La realidad de Honduras

Alex, Spain can call themselves a democracy when they get rid of a king...kings are dictators...not elected by the people...it is offensive to the US and our history for you to think you can just pop democracy on the title when you are a monarchy. We kicked out both Spain and the UK because the US wanted to be democratic not a monarchy...and do not pretend he has no power...hedoes have power..more than you want to admit..in 1975 he was designated king...2 days after the death of a dictator...you do not have a designated king if you are a democracy...it does not work that way.
According to Spanish law he is the HEAD OF STATE and he is the Commander in chief of the armed forces those are titles that belong to an elected official not an appointed one...in a democracy anyway.
Sorry I just find it offensive when in the US a revolution was fought and defined democracy in a very different way from what you are trying to define it so the US and its history has everything to do with it since they are the founders of constitutional republican democratic form of government until you rid yourself of a king you are a monarchy.

Also, in a democracy people do not get sent to jail for insulting the king...that is called freedom of speech...in the US you can insult the president to your hearts content...no one can send you to jail for it. A Basque man was jailed in Spain for insulting the king in 2005.

"Sorry I just find it offensive when in the US a revolution was fought and defined democracy in a very different way from what you are trying to define it so the US and its history has everything to do with it since they are the founders of constitutional republican democratic form of government until you rid yourself of a king you are a monarchy"
...You seem to believe that the US is the craddle of democracy - it is quite unfortunate to let you know that IT IS NOT...it was ancient Greece! The US has fought its wars - yes!- but that doesn't mean that the rest of the world has to follow its path: the rest of the world does not have to be like the US.
So, following your argument, according to you, the mere fact that a state has a king/queen makes it undemocratic - just like Spain, you say. There is a queen in UK...another one in Denmark, and Holland. Similarly, there is a king in Sweden, in Norway, in Belgium, Malaysia, Thailand, Jordan, etc. A Prince in Lichtenstein, and one in Monaco. An emperor in Japan. How about the former countries, that like Spain, have monarchs as head of state? are they undemocratic? Of course not! All these countries are either constitutional or parliamentary monarchies!!
If you think "my" definition of democracy is a bit skewed, I encourage you to seek your own info from a reputable source(I will give you a hand):
"Democracy is a political system in which government is either carried out by the people, or the power to govern is granted to elected representatives"
You can find more info in:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy
http://www.google.com/search...
You can also email the Instituto de Estudios de la Democracia, in Madrid, Spain, and ask them whether or not their country is a democracy.
http://www.uspceu.com/CNTBNR/sitio_ID/id_inde...
Have you been to Spain? I am sure you haven't. I do hope one day you can visit, and learn from Spaniards (Barcelona is exquisite!). But if you do, please review the links that I gave you before departing, and don't go around telling them that they have an undemocratic country, and that they are ruled by a dictator as a head of state. Please follow my advise and review the info - your trip will be smooth and enjoyable, and you will be saved from a total embarrassment. Spaniards are quite vociferous, opinionated, well informed and well educated people.

jutstica ?y entonces que,Es honduas. no otra,es de echo,Keep writeing,I do not spell worth a ****.I can speak it,spell it no.I will work on that.I,m back today,sitting at a air port,board.Take care

Summermoondancer wrote:

Si uds fijaron ella fue diputada del congreso en los estados unidos y secretaría de agricultura también quisiera saber ¿de que no estan de acuerdo?
Eso no es pelea que debe ser de partidos politicos de un o otro lado por motivos partidistas. Yo vivo en Honduras y tiene mucha razón que es dificíl a encontrar alguien que siente por Zelaya.¿por que? porque comitio fraude electoral y burlo de la justicia. Violo la constitución y burlo del pueblo. Ofendio a extranjeros incluyendo norteamericanos y judios y ahora el subsecretario Shannon con sus ridiculeses de acusarlo de haberlo amenazado con encarcelar y enjuiciar el hijo Hector por narcotrafico. Si no firmaba entonces supuestamente lo iva a hacer entonces yo no creo que el señor Shannon va a amenazar semejantes cosas sin evidencias eso dice una de dos cosas..si lo tienen evidencia y lo utilizaron o otro que son mentiras y invenciones de Zelaya para tratar de desacreditar lo que hicieron porque ya cambio de mente y es demasiado tarde porque ya firmo y no encuentra como recuperarse de eso viendo que ala mejor el congreso no lo va a restituir.
Hoy María Bogran candidata a la vice presdiencia con Pepe Lobo estuvo entrevistado en Frente a Frente un pograma de analisis politica en Honduras y dijo que Lobo no prometido nada a Shannon y no tuvieron reunion privados y que no tienen trato con Zelaya tampoco y todo decisiones van a ser in acuerdo y basado con la ley y que así estan esperando que pronucia la corte suprema de justicia.

...You seem to believe that the US is the craddle of democracy - it is quite unfortunate to let you know that IT IS NOT...it was ancient Greece!

Ancient Greece had a different form of democracy known as direct democracy. They are two different forms of government. The US has a representative form of democracy or in other words they are a Constitutional republic based on democratic ideals and seperation of powers. There are big differences in what was ancient Greek direct democracy and US democratic institutions. First in Greece woman were not concidered citizens they were chattel(owned slaves) also foreigners could not be citizens. Your ability to vote depended on your status in society. It was mob rule and while that is considered true or direct democracy it is not an institution that is successful. The US is considered a representative democracy built on the principal that everyone is equal. Also, the US was founded upon the ideal of rights and freedoms including the right to worship as you choose and if you choose not to worship as well. So yes the US is the cradle of modern successful democracy in that the ideal model is a representative government that represents equal rights for the people and the representatives are elected. Everyone in our government is elected except the apolitical Supreme Court and Honduras is built on that same model of Democracy. The king is the head of state in a monarchy and he is not elected therefore in Spain there is no representative democracy and direct democracy is anarchy essentially in that the little guy has no voice or choice.

The US has fought its wars - yes!- but that doesn't mean that the rest of the world has to follow its path: the rest of the world does not have to be like the US.

Um, Spain was not admitted to the UN until 1955 because of their brutal ways...they raped and pillaged the Indian populations of the Americas...they do not need to be pointing fingers about wars..we fought a war to be independent as did the other parts of Americas fight to be free from the monarchs of Spain and England and we don´t want them back.

So, following your argument, according to you, the mere fact that a state has a king/queen makes it undemocratic

Yes, it makes them not representative democracies...sorry you cannot say you have an elected head of state which is required for a representative democracy and then have a king who is clearly not elected...furthermore in a constitutional democracy or representative democracy the constitution is not just the basis for law..it is the Supreme Law of the land..and in Europe not a single country has the Constitution as their Supreme Law. Please do not use wikipedia as your source it discredits you immediately..wiki is not a reliable source since ANYONE can edit the pages on wikipedia. Also, you compliment the Spanish and you forget that they are also thieves, criminals, rapists, war mongers, and racists. Remember the video where they were kicking an Ecuadoran on the bus just because she was a stupid Indian? It is common to find racism among Spanish..and I have encountered it on a frequent basis. We had an exchange student who found it offensive that she was picked to live in a lowly Indian household even though our home was larger than hers and we were financially better off than she is in Spain. Her complaint was that Indians are beneath her because she is Spanish and white and superior. Sorry that attitude shows ignorance to me. Europeans frequently try to act superior or think they are superior to those in the Americas.

You are sure I haven´t? wouldn´t you like to know..don´t be so sure of yourself that only you have visited Spain..believe me I wouldn´t waste my time again. Spanish and English are arrogant know it alls.

Estimada Summermoondancer: entiendo si no estás de acuerdo con Zelaya, pero si así fuera siempre, que porque un presidente no complace a todos lo sacaramos por las armas del poder seguiríamos viviendo la misma política bananera en la que América Latina estuvo sumida durante años, con el beneplácito de los EU. El incidente con su mujer lo desconozco y eso pertenece a la esfera privada. Yo sólo hablo de un asunto de instituciones y de legalidad, y el señor Zelaya termina su mandato hasta el próximo año, y si queremos que nuestras democracias se vuelvan instituciones sólidas tenemos que respetar los tiempos y el mandato de la mayoría, y hacer los cambios en las urnas y no a través de la violencia de los militares: a eso se le llama GOLPE DE ESTADO.
Respecto a los ejemplos que pones de España, con todo el respeto, hay que informarse bien antes de discutir, para que los argumentos sean reales y tengan peso. Las monarquías en España, Inglaterra, Suecia y otros países europeos son simples figuras de ornato que no tienen ningún peso en la vida política de esos países.
Chávez puede gustarte o no, pero es el presidente legítimo de Venezuela.
Cuba, sin duda, es una dictadura y muchos protestamos desde años porque se abra el régimen de Castro y haya elecciones limpias y transparentes.
Por último, el hecho de que viva en EU no le quita el peso a mis opiniones, pues precisamente tuve que salir de mi país, México, porque la derecha se robó las elecciones del 2006 y desde entonces se ha desatado una cacería de brujas contra muchos segmentos que no comulgamos con el gobierno del espurio Felipe Calderón.

Summer, you don't have to believe me. You can google search "democracy in Spain" or "Democracia en Espana" and you will have hundreds of links with useful information. There are plenty of institutions that work on studying democracy not only in Spain, but in many parts of the world. You can send them your inquiries, if you want to do your own research.
"There are big differences in what was ancient Greek direct democracy and US democratic institutions. First in Greece woman were not concidered citizens they were chattel(owned slaves) also foreigners could not be citizens." Similarly, the US slaved men and women from african ascent. So, until 1960's, the US democracy only represented white people - that is why the Obama victory is so symbolic for many, particularly african americans. There are different versions of democracy, and like someone in this thread mentioned, it would be a mistake to think of it in absolute terms, just like you do.
"you compliment the Spanish and you forget that they are also thieves, criminals, rapists, war mongers, and racists. Remember the video where they were kicking an Ecuadoran on the bus just because she was a stupid Indian? It is common to find racism among Spanish."
I strongly disagree with you, and refuse to stereotype spaniards - some of them might be racist, but in my experience, that ones I've met, are not. I wouldn't call them rapists, criminals, thieves - that is so wrong! I saw the video, and there was only 1 young spaniard beating a girl, not an entire country. Indeed, they pillaged the Americas and massacred its people for nearly 300 years since 1500s - but that is history. I agree with you in the sense that the consequences of their contact (almost 500 years ago) with the local culture and societies are still felt (sometimes very subtly), including the pseudo-casts that control our countries politics and economies. Something that didn't happen in the US, as the newcomers (pilgrims) to what it was the US - european immigrants initially - did not mix (procreate) with the native population, and instead, decimated them and put them in reserves. So, as you can see, in this regard, your ancestors, just like mine, were equally racist. But like I said, that is history, and it is up to us to understand our past so we dont' keep perpetuating those beliefs (racial, ethnic, religious, etc superiority). Make no mistake: there is racism in modern Spain, as well as in the rest of Europe. There is a lot of racism in the US, particularly in the southern states [those that formerly embraced slavery]. There is racism in Honduras, as well as in the rest of Latin america.

"You are sure I haven´t? wouldn´t you like to know..don´t be so sure of yourself that only you have visited Spain..believe me I wouldn´t waste my time again. Spanish and English are arrogant know it alls"
I am glad you visited Spain and UK. You see: English and Spaniards will quickly turn into arrogant creatures when exposed to a foreigner who thinks that their countries are undemocractic just because they have kings and queens - for them, this is an abominable form of arrogance. Like I said before, your trip could have gone smooth and easy if you had learned that Europe has the strongest democracies on the planet. No offense, but I personally think their democracies, at least in Northern and Western Europe (including Spain), are way stronger than in the US or [obviously] any latin american country. I just regret I couldn't tell you this before your trip to Europe.

Summermoondancer wrote:

Please do not use wikipedia as your source it discredits you immediately..wiki is not a reliable source since ANYONE can edit the pages on wikipedia.

I use wiki for popular references - I find it quite handy and relatively accurate for simple, common encyclopedic definitions. A few years ago, Nature (the most prestigious science journal, based in the UK), published a study aiming at measuring the accuracy of Wiki and Britannica. Even though Nature's study was highly criticized in terms of the real comparison between the two, there is still a wide consensus that those two are the most reliable ENCYCLOPEDIAS ever [in the english language, at least]. Of course, I can also run a search and find peer-reviewed papers for you, if you really want accuracy and reliability - and of course you will have to be proficient understanding highly technical, specific, and often complex language. In return, you will have to stop using "El Heraldo", "La Tribuna", "El Tiempo" - awful, heavily biased manipulative honduran media.

Alex, you pretend to think you know how I did or did not act on visits to Europe...you don´t and you also assume I am white and I am not..I am Hispanic just like you and the Spanish did not intermarry with the Indian women they raped them so you are preaching to the choir...and wiki is not a good thing to use for popular reference as they are considered NOT a reliable reference since it can be edited at whim. Using local media is not considered inaccurate but an online group that you can edit yourself isn´t exactly what is considered reliable sources...yes you can edit Wiki and put anything you want there and the sources can be **** like Narconews...and Democracy Now...so that is not considered reliable..considering local media sources as accurate is always a given..and btw Tiempo is owned by Zelayas richest fan...so it doesn´t exactly work in your favor to complain about using them as a source. La Prensa has been one that have used but if you can point out a single thing that is biased in their paper outside of the opinion section then have at it...they have been right on target as have Channel six news and Televicentro..and nothing works like first hand experience as to what is going on..as I told you I live in SPS and live three blocks from the cathedral...I get an up close experience every day of my life...

Summer, you don't seem to get my point: I am not in favor neither of Mel, nor of Micheletti and his coup'sters. It was more than clear that during the honduran conflict, media has been used as a weapon...after all, the real war lies in people's mind. But people believe everything they are told by media as absolute truths, and that is particularly true in the honduran conflict...for both sides! Hence, the escalation of violence, and the major risk that a civil war might erupt. El Heraldo, Tiempo, La Prensa, La Tribuna, Televicentro, Canal 36 (Golpistas and Resistencia)...all of them are awful...they sell partial truths. Media is a business, and therefore, they will do whatever they have to in order to make a profit - distortion, censorship, descrediting, manipulation, cheap entertainment, etc.

In regards to wiki, well, you don't have to know, but I make my living as a scientific researcher - so, if there's one single thing that I was trained to do well during my adult life is to acquire, purify, integrate, analyse, synthesize and communicate information/data. Like I said before, Wiki is just an encylclopedia, as competitive as Britannica. But if you don't like what you can find there, or you distrust the information, then you can use all the resources on the internet to acquire the data you need from a credible source or institution. The "most" filtered and unbiased information can be obtained from scientific journals - publishing here is not easy as the author must follow the due process of scientific inquiry, and then submit the manuscript for review by experts in different parts of the world. Most of the time, these articles get either rejected or need considerable modifications. The bottomline: You are entitled to having your own opinion, but this doesn't necessary mean that it will be a universally accepted truth - you have to provide sound, acceptable evidence to support your claims (this can also apply to your ideas about Spain, their democracy, europeans, or whichever topic you'd like to bring in)

I never assumed you were white, but then again, people's race is a piece of information that I find highly irrelevant. However, what I find more interesting and important is people's cultural background as their worldview is highly affected by their values, beliefs, assumptions, fears, stereotypes, etc. In a world that becomes more interconnected every day, mutual understanding becomes highly relevant, and thus, the need for fostering a dialog among people becomes highly important.

Alex, since you are not here you might find this as a surprise...but there is no bordering on the edge of a civil war issue here...there is a handful of idiots that want to boycott the election at all costs..including killing folks...however, there is a great deal of security and very little chance they can succeed. I am very aware of the problems with media..for instance the AFP report that claims Hondurans are going to lose their guns...now anyone who has ever been here knows how ridiculous that is...and a general ban on carrying one on your person during elections is what is occurring. I disagree with the decision as I know for a fact that criminals will not disarm...but the US requested it and it makes no sense for Honduras. They also requested that Micheletti take a vacation during the elections...stupid...but whatever..they are recognizing them and all of this will be over come 6 days from now...the general attitude here is people just want the elections to come and be over with so we can get on with our lives. They also agree that then this will be a thing of the past and a new government will take control in two months. The international community has caused more problems than they have helped solve.

Summermoondancer wrote:

Alex, since you are not here you might find this as a surprise...but there is no bordering on the edge of a civil war issue here...there is a handful of idiots that want to boycott the election at all costs..including killing folks...however, there is a great deal of security and very little chance they can succeed. I am very aware of the problems with media..for instance the AFP report that claims Hondurans are going to lose their guns...now anyone who has ever been here knows how ridiculous that is...and a general ban on carrying one on your person during elections is what is occurring. I disagree with the decision as I know for a fact that criminals will not disarm...but the US requested it and it makes no sense for Honduras. They also requested that Micheletti take a vacation during the elections...stupid...but whatever..they are recognizing them and all of this will be over come 6 days from now...the general attitude here is people just want the elections to come and be over with so we can get on with our lives. They also agree that then this will be a thing of the past and a new government will take control in two months. The international community has caused more problems than they have helped solve.

"people believe everything they are told by media as absolute truths, and that is particularly true in the honduran conflict...for both sides! Hence, the escalation of violence, and the major risk that a civil war might erupt." If you read my last post, you will see that I am refering to the [ir]responsibility that media has in increasing people's fury, which might [potentially] lead to increasing tension among both factions, an escalation of violence that ultimately might lead to a civil war - something that is far than desirable for Honduras. Currently, the country is in peace, and let's hope it remains like that - but the risk is far from over. My concern is that, politically unsatisfied [clandestine] groups emerge and operate, like they did in the 70's and 80's - an affair that the state managed resorting on torture, kidnapping and brutal killings (desaparecidos), perpetrated by the infamous honduran military. Perhaps you can remember those sad days of the 70's and 80's in Honduras?

Un fuerte abrazo a los hermanos de Honduras...Dios los proteja y bendiga...

Kriegskinder wrote:

Un fuerte abrazo a los hermanos de Honduras...Dios los proteja y bendiga...

Gracias hermano, muy apreciado tu mensaje y tu solidaridad!

Alex, sabes que aquí tienen el dicho que la gente que matan es por algo. Yo creo que aveces eso es verdad, pero aveces no. Sí, es cierto lo que pasó en esa epoca fue triste incluso el ejemplo de los Horcones. No tengomiedo de las elecciones es la voz del pueblo y va a ver como unos 27 soldados en nuestra colonia el dia 29 crealo o no me hace sentir mas segura a saber eso como observadora.
Tengo amigas que van a estar en las mesas y todos dicimos que si algo pasa estamos preparados a morrir para defender el derecho de votar.
Mi esposo estuvo en el auacate en Olancho en los 80´s a el lo bajaron del bus para hacer su servicio militar que fue obligatorio en aquel tiempo y estuvo por 6 años eso fue de 86 a 92.

Alex,¿vas a votar? si estas en la EEUU sabes donde nesisitas ir? No importa de que lado estas pero es importante a votar.

JohnnyBoy wrote:

It is a mistake to think of a democracy in absolute terms. It is always a matter of degree. It never really happens that power is shared evenly among everybody. People vary in their ability to represent themselves, and governments vary in their ability to control the population they supposedly serve.

The US is a republic. Democracy is a theory in practice that serves us when it is convenient. Certain supreme court rulings provide that states have a right to govern even when those laws fly in the face of the tenets of the us constitution sometimes allowing for the tyranny of the majority. We enjoy freedoms beyond many many countries but those have to be tempered with absolutes in order to maintain enough governmental and military power to keep the peace at home and defend ourselves.
There are no top to bottom guarantees that we can live in a democratic republic without infringing on someone's idea of a perfect government - but we try.

I have my own particular take on the origin of democracy in Grease. I believe that democracy arose in Hellenist Grease as a means of putting together an army.

In traditional tribal societies, every able bodied adult male was expected to fall out in time of crises for the sake of defending the tribe. This system works well enough when the tribal group is small because in smaller groups where everybody knows everybody, and things like social affiliation and family membership are enough to ensure compliance.

When a tribe grows from, say, a thousand to ten thousand, things become more impersonal and social custom is no longer enough. The common solution three thousand years ago was for a tyrant to arise. He would, by force or payment, produce an army under his command. This, also, frequently produced an individual, who was apt to abuse his privilege a lot.

The Greek solution adapted in Athens was to put he troops themselves in charge of the army. The troops were divided up into (I think) twelve groups. Each group was both privileged and obliged to serve on a council for a portion of the year. They could appoint a leader, but such leaders were temporary and were obliged to go back to the council on any important decisions.

Greek democracy is justifiably celebrated for a variety of reason. Under this oligarchy of the military rule, Athens became a great success artistically, intellectually, and most importantly at the time, militarily. Athens, until it was taken by the Romans, did well for itself and enriched its population in a variety of ways.

As a model for modern societies, this sort of direct rule does not appear to be practical. At the least it requires a minority of the citizens to serve for a while in full time duty as legislators. And for better or worse, this seems often to evolve into a professional political class.