polls closed in peru

[Munachi]

i guess most people won't be too interest in this, and maybe i shouldn't really start a political thread either, as they usually make me angry or sad or scared... but with these elections i am all that already. quite happy i am not peruvian and didn't have to chose between alan garcia and ollanta humala - they are both scary. ah well... i guess i just needed to say this somewhere... i can see the reasons of why it was them who passed to the second round, why a lot of people voted for them, but peru is a country very close to my heart, and i am worried about how things will go there in the future...

 

[NoJo]

Peru is where Paddington Bear comes from. And that's about it for my knowledge of Peru.

 

[Munachi]

that's what i was told before going there. in the end though, i saw lots of llamas and alpacas, but no bears.

 

[NoJo]

that's what i was told before going there. in the end though, i saw lots of llamas and alpacas, but no bears.

You were probably not actually in Peru. I think it was probably just some bad acid.

 

[Munachi]

You were probably not actually in Peru. I think it was probably just some bad acid.

that would explain a lot of things. now the question si though, where did i get it? i want some more of that... probably cheaper than a airplane ticket, as well...

 

[R. Richard]

i guess most people won't be too interest in this, and maybe i shouldn't really start a political thread either, as they usually make me angry or sad or scared... but with these elections i am all that already. quite happy i am not peruvian and didn't have to chose between alan garcia and ollanta humala - they are both scary. ah well... i guess i just needed to say this somewhere... i can see the reasons of why it was them who passed to the second round, why a lot of people voted for them, but peru is a country very close to my heart, and i am worried about how things will go there in the future...

It would appear that Alan Garcia is going to win. According to the election people he is leading 55.5% to 44.5% with a bit more than 77% of the votes counted.

Just as background, Alan Garcia damn near ran Peru into bankruptcy when he previously mis-ran the country. He is now back and still left wing, but clains to have calmed down some. Ollanta Humala is a Hugo Chavez clone/lackey and would have been a total disaster for the country. Chavez can get by with mis-rule for a while because of the enormous oil income. Peru does not have that kind of natural resources to exploit.

 

[Munachi]

Well, Alan Garcia won, and I suppose he is the lesser evil...

My problem with Ollanta Humala isn't so much on economic grounds - I don't understand enough of it to fully form an opinion, and the opinion I have is somewhat different to yours, as you probably noticed in the past, but that's not what I wnat to discuss...

The main problem I see with Ollanta Humala is the very strong nationalist tendency, that I am in general not a fan of, in this case (quite typical for Peru) expressed in a strong anti-Chile stand, going so far that he even promised a war against Chile... And I see problems with the use of ethnicity that he took in his campaign (promising to reinstore the Tawantinsuyo [the kingdom of the Incas] which is not only ignoring the realities of today's Peru, but even those of prehispanic Peru...). Tendencies taht are combined in his father's Ethnocacerista movement (the name alone gives me shudders), which Ollanta seems to have distanced himself from to run in the elections, but which he still seems close to ideologically... Another Problem, connected to these points, is that he is a military person, and I am always a bit worried about militaries being heads of state (see also Chavez) - usually their structures of thinking are too much in a world of orders and obeying... Another interesting fact about Humala is, that contrary to Evo Morales in Boliva, he is not even really from the background of those he claims to represent - he is from a mestizo family of militaries which from what I understand has not been poor... And he has no pure record on human rights issues either - during the war against the Sendero Luminoso, in which both the Senderistas and the Military commited atrocities especially against the very poor indigenous people in the countryside, he is said to have participated in torturing and killing...

Seeing all this, Alan Garcia, who now won, seems the lesser of two evils for me - but not all that much less.

I distance myself from your "he is still left wing but" comment, because the issues are deeper than just saying left and right, bad and good (apart from the fact that I see myself as left wing and favor in a lot of cases left wing governments, but there are quite a few cases of left wing governments I see as dangerous, and tendentially more right wing people I would prefer, like I would have preferred Lourdes Flores for Peru - I dislike limiting myself by a simplified labelling)...

But anyway, Alan Garcia is btw. said to be still quite filthy rich from all he got during his first presidency - much more so than Lourdes Flores, the "candidate of the rich", according to an article I read to day... Despite his desastrous presidency he was already close to winning in 2002, and now he obviously made it (his win in the second round, I think, is in big part due to people who saw him the lesser of two evils, and voted for him, as they say in Peru, while holding their nose closed)... Well, as I was told it is mainly young people who voted for him, those who don't remember the huge inflation during his government, and the war with the Maoist group Sendero Luminoso and the MRTA which led to between 40.000 and 60.000 deaths...

In an article I read today, they made some interesting points about how these elections once more show, that Peru is very far from being a unified country, and how the elites of the country keep ignoring the poor people particularly of the Andes, who then end up voting for someone like Ollanta Humala, because he's the only one they feel takes even notice of them...

I knew some people who were in favor of him when I was there (though not that many, or it wasn't discussed that much - I was there still quite a bit before the elections, and before his popularity started rising so much)...

From what I read, also, economic growth is not the only thing that matters - because as I understood, Peru's economy didn't go all that badly under Toledo - the problem was, that most of it did not reach the poor of Peru, and the knowledge of that is part of what might have brought this situation of it being Humala and Garcia who got into the final round of the elections...

Anyway, now the only hope is, that Alan Garcia has learned some lessons...

 

[R. Richard]

Muachi:
I myself have a very stron military background. However, I was not a General who sent men to fight based upon ideas I got while moving toys around a sand box. I was on the front lines and I gave orders and they damn well were obeyed. However, I myself was affected by my orders and I was very cognizant of the effect on myself and my troops.

The main problem I see with Ollanta Humala is that he is insane. Worse yet, the people around him are even more insane. If Peru starts a war against Chile, Peru is very likely to find itself inv0lved with US forces. Peru can't beat Chile and they damn well can't beat US forces.

I don't see problems with the use of ethnicity that he took in his campaign, particularly I don't see a problem with promising to reinstore the Tawantinsuyo [the kingdom of the Incas.] In fact, if I were running Peru, the first thing I would do is order Ollanta Humala to reinstate the Tawantinsuyo. I would give him no finances and definitely no troops. I would give him a strict time deadine with the penalty of death for him and his family if he failed. [Be careful of what you wish, it just may be granted.]

Again, the matter of the Sendero Luminoso was badly mishandled. Again, captured Senderistas should have been granted at least a part of what they were fighting for. As an example, I would assign a Senderista the job of optimizing the bus schedules for Lima and Callao. I would give him a strict time deadine with the penalty of death for him and his family if he failed. [Be careful of what you wish, it just may be granted.]

I don't know how much you are aware of the Spanish background of the conquerors of Peru. I have worked in Mexico [Spanish] and Brazil [Portuguese.] In each case, the upper classes of the country considered the poor natives as less than human. I watched a plantation owner call one of his slaves over and ask, "Joao, are you happy?" Of course, Joao was happy. If Joao was not happy, the plantation owner might have had him killed or simply turned out into the jungle with no means of survival. [I would have liked to see a midnight meeting in the jungle between a machete armed Joao and the plantation owner.]

You say that you read an article that states thart Peru is very far from being a unified country. The elites of the country keep ignoring the poor, indian people.

If you expect any large number of the Peruvian elite to worry about the indians, you are bound to be disappointed. The elite, by and large, have the old Spanish view that the indios are sub-human animals. That attitude is not going to change, regardless of which group rules Peru.

The only answer is economic growth. With economic growth, there is money available and some of it will trickle down to the indios. The best chances for the indios are foreign firms, particualarly mining/gas/oil firms. Such firms often operate on the jungles areas of Peru and they have to use indios, because that is the work force that lives there. In order to use the indios, the foreign firm has to train them. Once trained, the indils have taken the first step from being subhuman slaves to being Peruvian citizens. Most of any economic progress will not reach the poor of Peru. What does reach the poor of Peru will be a very small share of overall prosperity.

I suspect that Alan Garcia has learned some lessons. I also suspect that he has a lot more lessons to learn. The very first lesson that Alan Garcia needs to learn is to let his criminal enemies have a chance to run small bits of Peru their way, with draconian penalties for failure.

 

[Munachi]

Well, I still think that in a lot of cases (though there are exceptions) it is not quite a coincidence when someone with a military career becoming president ends up having quite an authoritarian regime. that doesn't necessarily have to do of how aware you are of your orders' effects, it has more to do with that a government is supposed to work somewhat different from an army...

Else - I don't quite understand yet what the Sendero Luminoso has to do with bus schedules in Lima and Callao... Could you explain, please?

Also, where did Humala wish for being given the task of reinstating the Tawantinsuyo without financial means or troops? I assume your comment "I don't see problems with the use of ethnicity that he took in his campaign, particularly I don't see a problem with promising to reinstore the Tawantinsuyo [the kingdom of the Incas.]" was meant ironically, considering what followed in the same paragraph?

And I must say, I am glad that I don't have some insane relative in a country governed by you, how far are you taking family btw? Would you kill just their children and wife, or also their parents, siblings, maybe even aunts and uncles and cousins? It'd all be in good latin american tradition...

I am indeed aware of the Spanish background of Peru's conquerers and its traditional elite - and yes, class in Peru is strongly connected with ethnicity, though ethnicity is also a very fluid category, at least within the poorer population and middle class, where most people are mixed to some extent. I do not know the elite well, nor do I know really that much about them - particularly since I am not sure where upper class really starts. I have some upper middle class friends, and their attitude towards the poor of their country are quite mixed - there are prejudices and cliched behaviour they have learned from early on, but at the same time at least for some there is thinking...

What I meant was not so much anyway, that the very rich will suddenly start to love the poor, but rather, that at some point they might start seeing that there is a certain necessity of taking them into consideration, considering the results of most of the elections in recent years... Some already prognose half-jokingly that next time it will be Fujimori and Humala who will run against each other in the last round...

The divide of Peru is not only between elite and poor, though. With the "two Perus" one usually refers to Coast vs. Sierra (the jungle tends to be ignored) - and there is a connection, the coastal population being somewhat richer, of a criollo background, the andine population having a lot stronger indigeneous element and being poorer (highest votes for Humala I think were in Ayacucho with about 80 % of the votes), but it is more than just that, considering Lima has quite a lot of poor people as well, a lot of them actually being migrants from the Sierra...

Under Toledo there was, afaik, quite some economic growth - and it doesn't seem like those who live in the Andes felt like any of it reached them (or, in fact, anyone elsewhere). When you say that is the only way, and it will "trickle down", this makes me wonder if you really expect of those that are poor to sit there and wait patiently for it to start trickling - when by their experience this so far didn't seem to happen. And that's where I hope all those of the "elites" (though here I think we have to clarify at some point also, if the elites are the very small upper class, or also the much larger middle classes - and how to define these classes in general) who are shocked right now at how someone like Humala could gain so many votes that they wer forced to vote for Alan Garcia as the lesser evil, will understand that no matter what they think of the poor, they have to take their existence into consideration... But this might be too optimistic I suppose.

Btw, most of Peru's indígenas (I am not a big fan of the word "indio", as it is often used in a derogatory sense), do not live in the jungle, but rather in the Sierra. Apart from that I would suppose such firms would train a tiny proportion of people to a higher degree, and the others only as far as they need for the labor that firm would wnat them to do - which a slave owner wouldn't do any different.

I have a lot more points, but it is already getting light outside and I can notice my command of the English language (and thinking in general) decreasing as I get more tired, so I will stop now - just one thing - whether Alan Garcia has learned his lessons is, I think, something the next five years will show. Your suggestion about having his enemies (who exactly do you mean? Humala? Humala's voters? someone else?) run small parts of the country they are bound to fail and then punish them for it, sounds to me like a quite scary mind game for the sake of revenge, and to scare people into "their place"... If I misunderstood you, I'd ask you to explain.

 

[R. Richard]

I don't quite understand yet what the Sendero Luminoso has to do with bus schedules in Lima and Callao... Could you explain, please?

If you want to govern a country, you have to govern the WHOLE country. If you can't do something simple, like a bus schedule, you can't govern a country. [Yes, I can do a bus schedule.]

Also, where did Humala wish for being given the task of reinstating the Tawantinsuyo without financial means or troops? I assume your comment "I don't see problems with the use of ethnicity that he took in his campaign, particularly I don't see a problem with promising to reinstore the Tawantinsuyo [the kingdom of the Incas.]" was meant ironically, considering what followed in the same paragraph?

If you want to install your own [perhaps a copy of a previous] system of government, why would you expect resources to do so? If you need resources, you get them freely from the governed.

And I must say, I am glad that I don't have some insane relative in a country governed by you, how far are you taking family btw? Would you kill just their children and wife, or also their parents, siblings, maybe even aunts and uncles and cousins? It'd all be in good latin american tradition...

Public library = everyone at the same address is equally guilty. You do support the public library do you not?

I am indeed aware of the Spanish background of Peru's conquerers and its traditional elite - and yes, class in Peru is strongly connected with ethnicity, though ethnicity is also a very fluid category, at least within the poorer population and middle class, where most people are mixed to some extent. I do not know the elite well, nor do I know really that much about them - particularly since I am not sure where upper class really starts. I have some upper middle class friends, and their attitude towards the poor of their country are quite mixed - there are prejudices and cliched behaviour they have learned from early on, but at the same time at least for some there is thinking...

I would, with all due respect, think that there is much more talking than thinking. It is easy to say, "We ought to do something." Much harder to actually do something.

The divide of Peru is not only between elite and poor, though. With the "two Perus" one usually refers to Coast vs. Sierra (the jungle tends to be ignored) - and there is a connection, the coastal population being somewhat richer, of a criollo background, the andine population having a lot stronger indigeneous element and being poorer (highest votes for Humala I think were in Ayacucho with about 80 % of the votes), but it is more than just that, considering Lima has quite a lot of poor people as well, a lot of them actually being migrants from the Sierra...

The divide that I have seen in SA countries is between Spanish/Portugese and indians. The Europeans are on top, the indians on the bottom. The exception is Argentina where they think they are superior to everyone else in SA.

Under Toledo there was, afaik, quite some economic growth - and it doesn't seem like those who live in the Andes felt like any of it reached them (or, in fact, anyone elsewhere). When you say that is the only way, and it will "trickle down", this makes me wonder if you really expect of those that are poor to sit there and wait patiently for it to start trickling - when by their experience this so far didn't seem to happen. And that's where I hope all those of the "elites" (though here I think we have to clarify at some point also, if the elites are the very small upper class, or also the much larger middle classes - and how to define these classes in general) who are shocked right now at how someone like Humala could gain so many votes that they wer forced to vote for Alan Garcia as the lesser evil, will understand that no matter what they think of the poor, they have to take their existence into consideration... But this might be too optimistic I suppose.

None of the SA governments give any more of a damn about the indians than they have to. The mining/oil/natural gas companies do not care for the indians as such. They do care for the skilled workers they need to make money. Thus, they are willing to train the indians and even give them some health related stuff. The purpose here is to have/raise workers.

Btw, most of Peru's indígenas (I am not a big fan of the word "indio", as it is often used in a derogatory sense), do not live in the jungle, but rather in the Sierra. Apart from that I would suppose such firms would train a tiny proportion of people to a higher degree, and the others only as far as they need for the labor that firm would wnat them to do - which a slave owner wouldn't do any different.

The outside companies treat their employees better than any slave owner. It is not that the outside companies are better than the ruling classes, just that the outside companies need the poor more than the ruling classes do.

I have a lot more points, but it is already getting light outside and I can notice my command of the English language (and thinking in general) decreasing as I get more tired, so I will stop now - just one thing - whether Alan Garcia has learned his lessons is, I think, something the next five years will show. Your suggestion about having his enemies (who exactly do you mean? Humala? Humala's voters? someone else?) run small parts of the country they are bound to fail and then punish them for it, sounds to me like a quite scary mind game for the sake of revenge, and to scare people into "their place"... If I misunderstood you, I'd ask you to explain.

You do misunderstand me. I do not like dealing with idiots, as I have to deal with them most of my life. If someone has a really nifty way to run a government, I am willing to let them try [ONCE!] on a small scale if they can find willing slaves. If they fail and they almost always do, they are idiots. The world does not need more idiots. I do not give a damn about idiots, as long as they do not try to inflict themselves on me. If idiots try to inflict themselves on me I do not try to scare them. I will not go into my techniques for dealing with idiots.

 

[Munachi]

If you want to govern a country, you have to govern the WHOLE country. If you can't do something simple, like a bus schedule, you can't govern a country. [Yes, I can do a bus schedule.]

So and if they managed the bus schedule, they are left to go free, or get their next task? It seems a bit of a weird example to me, but well... let's make all of the governments in the world make bus schedules in cities of chaotic traffic, to see if they are able to govern. Yes, of course someone who governs has to govern all of a country. But of course governments tend to consist of various people that are specialists in different areas. Apart from that, the Senderistas probably had real political aspirations only in the very beginning, soon after they became a terrorist organization fighting more or less for the sake of fighting (if they even started it voluntarily and weren't one of those children that had been taken away from their villages and forced to join the Senderistas)... After all in the end those they hurt most were the rural population, thus those they had claimed they wanted to help...

If you want to install your own [perhaps a copy of a previous] system of government, why would you expect resources to do so? If you need resources, you get them freely from the governed.

Well the whole Tawantinsuyo and raza cobriza talk is because it brought him support of people, he made them see a glorious past and claimed that this was them, once...

Public library = everyone at the same address is equally guilty. You do support the public library do you not?

Sorry, but I have no idea what you mean by public library. From what I know, a library is a place where I get books.

I would, with all due respect, think that there is much more talking than thinking. It is easy to say, "We ought to do something." Much harder to actually do something.

True. Yet, if the talk about something increases, there is at least a chance that in the long run it has an influence on changed attitudes as well. There have been changes in the world before, and while the sentence "We ought to do something" in itself didn't change these things, it stood probably in the beginning of the things that did trigger the changes. Not all talk leads to action, of course, but the more talk there is, the higher the chances some of it actually leads to something happening... At least that's what I think. Talk is better than not even saying anything.

The divide that I have seen in SA countries is between Spanish/Portugese and indians. The Europeans are on top, the indians on the bottom. The exception is Argentina where they think they are superior to everyone else in SA.

On principle, you are right - Most upper class people are white, most indigenous people are very poor. Yet pointing out only that seems too simple to me...
You mentioned Argentina... Argentina's indigenous are only a tiny percentage of the population, as is the rural population (from what I read, 90% of Argentinians live in cities and towns). It's not the only country in that, though... The situation in Chile is similar, and just as Argentina, it's population is mainly "white" (a very vague term, of course). It is true, that the richer people tend to be "whiter", and the few indigenous people that live there are almost all quite poor, but it can't be the only divide, else there would be a huge number of rich people and only very few poor. Also, since you mentioned Argentina, if the divide is between Spanish and "indians", where does that leave, for example, the people of Italian descent? In some areas, like in the Carribbean or I would think parts of Brazil (though I haven't been there), the divide seems to be also between white and black. In a lot of countries there is a high degree of either mestizaje or creolization, or both processes (and I don#t wnat to get too deep into the differences here, and the theories connected to them) - and even in the South American countries with the highest percentages of indigenous people, that is, Bolivia, Peru, and Ecuador, there are processes of mixture, and ethnic categories are vague.

None of the SA governments give any more of a damn about the indians than they have to. The mining/oil/natural gas companies do not care for the indians as such. They do care for the skilled workers they need to make money. Thus, they are willing to train the indians and even give them some health related stuff. The purpose here is to have/raise workers.

Well, but how many skilled workers does a company need? And how many very lowly skilled workers does it need, workers taht hopefully don't have skills they could use elsewhere as well, and thus end up leaving or even demanding higher wages? My impression is, that their main itnerest is cheap workers. Like, people who can crawl in mines (preferably children), or who can pick fruits, or whatever else they are wanting out of the country.

The outside companies treat their employees better than any slave owner. It is not that the outside companies are better than the ruling classes, just that the outside companies need the poor more than the ruling classes do.

Those "slave owners" you speak about need the poor as much as foreign companies do. If the owner of a mine or a plantation or similar, who is part of a country's upper class, treats them like slaves and knows they won't leave because if they do he'd easily find someone else of the many poor people in search for work - what would make the situation different for a foreign owned company or mine?

You do misunderstand me. I do not like dealing with idiots, as I have to deal with them most of my life. If someone has a really nifty way to run a government, I am willing to let them try [ONCE!] on a small scale if they can find willing slaves. If they fail and they almost always do, they are idiots. The world does not need more idiots. I do not give a damn about idiots, as long as they do not try to inflict themselves on me. If idiots try to inflict themselves on me I do not try to scare them. I will not go into my techniques for dealing with idiots.

Well, believe me or not, I don't like dealing with idiots either. That's part of the reason of why I avoid going into politics. Certain rights, however, apply even to idiots, and just being an idiot is not enough reason to be subjected to "draconian penalties".

 

[R. Richard]

So and if they managed the bus schedule, they are left to go free, or get their next task? It seems a bit of a weird example to me, but well... let's make all of the governments in the world make bus schedules in cities of chaotic traffic, to see if they are able to govern. Yes, of course someone who governs has to govern all of a country. But of course governments tend to consist of various people that are specialists in different areas. Apart from that, the Senderistas probably had real political aspirations only in the very beginning, soon after they became a terrorist organization fighting more or less for the sake of fighting (if they even started it voluntarily and weren't one of those children that had been taken away from their villages and forced to join the Senderistas)... After all in the end those they hurt most were the rural population, thus those they had claimed they wanted to help...

You stated the principle behind my solution: "governments tend to consist of various people that are specialists in different areas." The Senderistas are terrorists, pure and simple. I give the captured ones simple, relevant tasks. If the captured ones, or volunteer Senderistas do not do the required tasks in good order, I would apply severe punishment. Not punishment in private, punishment in public. "Did you complete your bus schedules?" "No!" Punishment follows.

Well the whole Tawantinsuyo and raza cobriza talk is because it brought him support of people, he made them see a glorious past and claimed that this was them, once...

If a man lies, let him live his lie!

Sorry, but I have no idea what you mean by public library. From what I know, a library is a place where I get books.

If you don;t take the books back , in good condition and on time, the public library set punishment. The punishment applies to everyone living at the same address.

True. Yet, if the talk about something increases, there is at least a chance that in the long run it has an influence on changed attitudes as well. There have been changes in the world before, and while the sentence "We ought to do something" in itself didn't change these things, it stood probably in the beginning of the things that did trigger the changes. Not all talk leads to action, of course, but the more talk there is, the higher the chances some of it actually leads to something happening... At least that's what I think. Talk is better than not even saying anything.

I must disagree. It is far too easy for talk to replace action. Ignoring a problem will eventually bring public condemnation. Talk will then substitute for action.

On principle, you are right - Most upper class people are white, most indigenous people are very poor. Yet pointing out only that seems too simple to me...
You mentioned Argentina... Argentina's indigenous are only a tiny percentage of the population, as is the rural population (from what I read, 90% of Argentinians live in cities and towns). It's not the only country in that, though... The situation in Chile is similar, and just as Argentina, it's population is mainly "white" (a very vague term, of course). It is true, that the richer people tend to be "whiter", and the few indigenous people that live there are almost all quite poor, but it can't be the only divide, else there would be a huge number of rich people and only very few poor. Also, since you mentioned Argentina, if the divide is between Spanish and "indians", where does that leave, for example, the people of Italian descent? In some areas, like in the Carribbean or I would think parts of Brazil (though I haven't been there), the divide seems to be also between white and black. In a lot of countries there is a high degree of either mestizaje or creolization, or both processes (and I don#t wnat to get too deep into the differences here, and the theories connected to them) - and even in the South American countries with the highest percentages of indigenous people, that is, Bolivia, Peru, and Ecuador, there are processes of mixture, and ethnic categories are vague.

Quote Argentina, "The Mexicans descended from the Aztecs. The Peruvian's descended from the Inca's. We descended from the boat." You say that there are processes of mixture. I say, not really. In the backwoods of the US, there is an old saying, "My name is Sam and I don't give a damn! I'd rather be a n***er than a poor white man." The indians are poor because they are indians, of course. But if a "white man" lets himself be poor, he is beneath contempt. And, a white man who mixes his blood with "the lower classes" is even worse.

Well, but how many skilled workers does a company need? And how many very lowly skilled workers does it need, workers taht hopefully don't have skills they could use elsewhere as well, and thus end up leaving or even demanding higher wages? My impression is, that their main itnerest is cheap workers. Like, people who can crawl in mines (preferably children), or who can pick fruits, or whatever else they are wanting out of the country.

A foreign company that intends to make a lot of money in mining/oil/gas needs a certain number of skilled workers. Those workers are not obtained from the local Shaman. Those workers are usually trained by the company. The company will also make efforts to insure that the children are educated enough to provide replacement workers as needed. True, the educated workers will eventually demand more money. However, the labor that the educated worker produce is more valuable than the higher wages. It is not about people, it is about money, however, the people benefit.

If you think of exploitation by foreign companies, think of Mexico. In Mexico, young Mexican boys work in dimly lit, poorly ventilated mine shafts for Mexican employers. The mines wanted to use apes, but the animal rights people stopped that. No one cares about young Mexican boys [well, maybe young Mexican girls to a small extent.]

Those "slave owners" you speak about need the poor as much as foreign companies do. If the owner of a mine or a plantation or similar, who is part of a country's upper class, treats them like slaves and knows they won't leave because if they do he'd easily find someone else of the many poor people in search for work - what would make the situation different for a foreign owned company or mine?

A plantation is different from a modern mine/oil well/gas well. A clever, heartless ass hole can use slaves on a plantation. A company that runs modern mines/oil wells/gas wells needs skilled workers, not ignorant slaves. The modern mine/oil well/gas well people are in no way better than the clever, heartless plantation owner. The modern mine/oil well/gas well people just need better workers.

Well, believe me or not, I don't like dealing with idiots either. That's part of the reason of why I avoid going into politics. Certain rights, however, apply even to idiots, and just being an idiot is not enough reason to be subjected to "draconian penalties".

Munachi, if you allow them to breed, you get more idiots! How can you, as an educated man, agree to allow the production of more idiots? Of course the solutions have to be draconian. An entirely unskilled idiot can produce idiots at the rate of one a year or even more. The problem needs to be nipped in the bud [or, in this case, buds.]

 

[NoJo]

I feel I really should edit out my "Paddington Bear" post.

 

[Munachi]

I feel I really should edit out my "Paddington Bear" post.

ah no, don't! it's the best response in this thread!

 

[Munachi]

You stated the principle behind my solution: "governments tend to consist of various people that are specialists in different areas." The Senderistas are terrorists, pure and simple. I give the captured ones simple, relevant tasks. If the captured ones, or volunteer Senderistas do not do the required tasks in good order, I would apply severe punishment. Not punishment in private, punishment in public. "Did you complete your bus schedules?" "No!" Punishment follows.

Well I agree. The Senderistas are terrorists. I have never said anything different. What I don't follow with is the weird method of giving them assignments and punish them for not fulfilling those, instead of punishing them for them for their crimes. What do you do if they end up fulfilling the assignment?

If a man lies, let him live his lie!

It's all a bit simplified. The whole "We are Incas, our kingdom is the Tawantinsuyo" thing is part of Peruvian national myth for a long time, and used by a lot of people in a lot of contexts. It's not reflecting realities, imho, but it's not as simple as just being a lie. Nor do I know what Humalas plan exactly was in that...

If you don;t take the books back , in good condition and on time, the public library set punishment. The punishment applies to everyone living at the same address.

Well around here, the person on whose name the books were taken out of the library is the one that gets punished (i.e. pays the fine). Which usually is the person who took the books out - as no one else can do that on their card. Or if they gave away their card (which they aren't supposed to do) it is considered their fault. If my flatmate looses a book, why would I have to pay a fine? In the case of families the fine might affect all the family's finance, but that is family-intern business - from the library's point of view the person on whose card the book was taken out gets punished.

I must disagree. It is far too easy for talk to replace action. Ignoring a problem will eventually bring public condemnation. Talk will then substitute for action.

True. It often happens. Yet, talk is still better than not even talk.

Quote Argentina, "The Mexicans descended from the Aztecs. The Peruvian's descended from the Inca's. We descended from the boat." You say that there are processes of mixture. I say, not really. In the backwoods of the US, there is an old saying, "My name is Sam and I don't give a damn! I'd rather be a n***er than a poor white man." The indians are poor because they are indians, of course. But if a "white man" lets himself be poor, he is beneath contempt. And, a white man who mixes his blood with "the lower classes" is even worse.

funny quote. of course as inaccurate as this type of jokes tend to be, even though with a grain of truth in it. i would think there is mixture. of course the question is what you understand of mixture - genetic? cultural? something else? the "purest" people would be those living in the very far countryside (i.e. in villages that are difficult to access etc.) while for example the people in the village i worked in, which was close enough to a bigger town, clearly had mixed traces look wise (varying from those that would pass as a local in Southern Europe to those that still looked quite indigenous), thus were mixed genetically, and culturally they clearly didn't live in a traditional way anymore, though part of their life had influences of traditional culture and believes. For the richer, I must admit, it is a bit different, as i said, the richer people are, the whiter they tend to be, but in the upper middle classes there are quite a few exceptions, and I have met people who got to financially well positions who were clearly of mixed heritages.

A foreign company that intends to make a lot of money in mining/oil/gas needs a certain number of skilled workers. Those workers are not obtained from the local Shaman. Those workers are usually trained by the company. The company will also make efforts to insure that the children are educated enough to provide replacement workers as needed. True, the educated workers will eventually demand more money. However, the labor that the educated worker produce is more valuable than the higher wages. It is not about people, it is about money, however, the people benefit.

Well, I am no expert in economics, and know little about how mining or oil or gas companies work. It seems to me that the number of skilled workers they need will be a lot smaller than the number of people looking for work, and that so far in countries that have a lot of these companies the general situation of the poor hasn't improved, but really I can't say much on that, and don't know what would work best there. The thing is, I believe in general, that there usually aren#t simple solutions. There isn't a one-fit-all method to heal the problems of every poor country, so your method might just sound too simple to me, and that makes me doubt it somehow. That, and I haven't seen actual proof yet.

The question that is more interesting to me, though, is not what would work best, but rather why people voted the way they did - even more so, if according to you the opposite of it would be best to you.

If you think of exploitation by foreign companies, think of Mexico. In Mexico, young Mexican boys work in dimly lit, poorly ventilated mine shafts for Mexican employers. The mines wanted to use apes, but the animal rights people stopped that. No one cares about young Mexican boys [well, maybe young Mexican girls to a small extent.]

What I still don't understand is why the local mining firms and the foreign mining firms approach things so differently - with the local firms trying to get most out of people by exploiting them, and the foreign firms by educating them - if this is a lot better for the firm, why does the local firm not realize that? is it stupidity on the local's side? and why are the locals stupid and the foreigners smart? and when the locals realize what the foreigners do, why do they never copy them?

A plantation is different from a modern mine/oil well/gas well. A clever, heartless ass hole can use slaves on a plantation. A company that runs modern mines/oil wells/gas wells needs skilled workers, not ignorant slaves. The modern mine/oil well/gas well people are in no way better than the clever, heartless plantation owner. The modern mine/oil well/gas well people just need better workers.

So foreign agricultural firms (like, producing tropical fruits ore similar) wouldn't be good for a country, then, in your opinion? so, should they allow only mining, oil, and gas firms to establish themselves there?

Munachi, if you allow them to breed, you get more idiots! How can you, as an educated man, agree to allow the production of more idiots? Of course the solutions have to be draconian. An entirely unskilled idiot can produce idiots at the rate of one a year or even more. The problem needs to be nipped in the bud [or, in this case, buds.]

Well, as annoying as idiots are, they still have a right to exist, and even the right to breed. Knowing lots of idiot children of great parents, and great people with idiot parents, I somehow doubt idiocy is genetic, but apart from that the question is who decides who is an idiot. If you don't allow idiots to breed, best by getting rid of them, I would be quite worried that those who think of me as an idiot (and they exist, in a fair number) might get into power.

 

[R. Richard]

Well I agree. The Senderistas are terrorists. I have never said anything different. What I don't follow with is the weird method of giving them assignments and punish them for not fulfilling those, instead of punishing them for them for their crimes. What do you do if they end up fulfilling the assignment?

If the Senderistas can indeed run a government, why not invite them in to help run the government? It is difficult to get competent people in government, I would use what is available. Of course, at least 99.99% of Senderistas are pure and simple terrorists whose highest and best use is as an example for other would be lawbreakers.

It's all a bit simplified. The whole "We are Incas, our kingdom is the Tawantinsuyo" thing is part of Peruvian national myth for a long time, and used by a lot of people in a lot of contexts. It's not reflecting realities, imho, but it's not as simple as just being a lie. Nor do I know what Humalas plan exactly was in that...

If it does not reflect reality and it is not a lie, it is insanity by classical definition.

Well, I am no expert in economics, and know little about how mining or oil or gas companies work. It seems to me that the number of skilled workers they need will be a lot smaller than the number of people looking for work, and that so far in countries that have a lot of these companies the general situation of the poor hasn't improved, but really I can't say much on that, and don't know what would work best there. The thing is, I believe in general, that there usually aren#t simple solutions. There isn't a one-fit-all method to heal the problems of every poor country, so your method might just sound too simple to me, and that makes me doubt it somehow. That, and I haven't seen actual proof yet.

In a well run business, you don't depend on having just enough trained people and no more. [What happens if one of your trained people gets run over by the proverbial truck?] Thus, the well run business will train more people than it really needs. If the well trained people can't get jobs with the big company, they will start their own little businesses in a free economy. Is it perfect? No, but it does work. The idiot Karl Marx saw a class struggle that would eventually destroy capitalism. Instead, people like Henry Ford needed better trained, better paid workers and capitalism marched on as communism sank in the East.

The question that is more interesting to me, though, is not what would work best, but rather why people voted the way they did - even more so, if according to you the opposite of it would be best to you.

Let me give you an assignment. If you send people to insane schools where they are taught to memorize instead of learn, if the material they memorize is mainly lies or insanity that they are taught to accept as the truth, what kind of adult do you get out of the system? [Hint: The graduates are your voters.]

What I still don't understand is why the local mining firms and the foreign mining firms approach things so differently - with the local firms trying to get most out of people by exploiting them, and the foreign firms by educating them - if this is a lot better for the firm, why does the local firm not realize that? is it stupidity on the local's side? and why are the locals stupid and the foreigners smart? and when the locals realize what the foreigners do, why do they never copy them?

Capital! Undercapitalized firms exploit their workers of necessity. Properly capitalized firms train their workers to maximize the firm's profits, assuming that the firm needs trained workers. Of course, even properly capitalized firms emplloy idiots in management and things do not always run smoothly.

So foreign agricultural firms (like, producing tropical fruits ore similar) wouldn't be good for a country, then, in your opinion? so, should they allow only mining, oil, and gas firms to establish themselves there?

A country should attempt to develop a broad range of economic activity. If a country is rich in agricultural resources, then agriculture should be developed. Of course, industry should also be developed so that when some idiot tries to exploit agricultural workers, the agricultural workers have other choices.

Well, as annoying as idiots are, they still have a right to exist, and even the right to breed. Knowing lots of idiot children of great parents, and great people with idiot parents, I somehow doubt idiocy is genetic, but apart from that the question is who decides who is an idiot. If you don't allow idiots to breed, best by getting rid of them, I would be quite worried that those who think of me as an idiot (and they exist, in a fair number) might get into power.

The best way to determine if a person is an idiot is via testing. It is currently practical to develop very realistic scenarios where the competent will achieve good results and the idiot will fail. The testing does not need to consist of a single trial and, in fact, multiple trials should be encouraged.

I had a friend who was very good with machines and mechanics. He was an idiot with math. The idiots/insane who ran the schools where I met the guy managed to convince him he should be an engineer. He failed several times trying to pass engineering math. I finally managed to convince him to try machinist. He became a top machinist, one of the best in the business according to other machinists. I wouldn't know, I am an idiot machinist. The point is, he doesn't do math, I don't do machines.

 

[Munachi]

If the Senderistas can indeed run a government, why not invite them in to help run the government? It is difficult to get competent people in government, I would use what is available. Of course, at least 99.99% of Senderistas are pure and simple terrorists whose highest and best use is as an example for other would be lawbreakers.

Well hadn't we already agreed on that they are terrorists? And even if some of them are competent (and I am quite sure more than you say are - there were quite a few studied people between them) they would still remain terrorists and someone who did certain things, including murder, should not be in a government, no matter how competent in certain areas.

As for examples - I don't think your way works as an example. I don't know what the right example would have been - or if "examples" are what would have been necessary, after all both the Peruvian army and the Senderistas set thousands of "examples" - usually by killing villagers whom they claimed to suspect of cooperating with the other side.

What should, and did to some extent, happen is that those caught should go to prison, instead of playing games with them...

If it does not reflect reality and it is not a lie, it is insanity by classical definition.

I agree, it does not reflect reality. As all the various national foundation myths and the idea of a nation as a somehow common origin of people in general... Unfortunately people seem to have a need to find a common ground to form a "We" on - and if they have to change reality for it.

In a well run business, you don't depend on having just enough trained people and no more. [What happens if one of your trained people gets run over by the proverbial truck?] Thus, the well run business will train more people than it really needs. If the well trained people can't get jobs with the big company, they will start their own little businesses in a free economy. Is it perfect? No, but it does work. The idiot Karl Marx saw a class struggle that would eventually destroy capitalism. Instead, people like Henry Ford needed better trained, better paid workers and capitalism marched on as communism sank in the East.

As I said, I don't know enough about economy, nor do I really want to discuss it. All countries in South America seem to have their various phases of capitalist governments, that allowed foreign companies a lot of freedom - the results seem to have varied a lot...

Let me give you an assignment. If you send people to insane schools where they are taught to memorize instead of learn, if the material they memorize is mainly lies or insanity that they are taught to accept as the truth, what kind of adult do you get out of the system? [Hint: The graduates are your voters.]

Which brings us back to one of my points in the beginning - if those, that claim to see the solution (like those in favor of your ideas, or of whatever other ideas) ignore the poor, don't work on educating them, on letting them see the chances these people see or believe to see for them, then they can't complain about the poor falling for someone like Ollanta Humala.

Of course, there are those that didn't even get to go to school, or not more than a few years... Anyway, education is quite a problem in Peru and other South American countries. Most people would like to send their children to better schools, but they can't afford the cost of said schools, or the money for the school bus even if it is just about a public school, or to have their children not contribute to the family's survival with their work. And some don't have a school nearby enough, anyway. I spoke to one teacher in a small community in an area in the Ocongate or Paucartambo district (not sure) about a day's foot march from the nearest street. He told me about this one student, who would just never turn up for class, and he wondered why, so he decided to visit her and ask. In the end he had to give up his plan, though, because he realized that she lived about a two day's walk away.

Anyway, I am not sure I agree with your ideas of what system would help Peruvians best, but whatever it is, there is something of a vicious circle if they are stuck in a situation that makes it hard for them to make a really knowing decision... Lourdes Flores, the conservative candidate, and third after Humala and Garcia, and the one I would have hoped to win (and that even though usually I am not that much in favor of conservatives... but it's a case by case thing) had the problem of being seen as the candidate of the rich. That's probably why she lost, because the rich are fewer than the poor. For her to win she would have had to find a way to get away from that image - not sure of course whether that would have been possible. Either way, I guess you can't blame her, nor can you really blame Humala or Garcia (though I find both of them scary), and you definitely can't blame the poor... I guess it all rather goes back to that things can't change until something changes.

Well, I don't know...

Capital! Undercapitalized firms exploit their workers of necessity. Properly capitalized firms train their workers to maximize the firm's profits, assuming that the firm needs trained workers. Of course, even properly capitalized firms emplloy idiots in management and things do not always run smoothly.

A country should attempt to develop a broad range of economic activity. If a country is rich in agricultural resources, then agriculture should be developed. Of course, industry should also be developed so that when some idiot tries to exploit agricultural workers, the agricultural workers have other choices.

well, one can only hope you are right... I am still doubtful, but am getting tired of turning around and around of the same arguments. Problem is though, even the foreign companies don't necessarily seem interested in a broad range, but rather in just working on what brings them best profit, resulting in areas concentrated on just one thing... And more and more people going there hoping for a job - but only some ending up with one, and still with the fear of loosing it.

One thing I am somewhat torn on is the question on economic development and loss of culture. In a modern economy, some regions like for example the high punas, might not be "useful" (except maybe for alpaca farming), yet they have been the home of people and their culture for thousands of years...

The best way to determine if a person is an idiot is via testing. It is currently practical to develop very realistic scenarios where the competent will achieve good results and the idiot will fail. The testing does not need to consist of a single trial and, in fact, multiple trials should be encouraged.

I had a friend who was very good with machines and mechanics. He was an idiot with math. The idiots/insane who ran the schools where I met the guy managed to convince him he should be an engineer. He failed several times trying to pass engineering math. I finally managed to convince him to try machinist. He became a top machinist, one of the best in the business according to other machinists. I wouldn't know, I am an idiot machinist. The point is, he doesn't do math, I don't do machines.

Well what kind of testing? and how to differenciate between an "idiot" and someone who just had little access to education? What about those that are "idiots" because subnutrition didn't allowed their brains to develop they would have else?

What, according to you, is exactly an idiot? And what, according to you, should happen to them?

 

[Munachi]

How can you, as an educated man, agree to allow the production of more idiots?

forgot to reply to this yesterday. while i'd like to think of myself as educated, i am not an educated man...

 

[NoJo]

forgot to reply to this yesterday. while i'd like to think of myself as educated, i am not an educated man...

Don't belittle yourself so.

 

[Munachi]

Don't belittle yourself so.

erm...