Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site whuxl.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!mhuxn!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!orb From: orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Re: Nicaraguan Parallel: Some key facts Message-ID: <717@whuxl.UUCP> Date: Mon, 30-Sep-85 17:59:11 EDT Article-I.D.: whuxl.717 Posted: Mon Sep 30 17:59:11 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 2-Oct-85 06:11:28 EDT References: <7800427@inmet.UUCP> <7800454@inmet.UUCP> Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Whippany Lines: 110 Once again we have the familiar refrain that any movement towards Socialism in *any way* is necessarily a move towards Communism. Furthermore that such a move is inevitably a move towards the repression of Soviet communism. This time the attack is focussed on Nicaragua, in the past it has included everything from the possibility of Eurocommunists in coalition with Socialists coming to power in Europe, to the "Communistic tendencies" of a Martin Luther King. Let's look at Jan Wasilewsky's attacks on Nicaragua: > > > I agree with you to the extent that repression in Nicaragua is not > (for now) on the Soviet, or Chinese, or Cuban scale. > What I was arguing was that the *machinery* of repression > is in place; so that, there being no checks or balances, > it is merely a matter of *policy* when this > machinery starts working full speed. Let me ask a question, is it "totalitarianism" if the supposedly "totalitarian" party garners only 65% of the vote in elections? Would you ever find such results in the Soviet Union? Of course not, yet these were the results in Nicaragua's recent elections. Opposition parties were allowed to run and as noted obtained 35% of the vote and consequently 35% representation in the legislative assembly. This is no more "totalitarian" than similar lopsided margins in Mexico and India, or shall we mention it, Mayor Daley's Cook County Machine. Whether such a lopsided victory is healthy, anymore than past dominance of many American cities by political machines was healthy, may be questioned. But to say that it approaches Soviet totalitarianism is absurd. There are further interesting parallels to be drawn between machine politics and the Sandinistas. Did it mean that Cook County had no democracy or opportunity for democracy because every precinct had an "informer" called the precinct captain to serve as the liason between constituents and the political machine? Or did the precinct captain serve an important function in relaying citizens concerns to the machine? It is entirely possible that what some see as some completely malevolent activity (namely Sandinistas in local districts representing their party to that district) may have beneficial effects in providing Nicaraguans with some direct input into their government. The most important point is that the Sandinistas at the local level, like precinct captains in American political machines, be held accountable by the *vote* for their action or lack of action in helping local citizens. > > Now for some detail: > > > > - no dissent within the ruling Party; > > > Please provide evidence of no dissent within Sandanista party. > > I meant, of course, *open* dissent. I think the onus is on you. > Proving the absence of something is kind of hard. > I believe this item very important. If you could demonstrate > significant factionalism, spilling out into general public, > in Sandinista Party (as there was in Russia till mid-twenties, > and in Germany till summer 1934), I would revise my > estimate of Nicaragua from "totalitarian" to "incipient > totalitarian". Why do you need to prove dissent in the *Sandinista Party*!! The dissent quite openly won 35% of the legislative seats, and they were *not* Sandinistas. How much dissent was there among Cook County Democrats while Mayor Daley held sway? The dissenting parties were also allowed TV time equal to the Sandinistas and are negotiating for regular TV and radio time throughout the year and not just during campaigns. > > I've read of at least one informer per every block. > I've read of at least one precinct captain per several blocks in Chicago. So? > > > > - a network of Party-affiliated organizations covering all > > > areas of life, cradle to grave; > > > Evidence? > > Sketchy, but non-contradictory. > The kindergarten picture I started with, peasant cooperatives, > unions, illiteracy elimination groups, militia, all this wonderful > stuff - it is all under party leadership, isn't it ? > I suppose you preferred the "cradle-to-grave" control exercised by Somoza's family which *by itself* owned 70% of all the land in Nicaragua. Who along with the rest of the landed aristocracy controlled and owned the nation's newspapers, businesses, TV and radio stations,etc. Moreover your information on peasant cooperatives is outdated. Lately the Nicaraguan government has been moving away from large-scale peasant cooperatives towards more dispersed smaller individual peasant holdings. How much control do you suppose peasants had over their economic livelihood when the Somozas owned 70% of the land? Do you suppose they had any say whatsoever in the control of that land? Now they have a voice in running peasant cooperatives and their own plots of land. Anti-government demonstrations were not made impossible since opposition candidates were allowed to hold campaign rallies in the recent elections. However there was intimidation when Sandinista supporters heckled opposition candidates. But then RayGun's supporters carefully cordoned off demonstrators and methodically removed their placards in the last election ... replacing them with pro-RayGun placards. Dirty tactics are unfortunately evident in various degrees in all political systems. tim sevener whuxl!orb