Heading back to the coast...

...after far too little time in the jungle. I figure, though, I'll have a lot more in the way of jungle opportunities down in Bolivia, which is on the agenda for the week after next, I think.

I've been reading through my survey data for Bolivia and taking a look through the Lonely Planet book at a couple of the places, and there are some really interesting-looking places to visit, so I'm getting pretty excited about it. My only regret: nowhere on Lake Titicaca is in the survey, and I was hoping to make it there. I had planned to do a case study on the Peruvian side, near Puno, but I think I'm going to cut it out, in the interest of getting more time in Bolivia. I have, after all, been in Peru, effectively since early October.

Hopefully, I don't have any trouble getting over the border, with this pig flu nonsense going on.

Anyways, my plane leaves Pucallpa tomorrow morning at the ridiculous hour of 5:40AM. Why they leave at that time, I have no idea, since there are only two flights a day out of this town.

I'll be in Lima for two days, then back to Cusco, then (I think) by bus to the Bolivian border, and ultimately, La Paz. There's also a very small possibility that I'll find a cheap flight from Lima to La Paz or Santa Cruz and be able to do it by plane, instead (really, can't have too many stops in the Lima airport, right?).

I'm going to miss the Inka Kola, but I'm looking forward to the Salvietti.

Lynchings and Community Justice

The L.A. Times has an interesting article about the "community" or "indigenous" justice provisions of the recently-passed constitution. You can get the article here.

They point out that "community justice" often takes the form of "mob justice" (not like The Sopranos, the other type of mob). And what is sometimes called "community justice" by some people is called "lynching" by others.

The article is very balanced, however, in pointing out that, in the face of an ineffective justice system and corrupt police force, sometimes, even the questionable practices that pass for "justice" may be superior to the absence of any justice at all, which is sometimes the only other alternative in these places.

I understand that there's a pretty good literature in Sociology that looks at this stuff (which I can't cite because I haven't read), but if I understand correctly, one of the reasons for lynchings is a pervasive feeling of insecurity in society, often because of an absence of the rule of law. In these circumstances, lynchings are bad, and having a well-functioning justice system may be the only cure.

In other cases, though, community or indigenous justice is very well developed, consistent, and fair--not only may it be the only option for "justice" in many poor rural places, but it may, in fact, be superior to the centralized "justice" of even a well-developed country like the US, in some ways. And indeed, we in the United States might be said to have a system of "community justice," as many of our legal encounters take place with municipal, county, or state courts which are not centrally controlled, even to the extent that their ruling are often not based on a simple, codified system of rules, but on precedent. There may be some interesting parallels with the informal justice systems of many indigenous communities.

One example might be this community landholding system, in which individuals who break community rules are not granted land to farm the following year, if they fail to make good their debt to the community in the form of paying a fine. This, linked with the social pressures that come along with rule-breaking and rule-obeying in small, rural places where everybody is related may do a better job at preventing crime and promoting rehabilitation than other alternatives.

Bolivian Constitution

Just to follow up, it passed.

The Bolivians also passed a law that says that no individual can own more than about 20 square miles of land.

What's next, in the everlasting drama that is Bolivian politics?

Happy Emily's Birthday/Bolivian Constitution Day!

Ultimately, we'll see how the vote goes down today--I haven't seen any public opinion polling, so I don't know with any degree of certainty what will happen. But Bolivia is voting on its new constitution today, which will probably pass, if Evo's 60+% vote in the most recent election--a recall referendum--is any sign.

Because I also know a little about Bolivian politics, a whole bunch of people have asked me what I think of Evo Morales, and the new constitution. Seems like pretty good fodder for a new blog entry, so here we go.

Evo Morales: Good or Bad?

I like Evo. First off, he's got great hair, and what's not to like about a guy who rose to power as the head of the coca-growers' union. Seriously.

There are some things about Morales that I don't like--journalists say they have a hard time in Bolivia because of the Bolivian government's attitude towards journalism, and the Bolivian Constitutional court has pretty much been dismembered through his term. That doesn't mesh with my own personal definition of good government, which carries something about respecting other government institutions.

That said, Evo has been carrying out a policy that caters to the poor, especially the rural poor. That is what you would expect from a guy that was elected by a majority (unusual in Bolivia), heavily influenced by the vote of the poor.

It's about damn time, folks. You can't have a democracy if the poor are excluded from the system, which was pretty much the way things were before his election.

In any event, there are good and bad things here--Evo is neither a saint nor a devil--but his isn't "ignorant," as his critics have often charged, and over the last couple of years, it would be hard to argue that Evo's policies themselves have been any more damaging to Bolivians than the rather extreme policies and rhetoric of the right in Bolivia, which sometimes seems to have more in common with the Black Helicopter People in the United States than, say, the Reaganites in the Republican party.

New Constitution: Good or Bad?

Good. Really good, if I understand correctly. But not for the reasons that the left and the right have argued over in recent months.

Mostly, the Bolivian constitutional debate has focused on the role of indigenous groups in the constitution, natural resources, regional autonomy, and a couple of other things which mostly seem to be codewords for "Who gets the natural gas money?" and "Who controls the system--the rich or the poor?"

Unfortunately, this is the way these issues are framed in Bolivia, which makes it difficult for there to be middle ground.

But the new constitution is important for another reason, which nobody seems to be talking about, probably because it's mostly the domain of nerdy political scientists and is a lot less glamorous than talkin about who gets the natural gas money.

Here's the important thing: Electoral rules.

If I understand correctly, the new Bolivian constitution will do two things that are really important.

First off, it will create a presidential runoff system (about damn time!). What this means is that if no party gets a majority, the two highest vote-getting candidates will run against one another in a second election. The guy/gal who wins this election becomes president.

This is much better than the old system, where any time a president failed to get a majority (every time except 2005, when Evo was elected), the president was picked by the congress, between the two highest vote-getters.

This meant that a small clique of powerful congressional representatives had more say over who became president than anyone else, and the people ended up having much less control over who they would elect.

The second important thing is legislative elections. Bolivia, like most Latin American party systems, has a president, but uses a (mostly) proportional system to elect their representatives. What this tends to do is create a lot of parties. But in the new constitution, the lower body of the legislature will be elected through a first past the post/single-member district plurality system, like we've got in the US. This will tend to narrow the number of parties, making it easier for people to make choices.

It may also help to produce a more stable party system, but that's another story.

There are some other things going on in Bolivian politics that may make it easier for the system to coalesce around a smaller number of parties--relatively popular former president Mesa, a center-rightist, is talking about running if the constitution passes. The right is talking about a single coalitition and a primary election. And pretty much the only major force to deal with on the left is MAS, Evo's party.

This could all be very helpful in stabilizing the system, and producing more moderate and more consistent policies that will help Bolivia develop. But we'll see.

Here's my prediction:
1. Constitution passes.
2. Mesa runs as the major candidate of the right.
3. Congress is elected under the new rules, and is inefficient, but something of a check on the election.
4. Whoever becomes president faces a divided legislature and is forced to pursue more moderate policies.
5. The Bolivian economy grows and inequality continues to decline.

But we'll see, eh?

On a more important note, happy birthday to Emily! Wish I could be there with her.