barrio flores

I have to say, after reading those answers, there are some truths to them, but mainly are the words of people who haven't got a clue what is going on in Bolivia.

Laserna's comments are more informed, but nevertheless, I don't think he sees the dynamics of the problem. Not to say I know it all, but this is just my opinion and I disagree with Laserna's comments. 250,000 people demonstrating in Sta. Cruz and another 100,000 in El Alto, cannot only be the work of a few irresponsible and demagogic leaders. There has to be more to it than that. We have to give those people a little more credit and think about the reason that made those people get out on the streets. However, Laserna is right, in my opinion, when he says Mesa increased the uncertainty in the country and that may have pushed the conflicts further.

As far as Gelbart and Rangel, they are simplistic views, based in political models which do not fit the reality in bolivia. Nothing more needs to be said.

I'm not so sure Gelbart & Rangel are entirely wrong. First, because the snippets were too short, really, to be insightful. I get the sense that neither is used to giving short snippets, and are unable to make clear/concise messages.

But Rangel's suggestion of institutionalization of social demands is pretty standard political science. Democracy requires not just that governments are accountable to people, but that the people channel their demands through institutional organizations (political parties in parliament). This, of course, requires legitimate/representative/effective political parties (which may not exist in Bolivia anymore).

Also, I'm not sure what Gelbart meant, exactly, but if he meant what I mean when I say that Mesa seems to misunderstand that a democracy requires both accountable politicians, representative mechanisms, the liberal rights to organize & make demands AND a state capable to enforce authority (even if just to enforce bargained demands). I'd recommend Robert Dahl's "Dilemmas of Pluralist Democracy: Autonmy v. Control" or his "After the Revolution? Authority in the Good Society".

I'm sure most people agree that demagogues play a key role. But they need two things: A) people who have nothing to lose or need/want a demagoge and B) institutions that make it easier for demagogues to exercise power. I'd recommend O'Donnell's work on "delegative democracy" (first appeared in an article in "Journal of Democracy").