you. I try not to complain about it because I enjoy what I do. Your readers and fellow workers should also be aware that your view of the cause of high Nicaraguan inflation is not the only one. There are other views including the views of the Nicaraguan economists I previously mentioned. As to the aside regarding your airline cutlery preferences, I still havent gleaned the significance of that pearl of wisdom to dissent in Nicaragua.

Bluewater...

Submitted by will305 on 1 July, 2008 - 11:15.

you are AWESOME!

really phil?

Submitted by Pinolero2 on 28 June, 2008 - 11:45.

Somethings are impossible to sugar coat,if you did not read right, one of the banner said :Ortega Y Somoza,Son La Misma Cosa: meaning Ortega and Somoza are the same thing,thus putting the blame directly on Ortega,regardless of the pacto anti pacto bs. I have always told(advised) friends of mine that are visitor or residents from another country,such as Canada,USA,Germany,Japan,Scottland and England,which happened to be their countries of origin(birth). I have told them(advised them) to,Stay away from Nicaraguan Politics,leave that to the Native Nicaraguans,after all that is for US Nicas to resolve,more over taking political side can back fire on You,should you take the FSLN,for instance,and they end up lossing,you would be at a great dis advantage in your community with the opposing party. Playing political sides,to benefit yourself or to avoid some type of repre cautions,or to blend in(remember being a Chele,who does not master the language is IMPOSIBLE to blend in) if not a wise thing to do. The best case scenario to live a peaceful life now and in the future is to stay neutral,regardless of what you think of the current goverment,voicing your opinion may gain you an edge now..but you may regret it later. ALWAYS work with the present goverment,and mantain a profesional relationship with the governing officers and local and national levels,avoiding any harsh critisism towards the current goverment. now all of this would apply to ANY foreigner wheter with cedula,residencia etc,to US Nicas,that gets thrown at the window and even so,being a Nica and having a business here,it would behoove us to adhere to the above as well,no matter how hard it gets sometimes. Food for thaught,or should I say,It is only my .50 Centavos.

FAP

That is awesome advice

Submitted by will305 on 28 June, 2008 - 12:51.

I think that is one of the best things I've ever seen written on here. Thanks

And, if you don't like it, run away for a while?

Submitted by fyl on 28 June, 2008 - 12:46.

I live here and what happens here has a direct effect on my life and my business. Lots of Nicaraguans in the 1980s left Nicaragua (many for the country that was waging a war against Nicaragua) because they didn't like what the government was doing. In many ways, that is a lot like my decision to leave the U.S.

Now, I have made a decision to build a business here. To become an active part of the Nicaraguan economy. For that business to succeed, it depends on both the reality on the ground in Nicaragua and the perception of Nicaragua.

Let me contrast this with my presence in Costa Rica. I went there "to hide". I did not get involved with or depend on the economy, Tico workers, ... And, yes, I could have done the same thing here. But, I elected not to.

The best historical example I can think of is Hitler's Germany. (I actually think today's U.S. is another good example but that game hasn't fully played out yet.) People didn't question actions of the government because the actions were against groups to which the people were not members. Eventually, there was no chance for opposition.

Now, back to Nicaragua. I have some "Ortega is always right" friends who won't like what I am saying but the reality is that no politician/political party is perfect. Today, my position is pretty simple: There is a problem and the government needs to do something. I think that is pretty obvious to anyone including the president.

The rally and the people are saying the same thing. Clearly, some would like a "Montealegre government", some would just like free food for the poor, some want abortion rights, ... but what is agreed is that a change is needed.

Am I taking sides? If I am, it is the side of Nicaragua in general. The side of "there are things that need to be addressed". To the current government's credit, it has responded to issues many times. For example, what started as a "confiscation of the Esso tank farm" turned into a negotiated settlement that seemed to be good for everyone.

You said "ALWAYS work with the present goverment,and mantain a profesional relationship with the governing officers and local and national levels". Well, where I came from, we had "government of the people, by the people, for the people" but, unfortunately most people seem to have forgotten that this is not just a message to the president and the Congress but a responsibility for everyone.

The good news is that here, the average Nicaraguan seems a lot more willing to actually speak out and get involved to direct their government. That involvement is not my job but reporting on what I see is. So, I am.