tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8820814198873126054.post8445250659546078203..comments2023-10-20T05:51:51.625-04:00Comments on The THINK 3 INSTITUTE: Devil's advocacy for Hugo ChavezSamuel Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00934870299522899944noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8820814198873126054.post-5969284662886350162013-03-28T20:24:45.477-04:002013-03-28T20:24:45.477-04:00My point being that a successful grassroots moveme...My point being that a successful grassroots movement is successful because it embeds itself in government. a grassroots movement that never becomes part of the government will never succeed, it will always remain merely a "movement" not "change".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8820814198873126054.post-90041309665723328682013-03-28T12:35:41.321-04:002013-03-28T12:35:41.321-04:00In this case, Grandin shows a "progressive&qu...In this case, Grandin shows a "progressive" bias, echoing those who think that activism outside the sphere of government is more authentic, honest, etc., on the assumption that being embedded in the government compromises you in some way -- maybe it turns you into a Democrat. There's probably also an admission that the "grass-roots" don't have the expertise to administer the state, along with a belief that they should remain wary lest the experts use the state to aggrandize themselves.<br /><br />To clarify, "this man's attitude" is the belief in the "resource curse," which Grandin himself does not share. He is all for using oil wealth and other resource wealth to improve ordinary people's lives, and less worried over whether politicians use that wealth as a "bribe" in order to keep power.Samuel Wilsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00934870299522899944noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8820814198873126054.post-10412079158596740882013-03-27T19:19:09.779-04:002013-03-27T19:19:09.779-04:00"...it would have co-opted the grass-roots in...<i>"...it would have co-opted the grass-roots into the state."</i><br /><br />There seems to nearly always be this inference that there must be a separation of people from "the state". It seems to me that the entire point of democracy is that the people <i>are</i> the state.<br />_____________________________<br /><br />So oil-wealth produced and controlled by corporations, for the explicit profit of the corporation and it's shareholders is to be seen as "good". But oil-wealth produced and controlled by the state for the benefit of the people is only conducive of "lulling citizens into a dreamlike state that renders them into passive spectators," <br /><br />Overall this man's attitude seems to be that only the wealthy elite have a right to any expectation of furthering their fortunes or having any real political power.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com