Zcom_simple

Hello,

Blogs are a familiar feature on the internet - where users post content in an accumulating manner, with comments, and search options, etc. They facilitate expression and exploration, and via attached comments, also debate and synthesis.


Reading and
Navigating Blogs

Our blogs are quite powerful. Each writer can post, as is typically the case. Sustainers who have the option can also post, however. All Blogs appear in the blog system, and sometimes also in content boxes the top page of ZNet - and always via the left menu of the top page - and can be found via searches, etc.

Commenting on blogs follows the blogs, attached at the bottom, and blog comments, like all others, are also visible in many places that show comments including in the forum system. In addition, the entire blog system gathers content for everyone - but one can look at the accumulating content in many ways.

  • For example one can look at one writer's efforts - so one is seeing what is effectively a blog system for that one writer, or Sustainer.
  • One can also look at the content by topic, seeing blogs that are tagged as being about a certain topic - or place, as well. Thus, when doing that, it is a blog system about a topic, or a place, with many contributors.
  • One can look at only writer blogs, or only sustainer blogs, as well.
  • One can look at blogs for particular Groups, too.

All this is easily done using the left menu. Searches allow even more variables and refinements.


Creating Blog Posts

If you are a Sustainer with permission, and are logged in, you will see a link in the left menu for you to post a blog - and you can use that to post one, and then tag it various ways (such as with a topic or place, or a group tag), and once you do, it is in the system with you as the author.

You can also use the console button to the left to post a blog - anytime and from anywhere in the site, as long as you are logged in.

Meanwhile, enjoy the blogs - and, by the way, if you are a Free Member or a Sustainer with a ZSpace page, of course you can put one or more content boxes on it, pulling blog links of any sort you may want to filter for, for example, by you or by your friends or by others - and by topic, about places, for groups, etc.

Blogs

Costa Rican Democracy & CAFTA

By Noam Chomsky at May 18, 2005


Change Text Size a- | A+
Why did the US tolerate Costa Rican democracy, even social democracy, a pattern so radically different from the rest of the region? It's a question that interested me a great deal in the 1980s, in the context of the US wars in Central America, and the serious pressures on Costa Rica to adhere more closely to the model of the US terror states and to unravel its social democracy in favor of neoliberal principles. I reviewed the declassified record, and what other sources I could find, and wrote a chapter about it (one of the appendices) in Necessary Illusions (1989). In brief, the US was willing to tolerate Costa Rican social democracy as long as the government dealt very harshly with labor and the left, and remained the best friend US investors ever had, as the US Ambassador put it. Details are there. By the 1980s, some problems were developing. One was what I just mentioned about Costa Rica within US plans for the region. Another was that Jose Figueres, who was the leading figure of Central American democracy and highly regarded in the US (once he fell into line in the 50s), was saying unacceptable things about Nicaragua. He was strongly anti-Sandinista, but was calling on the US to let Nicaraguans deal with their own problems instead of carrying out a brutal terrorist war against them. He was also one of the observers of the 1984 election, and like the others (including the professional association of Latin American scholars, a very hostile Dutch government delegation, and others) regarded them as basically fair elections. But that was all unacceptable. By doctrinal fiat, the elections didn't take place, and the idea that Nicaraguans should run their own affairs was totally unacceptable pretty much across the spectrum. Therefore the leading voice of Central American democracy had to be frozen out of the media. Other problems were that Costa was insufficiently supportive of Washington's terror wars, and even took some action against them. Totally unacceptable of course, but in the context of the times, it would have been impossible to extend the state terrorist programs to Costa Rica. More studies and information have come out since, some of which I've brought up here and there. But to my knowledge nothing has come along to change the general picture. On CAFTA, there is plenty of resistance throughout the region. Costa Rica is the only country that has something like a functioning democracy. The others are pretty much as described by the leading scholar of "democracy promotion," particularly in Latin America, the neo-Reaganite director of the Carnegie Endowment program on law and democracy. As he points out in the standard scholarly work on the period, the US was willing to tolerate only "top-down forms of democracy" that left power in the hands of the traditional elites linked to American power in highly undemocratic societies. He's not a critic, but a strong supporter of the policies, and is writing also from an insider's standpoint, having been in Reagan's State Department working on "democracy enhancement." But he's honest enough to describe the facts. It's much like the famous "New Europe" of 2003, the real hope for democracy: namely, countries that rejected the will of the large majority of the population and followed orders from Crawford Texas.
Person

CR + CAFTA

By Bolanos, Pablo at Apr 03, 2007 06:42 AM

A refreshing comment by professor Chomsky. I could add that the opposition against CAFTA is strong despite extense propaganda led by a journal well known by professor Chomsky, far-wing La Nacion, which continues to cite hypothetical CAFTA-derived benefits which mostly apply to textile industries, an industry whose economic input is low. The same journal has acknowledged that more pressing to our economy is the lack of more English speaking workers and inflexible regulations for migrant workers.

In case CAFTA is never voted in Costa Rica, it would be worth studying any divergences between economic development patterns in CR and CAFTA-bound countries

 

Reply this comment


Person

By Systemsmac, Caliche at May 25, 2005 21:32 PM

Having lived extensively in Costa Rica, and within the last 18 months, the previous poster's impression about Costa becoming "very Americanized" is just that, a surface impression. And the line in Noam's original post about C.R. being "the only country in C.A. with a something of functioning democracy" should be changed to read, "C.R. stands out among the others for having a more democratic country than even the U.S." It's not really a stretch to say this when you look at the social democratic aspects alluded to by Noam. Sure, there are fancy restaurants in Escazú and now a Pizza Hut in Ciudad Quesada, the 2nd largest city, but last year there was a national worker and trucker's strike against RTV, the Spanish-owned car inspection monopoly, that was successful in putting pressure on the government to nullify the contract. The civil disobedience actions were effective (and peaceful!). Within the last 7 months there has also been a renascent backlash against CAFTA among the general populace, which is evident in talk in the street and in the popular press. As far as the social democratic elements, there is a health care system that is light-years ahead of anything in the U.S. as far as covering more people more adequately. Quality is quite high. It's hard to imagine the health-care system, and the other social democratic aspects, being seriously eroded through CAFTA's implementation. Though greater tragedies have occured.

Reply this comment

Loading_border