The only game in town?
11.18.2006Technorati tags: Bolivia politics Evo Morales
Just a quick note on Bolivia's constituent assembly (I'm swamed w/ grading). Seems MAS has decided to impose its will w/o compromise over the rest of the constituent assembly delegates — votes in the CA will be based on simple majority rules (see La Razón article). Majority rule sounds quite democratic to most people. But modern liberal democracy also rests, of course, on minority rights. But more importantly, modern liberal democracies also relly on broad consensus (or even "pacts") that reduce the willingness to seek extra-constitutional means (e.g. military coups, secession, civil war, etc.) to secure one's interests. Riding roughshod over the opposition — especially one w/ a sizeable (and powerful) constituency — is dangerous.
What are the implications? Opposition assembly members (who make up about 40% of the body) now argue that their presence in the assembly "isn't necessary" (see La Razón article). If the opposition delegates decide that the assembly won't respect their views, or that MAS will simply impose a new constitution upon them, they'll have little incentive to respect the new document as legitimate. Regardless of what one thinks of the MAS project — or what one thinks of the Podemos-led opposition — Evo Morales' government must negotiate in good faith w/ its opponents.
And not just its opponents. Because MAS alone has a slight majority in the assembly, it can impose any document it chooses. Now, even anti-neoliberal, anti-systemic delegates who had MAS sympathies (like AS & ASP) are grumbling. David Vargas (ASP delegate & leader of the February 2003 police mutiny that attacked the presidential palace) argues that the assembly should just go home, since his votes no longer matter (MAS has the required votes).
In Linz & Stepan Przeworski's famous phrase, democracy only survives when all actors believe that it's "the only game in town." But if political actors (like Podemos, Unidad Nacional, the MNR, other opponents of the MAS-led government) don't think the game is fair, that the rules are stacked against them, they'll start looking for another game to play. And, in Latin America, historically that has been the coup game.
-----
NOTE: I got fact-checked. The phrase "only game in town" was coined by Przeworski, from whom Linz & Stepan borrowed it. Apologies for the oversight.
Posted by Miguel at 10:47 AM
Comments
But can't you make the same argument on behalf of MAS? They've played the election game and won, but they still see the rules stacked against them. So they are trying to change the game, a little.
So everyone has to negotiate and decide how hard to push. It's risky. But this is MAS's big chance, right?
--JW
Posted by: John at November 20, 2006 04:18 PM
I understand what you're getting at, JW. And, yes, one could make the same argument either way. And if so, then Podemos should negotiate a set of consensus rules that would prevent any major group (i.e. MAS supporters) from feeling like they weren't being listened to. The point is that establishing a broad social consensus is extremely difficult. But it can't be made form a majoritarian position (which is my point); it must be negotiated w/ even the majority agreeing to give up some ground.
Posted by: mcentellas ![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.centellas.org/miguel/nav-commenters.gif)
at November 20, 2006 07:08 PM
Maybe (while they're in Sucre by themselves?) MAS will moderate what they produce so that there is reasonable hope that the whole package will get 2/3rds. Maybe there will even be a post-CA addition, like the US Bill of Rights, that would make it all acceptable.
Here's hoping.
--JW
Posted by: John at November 21, 2006 06:42 AM
A democracy is consolidated when " given policial and economic conditions a particular sistem of institutions becomes the only game in town" (Pzeworski 1991, p 26) Furthermore, "democracy is consolidated only when it becomes self-reinforcing". (ibid).
Posted by: ani at November 30, 2006 12:57 PM
Post a comment