Lopez Obrador to create parallel govt. in Mexico

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

Mexico leftist to create parallel gov't
By MARK STEVENSON, Associated Press Writer

MEXICO CITY - Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, convinced he won't be awarded the presidency, has vowed to create a parallel leftist government and is urging Mexicans not to recognize the apparent victory of the ruling party's Felipe Calderon.

While his party lacks the seats in Congress to block legislation, Lopez Obrador can mobilize millions to pressure his conservative rival to adopt the left's agenda — or to clamp down and risk a backlash.

Both scenarios are possibilities as the former Mexico City mayor lays out plans to create his own government to rule from the streets, with the support of thousands who are already occupying protest camps throughout downtown Mexico City.

Some predict his parallel initiative — which Lopez Obrador's supporters call the "legitimate government" — could turn those protest camps into the core of a violent revolt, especially if the government tries to shut it down.
more:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060829/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/mexico_elections_16

[bluestateguy]

1. Will Bush invite him up to the ranch?

nt

[Ignacio Upton]

2. This is a bad idea

While AMLO should continue contesting the election, saying that he will create a parellel government doesn't seem constitutional, and could be a divisive move.

[manic expression]

4. Of course it's divisive

but the point is that contesting the election will get them nowhere really, really fast. It is a drastic action, yes, but are these not drastic times?

[Renew Deal]

6. How many dead Mexicans is it worth?

Because that's what it sounds like. Doesn't the US have to accept refugees from warfare? We do not want that on our border.

[manic expression]

8. Ask yourself

how many Mexicans are willing to put their lives on the line for it? That should tell you something about the situation. The fact is that if they aren't going to get anywhere with just contesting the elections, they need to continue to fight, they need to take necessary and justified action. Lying down and allowing this injustice to occur simply because you don't want any refugees, or because someone is simply unwilling to contribute towards achieving something is patently wrong in numerous ways.

No one got anywhere by accepting injustice. There comes a time when you have to fight for what is so clearly true and right and worthy. Has that time come for Mexico? Perhaps.

[Renew Deal]

12. Who will the military support?

And who is supplying weapons? Are the leftists going to get exterminated? There are too many questions and none of them lead to a positive answer.

[manic expression]

17. No idea

but I would bet on the "government". However, I also have no idea what your point is. You simply don't lie down and let someone step all over you and take advantage of you, you fight. When someone tries to ignore the voice of the people and the people refuse to be ignored, they must make themselves be heard and felt.

The positive answer is that this type of action is justified and necessary and acceptable and right and more. What is wrong with opposing wrongdoing?

[rinsd]

23. 40% of the vote now = voice of the people?

"You simply don't lie down and let someone step all over you and take advantage of you, you fight"

I put myself at risk. Not others. If this guy starts a civil war then there will be blood on his hands.

[manic expression]

25. Try again

"Lopez Obrador is encouraging his followers to disobey Calderon, whose 240,000-vote advantage was confirmed Monday by the country's top electoral court. The seven magistrates stopped short of declaring Calderon president-elect, but they have only a week to declare a winner or annul the election."

(on edit, that's from the link in the OP)

And yet more than 3 million ballots were lost.

[Vidar]

44. Obrador has done nothing violent.

[rman]

105. 40%? That's if you assume the election was fair.

[Renew Deal]

24. My point is

That I wonder what opposing wrong doing is worth? How far is Obrador willing to take this? How much death and violence are we willing to tolerate on our border. We do not want Mexico going to hell.

Let's follow this through logically.

Obrador creates a shadow Gov't and claims to be the true ruler of Mexico. This is not constitutional. So, how is this justified legally?

What does the Gov't of Mexico do? Do they clamp down? Is Obrador willing to fight to the death? What does that mean?

What does the US do about a war on it's border? Do we get involved? Do we fully militarize the border?

Let's say Obrador wins the war. Does he declare himself "President for Life", pull a Castro, or a Musharraf, or something else?

I don't feel like people advocating violent resistance have thought this out.

[manic expression]

29. In case you forgot

This is about Mexico, not about the US. Let's just get that straight.

What does the US do about the war? That's your major concern about all of this? Are you kidding me?

Next, don't bring up Castro, I'm not going to respond to that point after this post because it's tangential, but let me just say that Cuba is not dictatorial or authoritiarian, it is the opposite, and Castro doesn't have dictatorial powers or anything approaching anything of the sort. That's it.

However, you can claim that Obrador is a potential dictator all you like, but the fact remains that he is demanding some justice and accountability and he is fighting those who would perpetuate unspeakable inequity.

No, it seems like you haven't given this a single shred of small thought. The only thought you've given this is about the US' problems, which are more than inconsequential.

[Renew Deal]

31. I don't know about you

But I live in the US. So the effects on my country are kind of important. I didn't just name Castro. What about Musharraf? What about whoever? It doesn't matter what the form of government is. You are ignoring the point.

Where specifically did I claim Obrador was a dictator? Use the copy and paste feature. I never said or even implied that.

You say that I haven't given it any thought, though in just one post I show that I have given it more thought than you. I asked a lot of good questions. You can ignore them and start your war. That's what bush did.

Start at the top.

"Obrador creates a shadow Gov't and claims to be the true ruler of Mexico. This is not constitutional. So, how is this justified legally?

What does the Gov't of Mexico do? Do they clamp down? Is Obrador willing to fight to the death? What does that mean?

What does the US do about a war on it's border? Do we get involved? Do we fully militarize the border?

Let's say Obrador wins the war. Does he declare himself "President for Life", pull a Castro, or a Musharraf, or something else?"

[manic expression]

40. Good for you

The effects on our country will be minimal. Furthermore, the effects on our country will be meaningless and inconsequential in relation to the situation in Mexico. Please do the very least in recognizing these facts.

You specifically brought up how Obrador could become a dictator, which is an invalid concern. IIRC, I didn't claim that you said he WAS a dictator.

No, you haven't given it any thought, a cursory look at your posts will bring about this conclusion quite easily.

Start at my post, I addressed your remarkably misled fears and pointed out that the possiblity of Obrador being a dictator is completely meaningless at this point. Start.

[Renew Deal]

51. So Obrador won't become a dictator

because you said so? Brilliant. I'll take your word for it. Like I said, Obrador becoming a dictator, an eventually elected president, prime minister, chairman or whatever is irrelevant. If he takes power outside of the legal bounds, then the rest of their laws go to hell. Have you thought about that? He would either be the illegal ruler or he would have to change the law after he took over. We haven't even talked about if the UN and other governments would recognize him as the leader.

You claim that I haven't given it any thought, yet you are incapable of answering simple questions.

"Obrador creates a shadow Gov't and claims to be the true ruler of Mexico. This is not constitutional. So, how is this justified legally?

What does the Gov't of Mexico do? Do they clamp down? Is Obrador willing to fight to the death? What does that mean?

What does the US do about a war on it's border? Do we get involved? Do we fully militarize the border?

Let's say Obrador wins the war. Does he declare himself "President for Life", pull a Castro, or a Musharraf, or something else?"

Add to that:
Would he be recognized by the international community?
Who will the military support?
Where will the weapons come from?
Who will run the refugee camps in the US?

Bush, Wolfowitz, Rummy, Condi and the rest advocated war against Iraq without considering all of the information and disregarding anything that didn't jive with their world view. You're doing the same thing here (minus the power to actually start a war).

[manic expression]

55. No thought

The possibility of him becoming a dictator is meaningless right now, it has no bearing on what he is presently doing. Worry about that when he has, you know, power. :eyes: And on edit, how about Calderon? Why do you worry about Obrador somehow morphing into Musharraf overnight (:rofl:) while you pay no attention to the fact that Obrador is fighting someone who effectively stole control of the government. Get a grip, what you are suggesting is like saying MLK could have been a dictator.

Power outside of legal bounds? You mean like stealing an election? Kind of like that? Get a grip, legal bounds mean little when the other side has already ignored them, THAT is the time to make drastic, necessary and justified action, which is what Obrador is doing. You, on the other hand, would just sit back and let the thieves get into power without a fight, that's very "nice" of you, but I'm very glad Obrador is not so enabling.

I claim that you haven't given it any thought, and you haven't. You throw out insipid hypotheticals that are as meaningless as they are invalid. I've already addressed your post quite extensively, but nice try anyway. Please address my refutations of your post or further dig your head into that sand.

Your additions are equally trivial and inconsequential. The UN can recognize whoever they want, Obrador still wants to oppose those who would take the reins of power in defiance of the people's voice. I've already addressed military support, thanks for ignoring it yet again, but to reiterate, the military would (in this case) become another obstacle, the people should not bow to an oppressor because of military support. The weapons will probably come from many places. The US can easily handle the relative headache that would occur in your worst case hypothetical scenario, that is not a real problem and your constant harping on this doesn't make it any less so.

What I am advocating is standing up against injustice and theft. I have considered your points, and I have refuted them; I have considered your concerns, and I have effortlessly countered them. I have considered the situation, you continue to refuse to do so.

[Renew Deal]

70. I agree

Like I've said, it doesn't matter if Obrador becomes a dictator or not. That's not the point. The point is that the Mexican law doesn't recognize Obrador as the winner. So if the law doesn't recognize Obrador, then declaring himself the "legitimate" ruler of Mexico is not legal. In your view, Calderon stole the election. In Mexico's view, Calderon won fair and square. I have not seen anything from the international community (other than Chavez) that says otherwise.

I'm not sure why you find the Musharraf point so funny. Musharraf took over in a bloodless coup. He has made himself president and will allow elections of a legislature later this year. The elections will be the first in years. That's what Musharraf wanted, so that's what he did. Obrador could do the same thing. He could do something different.

You say that Obrador is doing what is drastic, necessary, and justified. Do you realize that Calderon will do the same thing? You say that I would let Calderon get away with stealing an election, yet it doesn't appear that you are posting from prison. What did you do when an election was stolen in your own country? You're talking tough about a fight you don't have to fight. How chickenhawkesque.

Now getting to the meat and potatoes.

I agree about the UN, though I don't think it will be easy. Calderon would have to be long gone. I worry that the US would hold out in opposition to Obrador if he could take over. We don't recognize anything we don't remotely like (unless it has oil).

I worry about the military as well. The military comes from the people, and the people are the ones suffering. Mexico can make life very difficult for the opposition. If Mexico sees this as an insurrection, then they can clamp down with military force. BTW, that's true in the US as well (and it'd nastier than most know).

Refugees. That's one hell of a problem. The US would be obligated to take on refugees. That means the US would be forced to create refugee camps. That means that the border would probably have to be militarized. And that's just ugly. I agree that refugees is a worst case scenario, but if there is fighting, then I think there will be lawlessness and people will want out. I think the refugee problem is the #1 thing we don't want in the US. Americans will not like it.

You think you have countered my concerns, but we largely agree on the problems. Any disagreements are over what we don't know. That's still how far is Obrador willing to go and how will the Mexican gov't react. I don't see how the Mexican gov't will react positively. There are already stories about death squads and disappearances.

[MrPrax]

56. Orbrador is not calling for revolution?

I don't get your obsession with the worst case scenario that isn't even the reality on the ground...

Orbrador is a social democrat, not some communist far lefty revolutionary guy like Castro -- he was the popular Mayor of Mexico City...

1) The gov't of mexico if it was to avoid further problems should IMHO count all the votes (no revolution required and no war-torn Mexicans swimming the Rio Grande)

2) The gov't could work a coalition out where Orbrador would be brought into the government and his faction given some say...they have not offered to include him in anyway. They could in order words negotiation some power sharing system

3) They could anul the election and call a new one with greater scrutiny

4) They could allow the transition to take place but agree to an early election within the year

blah blah blah...you really are only looking at this from the standpoint of law and order -- any casual reading of the conduct of the elections shows a great deal of fraud and that's the problem; no one there is compalining about the system of government, just this outcome.

That is what they are pissed off about...they think Orbrador can be declared the winner. IMHO I think he won handily -- probably closer to the exit poll results.

Problem solved -- no revolution demanded and no revolution is going to happen...his supporters would drop him like a stone if he started down that road.

[Renew Deal]

71. I agree completely

The reason why I look at this from the law and order view is that is Calderon's advantage. They have the power and they have shown no indication that they want to share it. I worry about how the gov't is going to react.

[MrPrax]

98. Well you don't agree...

Caldrone, like ANY ruler, only has that power so long as we give it to them.

If the PRI elites still want to think it's business as usual, they might wind up like the Politburo in Russia...point all the guns you want, but unless you are going to shoot everyone, then you have to admit the jig is up and then risk giving up a whole lot more than you intended to do by simply frauding an election and then expecting it to be legitimate.

Mexicans it would seem care much more strongly about democracy than Americans do...

[readmoreoften]

74. So Obrador *will* become a dictator because YOU said so?

And what if Calderon becomes a Bush? Sorry, the Mexican election was rigged. They are doing what REAL members of a democracy do when they begin to live in a dictatorship: they revolt and they don't give up. Sad that you don't recognize that.

[Renew Deal]

75. Huh?

What do I have to do with this? I never said he will become a dictator. I did say that the form of government was irrelevant, especially when you consider many other factors that are detailed in the posts above. Sad that you don't recognize that.

[readmoreoften]

78. Oh please, you keep saying that Obrador could become

"dictator for life". You said:

<<So Obrador won't become a dictator
because you said so? Brilliant. I'll take your word for it.>>

You're insinuating that the poster isn't giving you any hard evidence that Obrador isn't going to become a dictator and that you don't put much stock in his "say so".

I'm saying that you aren't giving any hard evidence to your speculation that Obrador HAS THE POTENTIAL to become a dictator and that I don't put much stock in your "say so."

[Renew Deal]

81. I also said

that he could become president, prime minister, chairman or whatever. The method of government is irrelevant. We don't know what Obrador will do if he does truly take over. As things are right now, Obrador declaring himself president would not be considered legal. He would not take power based on the law for electing the president. That opens up a lot of questions. If Obrador disregards the laws of his country (rightly or wrongly) and declares himself president, and takes over the gov't (peacefully or not) it would deem their current laws meaningless. Obrador and the people in power would probably create their own laws.

It's like Bush deciding to run for a third term, being put on the ballot, winning and then serving. It would be completely illegal. If it held up, it would mean the constitution is meaningless.

[gorbal]

41. It looks like he is scrambling for a non-violent outlet for mass anger

I'm not there, I've just been following this story as close as one can via the internet. After reading what has been going down via Narco News and La Jornada, (military raids, people being killed by masked bandits possibly paid by Fox's government), I have been worried that the situation might turn even more violent.

Hearing Obrador speak of setting up an alternate government was actually a relief to me. It brings me hope that all that anger can be channeled into something that will give them the power to effect change denied them in the voting booth.

[John Q. Citizen]

59. Where do you get that Obrador is advocating "violent resistence?"

Mexico was the longest running dictatorship in the world up until the year 2000. Where were you then?

Obrador won fair an square in this election. Ripping off the will of the voters is unconstitutional.

[Renew Deal]

72. The article

"Some predict his parallel initiative — which Lopez Obrador's supporters call the "legitimate government" — could turn those protest camps into the core of a violent revolt, especially if the government tries to shut it down.

Such violence broke out in the southern city of Oaxaca after Gov. Ulises Ruiz sent police to evict striking teachers. Outraged citizens' groups joined the protests, setting fire to buildings and public buses, seizing radio and TV stations and forcing the closure of businesses in a city known throughout the world as a quaint tourist destination."

Declaring yourself president is a bold move and I doubt the real president will let it happen.

[readmoreoften]

76. Now that's the textbook definition of irony.

"Declaring yourself president is a bold move and I doubt the real president will let it happen."

Yes, Calderon has declared himself president after a fraudulent election and the "real" president is not letting that happen.

Who is the "real" president? The one who orders his men to destroy the votes of the poor or the one that people elect?

[Renew Deal]

82. Unfortunately it's Calderon.

The way things are right now, Calderon will be recognized as the president of Mexico.

[John Q. Citizen]

83. Some predict.... Who are those predictors? Members of the PAN?

If you really want peace, then you should call on the PAN government to count the ballots.

That should clear up the question of who is really the president.

[hogwyld]

68. What is it worth indeed?

Your quote "That I wonder what opposing wrong doing is worth? How far is Obrador willing to take this? How much death and violence are we willing to tolerate on our border. We do not want Mexico going to hell."
Take the words Mexico, and Obrador, and substitute Britain, and the colonies. We fought for our rights and independece. Mexicans will do the same.

[Cha]

62. It could happen here..anything

is possible.

[nick303]

80. There hasn't been any injustice

There has been no conclusive evidence of fraud on a massive scale. There were allegations that turned out to be hoaxes and minor irregularities, which are to be expected. (And no, a Narco News rant does not change the reality of what happened). Democracy doesn't work if one side refuses to accept the result, no matter how thin the margin was.

[ret5hd]

33. well, at least we get to your main objection to this...

MORE MEXICANS!!!

[Renew Deal]

35. No, it's more

dead mexicans

[ret5hd]

36. how many dead mexicans are going to be asking for refugee status?

[Renew Deal]

37. Heh?

How is that possible?

[ret5hd]

38. from your post #6 i believe:

"Doesn't the US have to accept refugees from warfare? We do not want that on our border."

So what ya' really worried 'bout? Dead Mexicans or more Mexicans?

[Renew Deal]

42. Both?

We don't want a war in Mexico. Also, how do we deal with one of it's effects which would be refugee camps in the US? Who would run the camps?

[KaptBunnyPants]

50. You're right, we should never revolt against the King.

How many dead colonialists is it really worth to live in liberty?

[Renew Deal]

52. 4,435

Don't ignore the point. The point is how many dead Mexicans is Obrador willing to tolerate.

http://www.cwc.lsu.edu/other/stats/warcost.htm

[KaptBunnyPants]

57. If Mexicans ever want to have a decent government,

someone must bear the cost. The political process was tried but found to be utterly corrupt. AMLO is trying an alternative process, but the former Mexican government is likely to resort to violence to maintain it's ill-gotten power. People have to be willing to stand up to their government when all other options have been exhausted, or they will live with tyranny forever. It's the basic principle that our country was founded on, something I'm sad to see that we don't share. Would you really accept living in a dictatorship?

[John Q. Citizen]

61. How many Mexicans are the PAN willing to kill to maintain illegal

control of the Presidency is a better question.

Just count the ballots and get this settled.

[skids]

77. How many will die of poverty and government corruption...

...in Calderon's term?

How many is Calderon willing to kill to seal the deal after bungling his election theft attempts?

No way should the question be phrased to lay this at Obrador's feat.

[rman]

87. It's across the border, it's their business

Even though it's not in accordance with "US interests"

[zonkers]

66. Nice.. From the comfort of your den, you enthusiastically

encourage others to hurl themselves into the line of fire.

[TheLastMohican]

94. Really?

Check Ukraine elections of 2004. Backed and sponsored by US, Yushenko contested the elections and climbed into a throne. What is happening in Mexico is a reverse situation, only the bushies don't want to talk about it much since it is not "their son of a bitch".

[Tellurian]

91. Anarchy is always a bad idea..

This guy is promoting dangerous liaisons that will lead to blood in the street and at the same time cast his supporters as anarchists and causing them to self destruct in the process.

[Pavulon]

3. 180 days

jail or dead. That is a pretty solid prediction..

[Renew Deal]

5. I don't like this sort of thing.

It's irresponsible and may send the country to civil war. We (US) do not want that.

[manic expression]

11. It's the opposite of irresponsible

The people of Mexico don't want to have their voices drowned out. What Obrador is doing is necessary and reasonable and then some.

[Renew Deal]

14. We'll see

I wonder how far he's willing to take this.

[rman]

88. This is about Mexico, not about the US. nt

[rinsd]

7. This is bad...real bad.

I hope this remains peaceful because it looks like its headed towards civil war between two factions who can't even garner 40% of the vote.

[w4rma]

9. To clairify, Obrador's actions are good. The situation is bad.

Obrador's actions are exactly what he should be doing. He's right on target. Flawless.

The problem is with the corporatists.

[Renew Deal]

10. Should Gore have done this?

I have a hard time believing that we should have started a war over 2000. Mexico is in a much different position because of widespread poverty and crime. It might be worth it when there is nothing to lose.

[w4rma]

20. I think President Gore should have done something similar.

But hindsight is 20/20. I didn't think, at the time, that Gore should have done anything but what he did.

Unfortunately, I don't think Gore had the option that Obrador has, in 2000. However, I think that he would have that option in 2008, if he ran and something similar happened.

[pokercat999]

22. Does the division of a country have to be violent?

I think we could divide the US without violence. Should Gore have gone that route? Who knows it would have been a tough "sell" and he would have been accused of being nuts. But if the elections can't be trusted and they can't then I see no other other choice except to let "things" fester till it does become violent.

[Renew Deal]

27. They could have persued this legally in the Senate

But didn't. That was a loser anyway and the court was stacked. Gore was in a bad position. I'll tell you this. If 2000 happened to Gore again in 2008, we're looking at trouble.

[DemInDistress]

101. can I add this about the USA elections.. if what happened in

2000- 2002- and 2004 happens again in 2006 were looking at trouble. I will not tolerate yet another stolen election. Will you and millions of other Democrats not be so outraged as to riot?

[gorbal]

46. People have been working in the state and local level to affect change

Many states are passing healthcare initiatives and living wage ordinances. People are coming together to do everything from building houses to sharing meals. In almost every aspect of life, people are finding alternatives to working with the status quo in their daily lives.

It is only working in a few states unfortunately, and it is sad to me because some of the poorest people are down there. I just hope they will see how raising a minimun wage in one state affects the economy positively, and go from there.

:)(Oops, wrong thread, LOL.)

[Vidar]

39. Most emphatically, yes!

[Mudoria]

13. And so, what happens..

if he really did lose the vote? Is he just in disbelief that the possiblilty exists that he actually lost? No one knows since they don't have a full recount but Obrador seems determined that no decision is valid unless he's declared the winner.

[manic expression]

19. Well we don't know, and we probably won't

precicely because Obrador's oppenents are blocking the recount. This all started because no one really knew who won, and so the obvious assumption is that there was most likely a great deal of foul play in light of reports and such.

So what Obrador is fighting for is actually to know who actually won, what actually happened.

What you refuse to acknowledge is that if candidate x wins by a razor-thin amount, and ballots for candidate y were found in the dumpster in addition to numerous other reports and claims of fraud, candidate y has a very good chance of being the winner.

[Jack_DeLeon]

85. Ballots in the dumpster...

obviously since I didnt personally witness it I dont know what happened but I've been a bit skeptical about the ballots in the trash claims.

One one hand yeah it looks bad to find ballots in the trash. On the other hand why are the ballots in the trash automatically assumed to be the real thing? Could they not have been fakes or extras that were purposely thrown away and found by some Obrador supporters so that they could claim that there was fraud from Calderons people? With politics so dirty you sometimes you cant really tell who is the real cheater.

[w4rma]

92. Mexico Presidential Election Ballots Found in Dump

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Mexico_Presidential_Election_Ballots_Found_in_0706.html
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2373785&mesg_id=2373785

[Jack_DeLeon]

96. Okay so that is a picture of the alleged ballots yet...

that still doesnt answer my concern, if they were actual legitimate ballots or if they were frauds of some kind.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

21. hard to say if they won't consider a recount

without that, you know something's screwy. a corrupt count is jsut as bad as a corrupt vote.

[rinsd]

16. I am not sure of that.

The protests are one thing.

Creating a parallel government is a step in the direction of civil war and I see little in the way of good outcomes if that comes to pass.

[gorbal]

26. I would say that may be the only thing that would stop a war at this point

As I say below, if peacefull means don't work with the government you have, better to build another government before you resort to violence.

I have been reading about the Zapatista's and how they did something similar in Chiapas. They even have Zapatista pharmacies that provide free medicine for Zapatistas and charge non-Zapatista's(people who are underinvolved in the movement)

[rinsd]

28. You consider that a good thing

"They even have Zapatista pharmacies that provide free medicine for Zapatistas and charge non-Zapatista's(people who are underinvolved in the movement)"

Government should be for all the people not just those that are supportive of the government.

I know that's hard to comprehend in Bush's america but that is how it is supposed to be....always.

[gorbal]

30. Good point, but Obrador is not a Zapatista

He is trying to win people over, so I think he probably shares your point of view on the matter:)

[rinsd]

32. I hope so. (nt)

[manic expression]

43. I don't find that unreasonable

The people should be for the people, not for themselves. Don't support the people's movement? Pay please. No big deal.

Unlike any of us here, the Zapatistas actually have real goals that need to be met, they actually have real needs to address. Have some perspective when looking at the world.

[rinsd]

97. Running it as a co-op is one thing

Price as determined by loyalty to government(and they are acting as the government in these cases) is a totalitarian concept irregardless of its shiny "will of the people" wrapping.

[gorbal]

102. I think Obrador is more conventional than that

But who knows.

Here is the only on-line article I could find on the Zapatista's pharmacies, please correct or add to it if you have the knowledge.

Political initiatives

Since December 1994, the Zapatistas had been gradually forming several autonomous municipalities, independent of the Mexican government. By August 2003 these municipalities had evolved into local government "juntas", implementing communitarian food-producing programs, health and school systems, supported in part by NGOs. Then several "Juntas of Good Government" formed by representatives of the autonomous municipalities and overseen by the EZLN were created as an upper level of government under the motto mandar obedeciendo (to command obeying). These renegade municipalities had been tolerated by the government despite being a state within the state. Although they do not tax the inhabitants, the Zapatistas decide, through assemblies, to work in communitarian projects; when someone does not participate in these communitarian efforts it is discussed and sometimes it is decided to not consider the person a Zapatista. This for example implies that the person has to pay for medicine in Zapatista pharmacies (although not for medical care). Membership in the Juntas rotates continuously, so that all members of the community have an opportunity to serve the community and also to prevent people in power to become addicted to it or become corrupted.t

(snip)

More...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zapatista_Army_of_National_Liberation

[stepnw1f]

18. Actually, the Mexicans Have Been Through Enough with Fascism

The wealthy in Mexico are lucky the poor aren't physicaly attacking them on the streets. I'd say their government run by elitest, have already pushed the people around long enough. I hope folks in this country pay attention. Afterall, we have had a revolution before against the very wealthy aristocracy we are beginning to see again in this country.

[gorbal]

15. It beats violence

People need to know they can change their lives peacefully. If their government leaves them no recourse sans violence to change things, isn't it better that they build their own government?

[YankeyMCC]

34. I'm conflicted

not that it matters much what this white guy living in New England thinks or feels about what the people of Mexico are going through. But just for the sake of getting this thought off my chest...I applaud determined action and perhaps this is indeed the only option left but I'm simply afraid many lives will be lost and that always concerns me. Some in this thread have said this can still resolve peacefully, I'm not optimistic that is true if this second government is set up but it is of course for the people of Mexico to decide what is the best course...I can only hope lives are not lost.

[UTUSN]

45. I agree that any blood shed will be on AMLO's hands

While a very vocal bloc here at DU roots for the Mexicans to protest vigorously the interpretation of the voting results, based on our own frustration over 2000 and 2004, two things:

1) GORE and KERRY are not the first to have experienced stolen elections here and NOT to have blown up the country in protest. Even Tricky Dick thought that the good-of-the-country would have been jeopardized by his contesting 1960.

2) Unfortunately, in Mexico the protest will likely be so vigorous that Mexican blood will be spilled. That is, the poorest people will suffer most of all---again.

It is too facile for those here who are cheering on the confrontation over there. It smacks of the eternal one-U.S.-life-is-worth-THOUSANDS-of-foreigners.

When the blood flows over there, there will be crocodile tears flowing here. My tears will be real.

[gorbal]

49. There already been bloodshed

http://www.narconews.com/Issue42/article2026.html

I don't see anyone cheering on a confrontation here.

[UTUSN]

53. You don't? What is half of this thread and many others like it doing? n/t

[gorbal]

63. We are cheering on the Mexican people taking a stand for Democracy

Something I wish I would see more of in the states. People are jumping ahead and saying that Obrador will be responsible for bloodshed...well Fox's government is already guilty of bloodshed, but so far the protestors have been peaceful.

[UTUSN]

64. Your headline sounds like Shrub talking about Iraq

Here's a post from another bloodthirsty thread, but it's from somebody named "Conservative" Democrat, so I'm sure it doesn't count:

*************QUOTE**********

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2000393
ConservativeDemocrat (669 posts)

55. I don't think it'll be as bad as that...
Obrador will whine for a while longer, stage a few protests, and continue to alienate all but his most hardcore supporters. (This is already happening in Mexico D.F., where people are getting tired of having their already-bad commutes turned into absolute nightmares.)

Eventually, a super-majority of Mexicans will come to the position of the European Union election monitors, who stated that there were no irregularities in the election that could have affected the transparency of the results, and the whole thing will blow over.

Hopefully Calderon will continue to make overtures to disappointed PRDistas, and as a result, have a successful Presidency by following a middle-road.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

***********UNQUOTE**********

[readmoreoften]

79. His comment sounds nothing like a "Bush Headline"

and no one hear is "cheerleading" for Mexicans to be killed. I am in support of anyone who is courageous enough to fight to the death to protect the liberty of themselves and their neighbors. Living in a rigged pseudodemocracy will only kill more poor Mexicans in the long run.

Your post is like saying that people who support a labor strike are "cheerleading" for working class people to have their pay docked.

[gorbal]

93. Never mind

Nobody is going to convince anyone of any thing off getting personal and accusing people of promoting bloodshed. I would be posting the same encouragement to WTO protestors or anyone taking a stab at an alternative government here. If their is bloodshed, it is on PAN's hands for subverting Democracy, and I do hope that does not happen.

[SoCalDem]

47. I fear for his life

Can the "legitimate" government allow this to happen? I don;t think so.:(

[stranger81]

86. that was my first thought too

wonder how long it will take before he gets treated to an icepick to the head or a visit at night from the CIA (not that those are necessarily mutually exclusive possibilities)

[samsingh]

48. wow

[bemildred]

54. Civil insurrection, coming right up. nt

[Peace Patriot]

58. There has been NO VIOLENCE by Lopez Obrador's supporters or by the

parallel government that has been set up in Oaxaca to oust Gov. Uribe. None! ALL violence has gone THE OTHER WAY--Uribe's and Fox/Calderon's Darth Vader troops brutalized striking teachers and election protesters. And there will BE no violence by the Left! ALL violence will be the fascist state against the people.

Yahoo:
"Some predict his parallel initiative — which Lopez Obrador's supporters call the 'legitimate government' — could turn those protest camps into the core of a violent revolt, especially if the government tries to shut it down."

Lopez Obrador's 'legitimate government' could "turn" those protest camps into "the core of a violent revolt"??? How??? How can a protest government by non-violent leftists "turn" their own camps into "the core of a violent revolt"? That is ridiculous. It is slander. It is trying to set up a story NOW to cover up that the fascist repression that is no doubt being planned.

Peaceful, democratic, leftist change is occurring throughout Latin America--with leftist governments elected in Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Uruguay, Venezuela and Bolivia, and strong democracy movements also in Peru, Nicaragua and other places, even signs of it in Columbia. This is the future. As the first indigenous president of Bolivia (who rose to power on a popular revolt against Bechtel Corp.) has said: "The time of the people has come."

How this peaceful revolution is occurring is by TRANSPARENT elections--the result of the hard work of the OAS, the Carter Center, EU election monitoring groups and local civic groups over a long period of time. The vast population of the poor and the brown--never before served by government, never before with any voice in government, exploited and brutalized, often by U.S.-backed dictatorships--is finally coming into its own as a social and political force. This is an unstoppable revolution. And the corporate looters in Mexico can only hold if off for a short while. Its time has come. It is an historic movement. Stolen elections, and their enforcement by violence, cannot stop it.

Trying to stop this great and historic leftist change is like trying to stop the ocean waves, or the pull of gravity. They are fighting something that is huge, powerful and inevitable. It has the inevitability of the democratic revolutions of the 18th century which started with our own. But the Latin Americans have emerged from decades--centuries--of fascist rule with NEW WISDOM. And that wisdom is from Gandhi and Martin Luther King. Violence cannot remedy violence. All must be transformed by justice--inside, in our souls. Peace, justice and excellent organization.

"The time of the people has come!" --Evo Morales

Viva la revolución!

[CanSocDem]

65. Nicely said, PP....

...you've raised my spirits, again.

[Vidar]

69. Thank you for eloquently conveying the truth.

[Renew Deal]

73. My worry hasn't been violence from the left.

It's violence from the government. http://www.narconews.com/Issue42/article2026.html

We have seen this already. They have the power to kill. And I bet anything that if the leftists get punched enough times, they'll respond.

[Master of Disaster]

60. Hmmm...this could get interesting.

[RCinBrooklyn]

67. I support Obrador 100% - It's another right-wing coup. n/t

[Jack_DeLeon]

84. I do not like the idea of a Mexican Civil War

that would be the worst possible outcome, nobody would benefit from it, and stuff like this makes it seem more likely.

[rman]

89. Mexico: Reporter gets PICTURES of Goverment Hired Killers

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1999095

Operation “Clean-Up” in Oaxaca
Following the CIA’s “Psychological Operations” Manual for the Nicaraguan Contras, the State Government Has Unleashed a Bloody Counterinsurgency Strategy to Eliminate the Social Movement

http://www.narconews.com/Issue42/article2026.html

By Diego Enrique Osorno
Special to The Narco News Bulletin
August 28, 2006

OAXACA CITY: One of them, the one in a white cap, black shirt and denim pants, smiles like a child upon being discovered in the middle of the street with his machine gun.

He’s maybe 32 years old, with dark skin and a moustache just barely visible, his face sweaty despite the cool air of the early Oaxaca morning. Maybe it’s the bulletproof vest, maybe it’s his nervousness over being identified – who knows where his agitation comes from.
Photos: José Alberto Cruz
Opposite him, sitting on bed of the Ford pickup with no license plates, another man tried to hide his face, though it was already hidden behind a black hood. But the camera will inevitably give him away. He is the most nervous of the four men in this armed convoy. Even his AR-15 rifle trembles in his hands.

At 1:20 a.m. these four gunmen are on Heroica Escuela Naval Street, in the Reforma neighborhood of Oaxaca City, when Milenio photographer José Alberto Cruz captures them with his camera.

They are part of the armed convoy that the Oaxaca state government has sent to try to eliminate the dissident Popular Assembly of the People of Oaxaca (APPO in its Spanish initials) once and for all.

These armed civilians, as State Attorney General Lizbeth Caña Cadeza will later clarify, were in fact police officers who, she says, were carrying out a “clean-up” operation in the Oaxacan streets. But days later, the garbage continues to accumulate, piling up on the sidewalks.

The real result was a murdered dissident, Lorenzo San Pablo Cervantes, as well as several journalists who came under direct fire, including José Alberto Cruz, the author of these photographs that show the alleged police forces with which the government combats the popular, teacher-led uprising.

<more>

[Judi Lynn]

90. Wow. This CIA Contra Manual was linked.

Makes you wonder what "improvements" appear in the new ones. Looks like a total plan to dominate completely, no dissent allowed.
http://www.kimsoft.com/guerilla.htm

It's about time our right-wing scum pResidents stop meddling in the lives of the good people of this hemisphere. They don't seem to realize we don't OWN these people. This is all so wildly sick.

Thanks for the news! It's a shame we can't get our own media to cover these things, isn't it? But then, who really ever told us they serve the American public, anyway? It's not their fault we trusted them so long. :eyes:

[goforit]

100. I guess what could happen there can happen here.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

95. Kick to expose some of these posts.

Hoo, boy!

[gorbal]

99. Courage and Resistance in Oaxaca and Mexico City

It began on May 15 this year when teachers belonging to the 70,000 strong National Union of Education Workers in Oaxaca, Mexico took to the streets for the first time to press their demands to the state government to address their long-neglected needs. They included restructuring teachers' salaries, improving the deplorable educational infrastructure forcing teachers to conduct classes in laminated cardboard shacks, a lack of books and other educational materials and providing food for the many impoverished children who come to school each day hungry.

After Chiapas, Oaxaca is the poorest of Mexico's 31 states, each of which has its own constitution and elected governor and representatives to the state congresses. Both states share a common border in the extreme south of the country, and both are predominantly rural which exacerbates the impoverishment of their people. That poverty level worsened substantially in the 1980s and especially in last dozen years because of the neoliberal so-called "free market" policies adopted by President Carlos Salinas and maintained by successive presidents up to the present that included the destructive NAFTA trade agreement with the US and Canada. It followed from the IMF-imposed structural adjustment policies since the mid-1980s that included large-scale privatizations of state-owned industries, economic deregulation, and mandated wage restraint that held pay increases to levels far below the rate of inflation. The result is that the great majority of Mexicans for years have seen their standard of living decline, and more of them now live in poverty especially in the rural areas where farmers are unable to compete with heavily subsidized US grain and other food imports flooding the country since the NAFTA agreement ended agricultural import tariffs. It's the main reason so many of them and other impoverished Mexicans come el norte in desperation to find work unavailable to them at home.

Mexico's adherence to neoliberal Washington Consensus policies also added to the country's growing dependency on capital inflows that includes "hot money" free to enter and leave the country's deregulated financial markets. It led to an unsustainable current account deficit and collapse of the peso in early 1995 causing the worst depression in the country in 60 years and far greater impoverishment of the majority of the Mexican people. Those conditions still affect most Mexicans, they're not getting better, and there's a growing discontent and anger because of them. It's leading to acts of resistance and rebellion against a system of governance that's enriched a small minority of the country's elite (a handful of them to obscene levels of wealth) at the expense of the majority poor sinking deeper into poverty and the misery from it. It's playing out now in the mass-demonstrations in Mexico City's vast Zocalo Plaza de la Constitucion (where the country's first constitution was proclaimed in 1813) in the wake of another stolen presidential election and in the streets of Oaxaca where teachers, other working people, and many organizations and groups in solidarity with them are encamped and demonstrating daily for the rights they deserve. It shows that ordinary people anywhere will only put up with so much for so long before demanding change. In the Mexican streets today, it just remains to be seen how far these acts of resistance will go and what successes, if any, they'll have.


The Spirit of Resistance in Oaxaca

Back in May, demonstrating teachers presented their reasonable demands to Oaxaca's Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) Governor Ulises Ruiz Ortiz (known as URO) who rejected them out of hand. A week later on May 22 the teachers went on strike and set up a tent city in an area covering 34 city blocks in the colonial downtown area. This was the 26th consecutive year Oaxaca teachers had demonstrated demanding redress for their grievances. In the other years, the teacher action lasted a few weeks, a modest compromise was eventually reached, and things returned to normal even without satisfactorily resolving fundamental problems that always remained. Not this time, however, as events have played out. Negotiations began but after nearly three weeks produced nothing. The teachers rejected Governor Ruiz Ortiz's claim that he had no resources to meet their demands. In response, they blocked government offices, city streets and highways, tollbooths, access to the airport, caused the cancellation of the Guelanguetza cultural festival, and brought the important tourist industry to its knees causing over 1000 hotel workers to be laid off. They also held marches obstructing traffic through the downtown area and blocked construction projects on the Cerro de Fortin that overlooks the highway entering Oaxaca from Mexico City. The frustration is clearly showing among Oaxaca's merchants, restauranteurs, and hotel keepers who've announced a one-day strike on September 1 in protest and to demand the government end the strike that's cost them millions of dollars and closed down the city's lifeblood tourist industry.

Back on June 2, things began to intensify as thousands of other working people and representatives from Oaxacan organizations joined in solidarity with the teachers to march against the state government and Governor Ruiz Ortiz. They repeated it again on June 7 in another huge peaceful march numbering about 120,000 in which student and parents' groups, other union members, and representatives from socialist and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) from Oaxaca and other states joined with the teachers to help them press their demands. So far everything was peaceful, as in the past, but all that changed on June 14 when state police entered the compound where the teachers were camping. They had riot shields, fired tear gas at the people there, and were aided by an overhead police helicopter that also dropped tear gas canisters on the crowds that by now were raging. The police also destroyed or burned nearly all the encampment shelters and disabled Radio Planton that had been broadcasting information to the people from the main square since the demonstration began.

The teachers took none of this lightly and fought back as best they could including tearing up cobblestones to throw at the police and setting police cars afire. After some hours they managed to regain the upper hand, but from this action a precedent had been broken of short-lived peaceful actions each year followed by government obstinacy and in the end a modest compromise. For the first time ever, this strike action became militant, and it showed two days later on June 16 when an astonishing 300,000 - 500,000 people marched again (in a greater area of 1 million people) outraged at how they were treated and demanding the immediate resignation of Governor Ruiz Ortiz who again ignored them. It was clear this was becoming more than just another strike for better pay and working conditions. It had grown to much more than that to include Mexico's long history of authoritarian rule for and by the rich and powerful with little attention given to addressing people needs.

(snip)

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=59&ItemID=10849

I just came upon this article and I thought it provides a great background for what is going on. Things HAVE been becoming tense, it isn't all about Obrador.

[gorbal]

103. Oh, and check out this article

http://www.counterpunch.com/salzman08302006.html

Okay, done posting. I'm off to bed:)

[TheLastMohican]

104. You know why you are discussing this

When bushy says the vote was violated when he needs some puppets to set up in Russia's backyard like Ukraine, Belorus, Georgia, and some other former SU shithole, you name it, then it is totally fine to recount the vote. When his guy won the elections like in Mexico, you don't see Shrub saying many things on the matter.
Sooner or later the whole Central and South America will go left because they are sick of US imperial policies.