|
That seems to be the difference in Latin America, which has actually worse corpo-fascist media than we do. In the countries with good leftist leaders, the citizens and international election monitoring groups have done awesome work in creating honest, transparent election systems. Thus, it's possible for the grass roots groups, the labor unions and other activists for the majority to overcome the combo of USAID money that is pouring into rightwing candidates and causes all over Latin America (yup, our tax money), corporate and other private money and the rancid corpo-fascist press, and win elections. We don't have that possibility here, with ES&S/Diebold 'counting' all the votes with 'TRADE SECRET' code--but they do have that possibility in most of Latin America, and it really shows: leftist governments elected in Venezuela, Brazil, Argentina, Bolivia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Uruguay, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala--despite every effort of the U.S. government and allied fascists to prevent this from happening.
I have no information on Peru's vote counting system, but with U.S. "free trade for the rich" operating the country, Diebold & brethren might have invaded the system--and, if they have, could easily weight the urban vote against Humala. (Say, urban areas go 55% against Humala. They would add 5% to 10% to that, and it would look plausible in those areas.) That's where they would likely first invade--in urban areas. My sense is that Peru still has a paper ballot system, but I'm not sure. They could also have an apparent paper ballot system but with central electronic tabulation, where the vote can be fiddled (as probably occurred in Mexico in 2005). If it's a real vote count--total paper ballot, top to bottom--it will be much more difficult for the rightwing to cheat (requires overt ballot stealing, intimidation, dirty tricks, etc.--much more observable).*
I wish the Carter Center were monitoring this election (and had set up the system). I don't know that they aren't monitoring it--but I haven't heard anything about it. They, a) don't permit 'TRADE SECRET' code (or private control of the voting system), and b) have very good, on-the-ground procedures for the kinds of fraud that may occur in a paper ballot system.
With the rightwing using racism--the nastiest of tactics--intimidation, ballot box stuffing and violence are expectable. The OAS has done pretty good election monitoring in the past (but not in Mexico) and so has the EU. But OAS election monitoring was recently compromised by the U.S. State Department, in Haiti. (Fraudulent election monitoring committee using the OAS name, set up by H. Clinton). So I don't know whether to trust the OAS any more. The EU also has corporate interests at stake in Latin American elections, but the EU election monitoring group has no stain on it, that I know of. (Can't recall if they also did Mexico in '05. I think they did. So that's one stain.)
---------------------
*(Venezuela has an electronic system but it is OPEN SOURCE CODE--anyone may review the code by which the votes are tabulated--and they do a whopping 55% audit (comparison of ballots to electronic totals)--more than five times the minimum needed to detect fraud in an electronic system. In the U.S., half the states do NO AUDIT AT ALL and the other half do only a 1% audit, while using 'TRADE SECRET' CODE. Our system is made-to-order for fraud--and it's now run basically by ONE private corporation, ES&S/Diebold, which has an 80% monopoly. Guaranteed right-wing scumbag Congress, for one thing. Venezuela's system was set up by the Carter Center, with participation of all parties. Though it is electronic, it is virtually fraud-proof. No system is perfect, but, as electronic systems go, Venezuela's is the best in the world--and ours is the worst. Small wonder that they have a kickass, "New Deal" type, leftist government, and free health care and free education through college).
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(892 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
