Monday, June 29, 2009

Now we meddle... on the wrong side

Honduras Defends Its Democracy
Hugo Chávez's coalition-building efforts suffered a setback yesterday when the Honduran military sent its president packing for abusing the nation's constitution.

It seems that President Mel Zelaya miscalculated when he tried to emulate the success of his good friend Hugo in reshaping the Honduran Constitution to his liking.

But Honduras is not out of the Venezuelan woods yet. Yesterday the Central American country was being pressured to restore the authoritarian Mr. Zelaya by the likes of Fidel Castro, Daniel Ortega, Hillary Clinton and, of course, Hugo himself.

I have been watching this story over the weekend with absolute incredulity at the reporting by the mainstream press and the response from Obama and Hillary.

It seems that wherever the enemies of liberty rear their ugly heads our American liberals will stand in support of them.


Roadrunner said...

Daniel Miglavs, your pro-military-coup blogger.

Stevie said...

Daniel, how thorough is your understanding of Honduran and Central American political economy? From your comments, it appears that your understanding is incomplete, at best. Here are some other facts about the Honduran coup which you failed to mention:

1. It isn’t just Venezuela and Cuba who objected to this coup in Honduras. Costa Rica, Argentina, the European Union, and a host of other democratic countries also objected. How come neither you nor the WSJ editorial mentioned this? Is it because all these other democratic countries objecting to the coup suggest that your “enemies of liberty” theory is missing some very important background and context?

2. After this coup, the Honduran military immediately blocked transmissions of CNN and other outside news agencies. The media in Honduras is now effectively under the control of the military. Here too, neither you nor the WSJ deemed this relevant enough to mention. How come?

3. Do you have ANY idea how, historically, despotic regimes in other Central American countries came to power? Let me give you a hint. Several involved accusations that a democratically-elected President had violated the constitution, and that a military coup was needed to restore “democracy”. This should clue you in as to why so many big players, including the U.S. and the E.U., and other Central American democracies like Costa Rica and Argentina, do not support this coup in Honduras. Non-democratic transfers of power in Central America have historically not lead to good outcomes.

4. You claim Daniel that “American liberals” are standing in support of this “enemy of liberty”. Which makes me curious. Can you tell us Daniel, what the Republican Party’s official position is on this matter?!? I'll be awaiting your answer.

Anonymous said...

To say that Daniel's understanding of political economy anywhere south of the border is "incomplete" is like saying my dog has "difficulty" with calculus. Daniel, do yourself a favor: Next time, before drawing from the deep reservoir of your "knowledge" about life south of these United States, sit down and spend some quality time with, say, a book! I nominate Jon Kwitny's "Endless Enemies: The Making of an Unfriendly World," paying close attention to the chapters on Central America, and Eduardo Galeano's "Open Veins of Latin America: Five Centuries of the Pillage of a Continent." If nothing else, you'll at least no longer be open to the charge that your knowledge of Central America comes from having seen "Predator" a dozen times.

Anonymous said...

Eduardo Galeano's "Open Veins of Latin America: Five Centuries of the Pillage of a Continent."

Is that the book that Hugo Chavez gave to the Obama?

Anonymous said...

Why not read the book for yourself so you can debate it on its merits? Oh ... sorry. I forgot I was talking to a Miglavian.

Anonymous said...

I asked a simple question.

Stevie said...

Hey Anon 10:49...I asked a simple question, too. I asked Daniel to tell us what the GOP's official response to Honduras was. You know, since Daniel was accusing "liberals" of siding with those against freedom.

Daniel's silence, says much.

Anonymous said...

Anon 10:49, I know what your question was, and we both know you asked it as a way of dismissing that particular book as ... let's see, what would you call it? "Biased"? "Un-American"? And we also both know that it would take you about 2 seconds on Google to determine the answer, which I suspect you knew already: Yes, that is the book Chavez gave to Obama. So I ask you again: Do you care to debate the book on its merits, yes or no?