SORRY, but those guys are no tea partiers. From afar it's tempting to romanticize the protests taking place in Spain right now, but they are not definitely a wakeup from Socialist utopia, but a call to delve further into it.
You only need to look at their resolutions (oddly in several languages but not in English): they demand more, not less government intervention, including: the right to a house; public, free and universal healthcare; more taxes, including Tobin tax; the declaration that wealth is subject to public interest; renationalization of bailed out banks and former public companies that were privatized; popular access to media (whatever that means, but something that would make McCain-Feingold a kids' game); the closure of all nuclear plants; the drastic cut of military expenses, including the closing of arms industry; a declaration of "No war".
You get the drill.
Yes, there are some valid points (the push to real separation between powers; transparency in the administration and political parties; a censure on corruption) but those valid points are marred by the rest. And also by the fact that the guys are handing themselves (by whom?) a sort of sovereignty over the legislative process, as if whatever a bunch of guys decide at an open assembly, voting by raised hand, was democratically superior to a parliamentary system.
UPDATE. This is totally mistaken: "The socialist federal government sought a supreme court ruling to halt demonstrations that have been happening for a week, but it was turned down Friday. "
The Supreme Court, and the Electoral Commission before, had ruled the demonstrations illegal not once, but twice, but the government announced it wasn't going to comply and clear them out. Which may make sense --it's not that easy to clear 20 thousand guys out peacefully. And I personally think the so-called 'reflection day' prior to the election, when campaigning is illegal, is stupid. But the law says what it says, and the Supreme Court ruled what it ruled, which is the total opposite of what UPI reports.
You only need to look at their resolutions (oddly in several languages but not in English): they demand more, not less government intervention, including: the right to a house; public, free and universal healthcare; more taxes, including Tobin tax; the declaration that wealth is subject to public interest; renationalization of bailed out banks and former public companies that were privatized; popular access to media (whatever that means, but something that would make McCain-Feingold a kids' game); the closure of all nuclear plants; the drastic cut of military expenses, including the closing of arms industry; a declaration of "No war".
You get the drill.
Yes, there are some valid points (the push to real separation between powers; transparency in the administration and political parties; a censure on corruption) but those valid points are marred by the rest. And also by the fact that the guys are handing themselves (by whom?) a sort of sovereignty over the legislative process, as if whatever a bunch of guys decide at an open assembly, voting by raised hand, was democratically superior to a parliamentary system.
UPDATE. This is totally mistaken: "The socialist federal government sought a supreme court ruling to halt demonstrations that have been happening for a week, but it was turned down Friday. "
The Supreme Court, and the Electoral Commission before, had ruled the demonstrations illegal not once, but twice, but the government announced it wasn't going to comply and clear them out. Which may make sense --it's not that easy to clear 20 thousand guys out peacefully. And I personally think the so-called 'reflection day' prior to the election, when campaigning is illegal, is stupid. But the law says what it says, and the Supreme Court ruled what it ruled, which is the total opposite of what UPI reports.
posted by José M. Guardia at 11:07 AM
<< Home