David Crow rightly says:

"Recent events in Paraguay (assassination of Vice President Luis María Argaña, resignation of President Raúl Cubas, and forced exit from the country of Gen. Lino Oviedo, who led a failed coup in 1996) remind us just how fragile many of the new Latin American democracies really are. Clearly, the Paraguayan military constitutes a "reserved domain" of power completely unaccountable to the people, as evidenced by Cubas' pardon of Oviedo last year and the rapport that exists between some factions in the Colorado Party and military leaders loyal to Stroessnerism.

Contrary to Francis Fukuyama's assertion in "The End of History", liberal democracy is not necessarily here to stay. Samuel Huntington reminds us that each wave of democratization has been followed by a period of reflux. For the sake of the noble but beleaguered Latin American peoples, let's hope Paraguay and other countries consolidate their democracies quickly."

My comment: Fukuyama's assertion is on a par with the proposal to end the Vietnam war by simply proclaiming that we won and get out. I would go further than David, in line with my belief in semper reformanda. The big challenge now is to establish not merely political democracy but economic justice. The worldwide trend is obvious, and we must meet the challenge. I hate mobs, but I applauded the protesting Paraguayan crowd.

Ronald Hilton - 03/29/99

More on Paraguay

John Wonder knows Latin America well, and he has become disillusioned about the prospects of democracy in countries like Paraguay. He says:

" I really do not understand what people mean by democracy. Is it something resembling the established governments in the U.S. and western Europe or literally "the rule of the people"? Sometimes the rule of the people is the worst kind of tyranny. People seem to confuse these things, often deliberately, for personal (read ideological) agenda. After having lived in Latin America for a number of years, I can think of nothing more absurd than to try to establish democracy there. Frankly, they do not know what it is, in the Western European sense. Until their societies (meaning the mind set of the people) become ready for a democratic system, there is no use in trying the play the good missionary. It smacks of the "white man's burden". We would do well to tend to our own knitting."

My comment: The very word "democracy", rule by the people, can mean government by people like Hitler, to name just one leader supported by "the people." With the years, I have become less critical of the old Latin American oligarchies, some of which were highly educated. The popular revolt in Paraguay was welcome, as was the Spanish republic in 1931. Now it remains to be seen what the outcome will be. However, there is slow progress toward our style of democracy. Of this Spain today is a splendid example.

I don't agree with John's isolationism, and I support the action against the Serbian regime. However, I agree that our knitting should involve taking a hard look at our own system, which I find very partisan, for example on this same issue. The San Francisco Chronicle (3/30/99) ran in parallel two articles on it by two Bay area congressmen, Republican Tom Campbell and Democrat Tom Lantos. Both Toms are well-respected professors, Tom C of Stanford Law School, Tom L of San Francisco State University. The latter is a Jewish refugee from Nazi Europe. Tom C says the war is unconstitutional, since it was not approved by Congress. Tom L says the U.S. must stand up to Serb brutality. Both make good cases, but if a Republican president were to intervene in a similar way, the Democratic Party would object.

Ronald Hilton - 03/31/99