Bolivian Democracy: Inventions and Violations
New in the Website
Even strong supporters of Western self-defined democracies admit they have fallacies. One of them – a Winston Churchill from the UK – said on November 11, 1947 in Hansard: “Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.” With this witty ending, he defined democracy as the less bad form of government. Please, let me take a British flag out of my pocket and wave it proudly before I continue.
The joke at Churchill’s statement was probably added in order to disguise a slightly different truth. If looking beyond the constant bombardment of Western propaganda, it is very clear these regimes suffer a deadly weakness, an Achilles’ heel inherited from the original society which developed this government model. This fallacy can be shown in every democracy at all times, yet certain events stand out due to their clarity.
On December 12, 2000, the landmark United States Supreme Court decision on the case Bush v. Gore resolved the USA 2000 Presidential Elections in favor of George W. Bush. It was the fourth election in which the electoral vote winner did not also receive a plurality of the popular vote. The decision was taken with the help of judges appointed by the would-be-president’s father, who was also a president. It is hard to see here democracy in action (we all remember the ridiculous recounting process in Florida) or even justice in action; under the American questionable legal system the judges have very strong political affiliations. Nepotism and politruks run the scene. Unsurprisingly, the USA was Churchill’s main ally at the time he uttered the abovementioned witticism.
Let’s cross the Atlantic Ocean and take a look at Israel, another self-proclaimed democracy which is notorious for its human rights violations and state-terror. Teva – the pharmaceutical company featured in The Cross of Bethlehem - is one of the largest companies at the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange. A quarter of the market is driven by two companies: Teva Pharmaceutical Industries and Israel Chemicals. Thus it is easy to understand its Chairman of the Board and former CEO is an extremely influential person in the Israeli economy, more so than any single American had ever influenced American economy. Yet, Eliyahu "Eli" Hurvitz committed a crime in the eyes of the bureaucrats running the Israeli Administration: in several occasions he openly said he wanted to pay as few taxes as legally possible. Consequently, Teva was designed in such a way, with many of its operations taking place beyond the reach of the Israeli taxation system. It would be difficult to pick up Israeli newspapers from the 1990s without finding references to his persecution by the taxation system, which was determined to milk Teva to death. In March 1996 Eli Hurvitz was indicted on charges of an $18 million tax evasion in corporate taxes as head of a Teva subsidiary, Promedico. In 1998 he was convicted by the Jerusalem district court, but was acquitted by the Supreme Court of Israel in 2000, when it became clear a single person in the system had decided to transform his life into hell no matter what. “You – lousy citizens – are here to pay taxes and enable our comfy pensions” was apparently the message of the Israeli Administration to its slaves. Again we see a legal and administrative system plagued by corruption, personal interpretation of the law system by partial sides. The happy end of Hurvitz case was possible only due to his financial capability to take the state to court. Mere humans are constantly abused by these democracies.
Under these circumstances, one must ask: can’t the system be defined in a wiser way? Can’t we take corruption and nepotism out of the government? The key for that would be the creation of a judicial system which would be unrelated to the executive and legislative branches of the government. Only in such a way impartiality can be assured. Only in such a way the citizen would be able to seek protection from abusive states at a local court instead of begging for refuge abroad. That’s not enough. A fair legal system is also needed. Human legal systems are not reasonable; they are purposely complicated in such a way that only experts know what is legal. Consider the taxation laws of most countries: they are unreadable despite not existing any reason for their being so. However, by making them unreadable, gates are opened for the manipulation of events by those who have the power.
Yet there is no reason to despair. Every few hundred years a shiny light appears in the world and illuminates our minds. On October 16, history is about to be made. For the first time in the history of the world, citizens of a country are about to openly elect the judges of their judiciary system. Is Greece emerging again as a beacon of democracy to the nations? Did Churchill words convince the Brits to improve the “less bad system?” Is this about to be implemented by Zionist Libya? No, no, no, Evo Morales of Bolivia is the Beacon.
Following the adoption of a new Constitution promoted by his party – MAS, the Movement Towards Socialism – the country is about to experience this new type of elections. In Bolivia against my will, I am witnessing this process from its very center, in La Paz. The national vote will elect magistrates to serve on the Supreme Tribunal of Justice, the Plurinational Constitutional Tribunal, the Agro-environmental Tribunal, and members of the Council of the Judiciary. Proposed Supreme Tribunal magistrates must be approved as qualified by a two-thirds vote of the Plurinational Legislative Assembly. Candidates are forbidden from campaigning and from affiliating with political parties. The sheet to be used for the voting is a meter long and probably can’t be properly understood by the vast majority of the voters. A similar attitude was adopted in previous referendums and elections.
Until yesterday, October 7, the candidates were practically secret due to the lack of campaigning. Yesterday, small booklets with the candidates’ names and biographies were given to passersby. Even now, there are no other official signs of the approaching event, which is odd for what it claims being a vibrant democracy. Yet, even regular elections take place here under curfew, so maybe this was to be expected.
However, unofficial signs of the event can be easily seen in La Paz. The always diminishing opposition is carrying on a campaign called “Rechaza el Engaño” (“Reject the Lie” in Spanish). They are asking from voters to nullify their vote (voting is compulsory in Bolivia!) in order to boycott the list. But, why? Why should one boycott a feast of democracy? OK, probably the government would take most of the seats, but something would be left for the opposition, isn’t it so? Well, not everybody was free to postulate as a candidate. The list was approved by the government and all the candidates are unofficially related to Evo Morales party. After all, as pointed out in recent articles, Bolivia isn’t so different from the USA or Israel. Nepotism and corruption are the bread and salt of democracies; cheap propaganda is their insurance policy against the free world.
My articles on the web are my main income these days; please recognize my efforts by donating or buying a copy of The Cross of Bethlehem, or Back in Bethlehem.