SF Bay Area Indymedia indymedia
About Contact Subscribe Calendar Publish Print Donate

Americas | International | Government & Elections

How Should Left Respond to Stolen Mexico Election?
by Beyond Chron (reposted)
Friday Jul 7th, 2006 6:47 AM
If forced to choose between cowardice and violence, we will choose the latter ----Cesar Chavez, quoting Gandhi
If America cared about democracy, our political leaders would be demanding that Mexican Presidential candidate Lopez Obrador either be declared the winner of the July 2 election or that a full precinct-by-precinct internationally-supervised recount immediately commence. Yet a nation that has spent $300 billion and ended hundreds of thousands of lives to allegedly bring democracy to Iraq is silent---and perhaps complicit--- as democracy is subverted in adjacent Mexico. Mexico’s progressive forces have already had the 1988 presidential election stolen from them, and walked away without a fight. The Mexican left cannot allow another hijacking of democracy without permanently disillusioning its base, and progressives across the world must get their national, state and local governments to support this cause.

When I read Wednesday night that progressive Mexican presidential candidate Lopez Obrador had taken the lead once most of the three million previously uncounted ballots had been counted, I immediately assumed that the Mexican elite would again manipulate the totals. By early Thursday morning, the conservative Calderon was back in front and again claiming victory.

But the psychological impact of Obrador’s taking the lead is huge. It provides an empirical basis to claims that the election is being stolen, a factor that loomed so large in the Bush-Gore contest that the Supreme Court had to intervene and stop the counting before Gore pulled ahead.

Since Monday’s initial results showing conservative candidate Felipe Calderon in the lead, the American media has pushed Obrador to gracefully accept defeat. He was essentially told to shut up and go along with the ignoring of over three million votes, and to ignore widespread evidence of inflated vote counts for his opponent (Thursday’s New York Times has an article confirming the latter. In six polling sites where the reporter observed recounts, all of the pre-recount totals had been miscounted to Obrador’s detriment)

The San Francisco Chronicle has provided good coverage of the election from reporter Robert Collier, but its editors---as is often the case---have reached opinions contrary to available facts. On Thursday, the Chronicle attacked Lopez Obrador for his “efforts to stir up passions and paranoia even before the vote count is official.” They gave the progressive leader “low marks for leadership,” and urged him to accept the election outcome.

The American media sure didn’t talk this way when the Ukrainian election stole the presidency from the American-supported candidate. Then the talk was all about the need for a recount and a new election.

The Chronicle should explain how it is “paranoid” to ask why 8% of the votes cast in a national election were not counted—a claim whose legitimacy was soon upheld by Mexican election officials.

More
http://www.beyondchron.org/news/index.php?itemid=3456#more

Comments  (Hide Comments)

by 0399
Friday Jul 7th, 2006 8:23 AM
Actually, it's none of your, or our, business. Mexico runs its own affairs. And how dare you speak of "stolen" elections! Were you there? Do you work for the electoral commission? Obviously not. So put a sock in it, gringo.
"Today, in front of the current election process, We the Zapatistas denounce that this is not about an election of citizens before political proposals and those who represent them, but rather an Election-of-the-State. The opposition confronts not only the official party, but also the entire apparatus of the Mexican State. There is no election under these conditions that can be qualified as "democratic."

by Take back the power
Friday Jul 7th, 2006 11:13 AM
Fuck this right wing theif.
Looks like another Bush vs. Gore theft.
by 0399
Friday Jul 7th, 2006 11:20 AM
Revolution? Unlike the wannabes here, Mexico has actually had several of them. And they don't want any more, especially one brought on by yankee busybodies.

Oh, and dear "subcomandante" Marcos - there was no "Zapatista" party in the election. Go back to your basement meetings.
by Hypnotized by Fox
Friday Jul 7th, 2006 4:08 PM
Hypnotized by Fox and materialism...
by T.Rios
Monday Jul 10th, 2006 1:32 PM
The Zapatistas are a breath of fresh air in Mexico. As for the political parties some might be better then others but they are all corrupt. All political parties attempt to monopolize state power and force all to live by the party line. In the final analysis they all tend to become despotic bureaucracies that steal the labor of the workers in the form of forced taxes and fees. They alienate all those outside of them from political life.

Voting a political party into power and handing them the reins of the state is like handing over all your life savings to a professional investor, a particularly powerful investor that has the ability to make laws that can force you to pay him fees and can use the coercive power of the state to imprison you or make your life a living hell through police harassment if you don't. The state and all political parties that have ever existed all operate on the principal of the organized crime.
by T.Rios
Saturday Jul 22nd, 2006 3:58 PM
Actually, the reality is that what happens in Mexico effects the U.S. deeply. A Social Democratic victory in Mexico might have meant more social programs to aid the Mexican poor and might have resulted in less economic pressure for them to immigrate to the U.S. which in that case might have benefited the agenda of the anti-immigrant American right.

However, the attitude of the American non-Neocon right in general is so dogmatic and obstinate that it consistently ignores the reality of situations in order to stay true to their political and social vision. They fail to realize that politics abroad can affect their agenda at home; they act as though all international borders are a natural barriers rather then artificial and man made political institutions.

The Neocons, although equally dogmatic in their own way, are more liberal and opportunistic and do not have the same agenda as the more traditional right. They are not so xenophobic (as long as the outsider is either of their economic class or can otherwise be used to future their agenda that is) and are not isolationists and they will use this victory of a like minded Mexican presidential candidate to push for an expansion of American business interests and internal meddling in Mexico's economy and politics and will in turn likely worsen the situation of Mexico's poor, causing ever greater numbers to risk the journey north across the border.

This is a victory not only for Mexico’s economic elite but also for American big business, and the Neocons, as not only will they both have greater opportunity in Mexico but they will also have a steady stream of workers heading north who can be easily exploited by American business interests.

The Neocon agenda of greater police powers will also benefit in another way here in the U.S, by getting a greater opportunity to legislate and enforce more draconian police state laws because of the inevitable call by reactionary segments of the American right to crack down on illegal aliens. Now that all Federal law enforcement is under the centralized direction of the Homeland Security Agency these laws will in turn set up an apparatus that can just as easily be used to control and persecute American citizens if our imperialistic minded leaders feel it pertinent.

You on the right may not intend it but you are very responsible for giving America the feel of what you people scornfully refer to as Third World Nations. The archetypical Third World Nation is not only marked by the flotsam of a poor and often criminally prone underclass but also by an obdurate, mean spirited and egotistical upper class that enforces a brutal system of deprivation through their political privilege and economic monopoly backed by a system of elite controlled legislative, police and military repression, a system of legalized and organized crime. I can easily see the American upper class and upper middle class and all who consider themselves as part of it, or have their sites set on becoming a part of it, becoming just as obdurate, mean spirited and egotistical as their third world counterparts are, that is if they aren't already.