El Criador Goes Too Far

El Criador de Gorilas is a brilliant blog but its pseudonymous author – though right to attack the ignorant ranting of Quintín -  goes too far when he includes Thatcher and Nehru in his list of leaders who served longer than Hugo Chávez has (so far) and who didn’t go on to establish themselves as virtual monarchs.

While it’s true that prime ministers in nations with parliamentary systems based on the British system  exercise a degree of power comparable to that wielded by Chávez, the difference lies in the fact that that power is delegated to them by parliament and what parliament gives, it can  take away. Thatcher, who would just loved to have gone on forever as prime minister,  was removed from office by her own MPs, who saw her continuing in office as lessening their own chance of reelection.

In a presidential system with fixed terms the only way you can rid of the boss is through an impeachment system that requires special majorities and God knows what else besides to work. In Brit-style parliamentary democracies all it needs is a lost confidence or finance bill vote, or a successful heave on the back benches and it’s goodnight Vienna for the sitting prime minister.

Anyone really believe that there’s any chance of Chávez ever being impeached, no matter what he gets caught doing?

Unlike Chávez, Brian Cowen, Gordon Brown and Stephen Harper all have to watch their backs at all times if they want a decent stretch in office and they know not the day nor the hour when their party’s men in gray suits will come to tell them that the game is up.

More Mumbai Attack Posts

Here and here

Mumbai and Imperialist States of Mind

Here

Resisting

Writing about in today’s Pagina/12, Juan Gelman says,

Pakistan itself is a British creation, a buffer state between India and Afghanistan, manufactured by London from Indian territory, of course.

Note well here that Gelman, a man of the  left and an enemy of imperialism, can’t  find it in himself to mention any other factor as being relevant in the foundation of Pakistan other than the will of the British. The desires and aspirations of the millions of Muslims who didn’t want to form part of what they thought would be a state dominated by Hindus, just don’t exist. And note something else; “Indian territory”, which Gelman obviously regards as being inviolable, was itself a creation of the British imperial presence. After trashing Pakistan as a nation state Gelman naturally goes on to laud the Taliban for resisting the presence of foreigners and the Pashtun people for their age old custom of giving hospitality to strangers. Some folk, it would seem, are just not suited to the  demands of the modern world and are at their best when enacting ancient customs and endlessly, ceaselessly resisting.

It might be said that I am placing too much emphasis on the use of one or two words but remember what Gelman’s day job is, he’s a poet and a winner of the Premio Cervantes, the most important prize in Spanish letters. He knows the weight of his  words and is not some harrassed hack throwing a column together as the newspaper’s deadline looms.

Antisemitism And Anti-Zionism

Any anti-Zionist position that does not base itself on the general application of a rule or principle held to be valid for all states, and which rejects the existence of Israel and no other state is necessarily antisemitic. Israel is the product and realization of Jewish nationalism, no more and no less a logical, justifiable or legitimate nationalism than that of the Armenians, the Turks or the Moroccans. One cannot regard Jews as truly equal to the rest of humanity while granting them all rights but one, that of national self-determination, or, if allowing them the right to self-determination, demanding that it be realized to a higher standard than that demanded of other groups. The latter point is especially true if attempts are made to justify it on the basis of certain cultural characteristics alleged to be typical of Jews or the history of persecution suffered by Jews.

The rest, here