Some Excellent Insights
Submitted by KeyWestPirate on Sat, 2013/03/16 - 10:59.
that mirror Nicaragua. What I don't understand is how, with their masterful propaganda do the Sandinistas let some incident like Puracal or the "Italian Confiscation" seize the headlines? Both could have been managed so much better, with at least a facade of due process and respect for the rule of law.
The end results could have been the same (to the benefit of the Sandinista piñateros in the Italian's case),, but the perception could have been managed much better. With the Nicaraguan judiciary deeply in the back pocket of the Sandinistas, what was the hurry?? Why not let the wheels of Nicaraguan "justice" grind on to the inevitable outcome without the bad publicity?
From TRN:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joel-d-hirst/learning-from-history_b_28836...
Insight! How about BS.
That first paragraph is just plain wrong. Its so condensed that even Readers Digest with the help of Campbells Soup couldn't have done a better job. I guess insight as with beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
I think he does what he does to remind you he can. Like Mom having a spazz about you cleaning your room. She say nothing for weeks, lulls you into a false sense of security and then lets go.
Condensed And Simplistic For Sure
---- but wrong?
" . . . .The 'revolution' had taken its toll. Tens of thousands were dead. Corruption scandals, food shortages, and governmental incompetence had increased the frustration of the population with the revolutionary bureaucrats. The blanketing propaganda through which the regime blamed the United States for all its ills could no longer hide the fact that the society was disintegrating. Nevertheless, despite the obvious signs of decay the revolutionary government called elections -- believing their public opinion polls that showed them with a significant lead, they were convinced that they still commanded popular support and could guarantee legitimacy of their regime at the voting booth. "
Granted he omits a few important items like the role of the US , , but in light of where the revolution has taken the Nicaraguan people, and who the original players were, and are,, was the role of the US (in supporting the Contras) really that important? Would the revolution have failed anyway under the weight of its own greed and incompetence?
Was the revolution ultimately not just the same predation of one group (different actors true, the Piñateros instead of the Somoza family) on the rest of the country? Heresy --and food for thought.
Anyway, this article wasn't so much an attempt at Nicaragua history as it was a reflection of potential developments in Venezuela ...a parallel to the current contest between Maduro and Capriles . . . .and begs the real question: "What am I doing reading the HuffPost"?
The author proclaimed...
"In Latin America, history tends to repeat itself in a never-ending cycle". How does he know that if he can't get his history straight.
Yes he omits "a few important items like the role of the US"...but I don't want to wake Black Eagle on a Saturday afternoon by listing the rest such as "the revolutionary government called elections"...no, they were scammed by Arias and the US and then the date was bought forward. But its just a little thing, like the role of he US.
I'd love to ask Nicaragua this one though "was the role of the US (in supporting the Contras) really that important"...
As for "history tends to repeat itself in a never-ending cycle", yes US interference and intervention does, doesn't it?
Bottom line, I don't see the clear dots and "Insight" between Nicaragua in 1990 and Venezuela in 2013, unless the US has made Maduro "An offer he can't refuse"....there is crude oil involved so look out.
Choices
I thought the last line of the 2nd paragraph just flat wrong. It said there was no choice to handing over power, Actually, there were lots of choices, but in fact, it was the first time in Post Columbian/Colombian history that anyone in power had relinquished it voluntarily in Nicaragua, election results notwithstanding. That put Ortega in the company of George Washington, you know, the guy that beat George III, and then G3 quoted in regard to his stepping down, "If he does that, he will be the greatest man in the World"
( http://althouse.blogspot.com/2007/08/if-he-does-thathe-will-be-greatest-... )
What was significant about that 1990 election was not that Ortega lost, or Violeta won, but that he handed over power peacefully. It had just not happened, in Nicaragua, or anywhere else in the region, unless it was at the point of a sword.
"if you see someone who has lost their smile, give them one of yours"
Setting a precedent for a
Setting a precedent for a peaceful transition of power is amazing start for Nica democracy and stability. The next election will be interesting to see if this new societal trust has really taken hold or not. This would represent the maturity of the Sandio philosophy for Nica independence and soverignity.
Check your History
Nicaraguan history that is. We've had peaceful transition of power before. You'll just need to dig a little deeper. Ortega's "peaceful" handing over the presidency was a smart move on his and the Sandinista party's side. Note I said he handed over the presidency but not the power. With a war with no end in sight, funded by the US, the Sandinistas were loosing supporters quickly. Mothers were really upset seing their young sent to the front lines to an almost certain death, as the saying goes: we didn't sign up for this. The Sandinistas regrouped and went to war but on a different front. The political front. Getting rid of Humberto Ortega was not the big deal that many make out to be. He was the piece that needed sacrificing in order to keep all the other pieces in play. Lets not forget that there is also another kind of violence that goes on and almost unnoticed. Some people swear that things have been just peachy and they will only get better, they have their reasons to believe or say it is so. But there are also those that aren't pleased, to say the least, with the way things have been and are being handled, from the managing of national matters that affect every single one of us to even the most trivial matter, that is if you happen to not being affected by it at all, but say that to the italian son of the close friend of Ortega. That they 'failed' to do a better job at keeping it under the radar is more a case of arrogance than negligency on their part. In the end it should be a reminder to those that worship at the Ortega and Murillo altar and do their bidding that no one is safe, for us that have seen this kind of behaviour in the past it doesn't shock or surprise us at all. The whole affair leaves me remembering this words: Et tu Brute?
Well there have been several elections since 1990:
1996, 2001, 2006 and 2011
Or are you saying that the FSLN are going to lose the next one and you hope they hand it over peacefully?
Glad someone said it
The comment about "or anywhere else in the region" is also inaccurate.