Nayib Bukele claims landslide victory and says Spanish democracy is a colonial fraud in impassioned speech to supporters
Nayib Bukele, El Salvador’s millennial president, attacked Spanish colonialism and imperialism in a fiery victory speech after he won a landslide victory.
Amid claims he is turning the country into a dictatorship, he boasted to flag-waving crowds below the presidential palace that El Salvador would be the first country with “a one-party system in a democracy”.
“The entire opposition together was pulverised,” Mr Bukele, who once styled himself the “world’s coolest dictator”, told the cheering masses.
The baseball cap-wearing Mr Bukele, 42, has become vastly popular for his war on gangs, but he has also been accused of stifling the courts and silencing opposition.
In his speech he said a Spanish journalist had recently asked him why he wants to dismantle democracy.
Salvador’s millennial president
Are we the badies?
Are millennials destroying democracy?
I had to find out how accurate that quote was, since everyone who writes about this guy mentions the coolest dictator thing.
He did write that, in Spanish, on his Twitter bio.
Ppl have no sense of irony anymore.
He was first called dictator, this is his humoristic response. Wake up!
:/
“The coolest dictator of the world globally”
At least he knows he’s not the coolest in the universe.
“Del mundo mundial” on Spanish is a common phrase (mostly used by children) to say “of the world”. If you want to translate literally, it would be more like “of the worldly world”.
Anyone who puts the words “coolest dictator” in a non satire publication needs to be stockaded
It’s what he calls himself on Twitter. I think it’s good for journalists to bring this cringe to light
Have you ever considered that kind of dichotomy actually helps him rather than hurts him?
Imagine being a Bukele supporter and seeing people like you say he’s bad just because has too much power.
To El Salvador’s population, Bukele is responsible for stopping gangs from freely using rape and murder as means of extortion. They don’t care about your stupid western ideological wars. To them, results are more important.
Compare El Salvador’s gang problem to Mexico’s, and perhaps you can see why dictatorships are not intrinsically bad just like democracies are not intrinsically good.
I don’t expect you to have that level of rationality, though.
k
Great dismissal of the truth you refuse to look at. The people of El Salvador love the man because he drastically reduced crime. Rape and murder was horrendously common there. People were afraid to leave their homes, even in the middle of the day. When you live like that for years and someone comes in and eliminates 95% of the crime almost overnight, yea, you’re not really gonna give a shit if he followed due process and whatever he calls himself when you can suddenly leave your house in peace. There’s a reason why he’s so popular there.
k
Glad you agree.
Yeah, maybe they should run their country more like Mexico!
We really need journalists on this planet to do their jobs
Like this journalist did by quoting him directly? Does no one even read anymore?
I read it, but you know many simply go by headlines, which are tailored as clickbait, often irresponsibly. So I’m fine with quoting the guy in context, but it’s poor form to let him get away with ‘coolest dictator’ in the context-free part that 80% of people will see.
A one party democracy
So
A dictatorship
But if you can still elect your party leader maybe it’s not quite a dictatorship.
It easily could become a dictatorship if left unchecked. It could become a communist state, or a fascist regime as well.
I got to meet him at a wedding about a year ago. He’s like a regular guy he just cares about the people. I don’t think the one party thing is on purpose.
That would be the same El Salvador that’s had the world’s highest murder rate since I was a kid, would it?
Sounds like the “war on gangs” is just “replace them all with one big gang and put the leader in charge of the country”.
But go back far enough and that’s how a lot of countries became more than a bunch of local warlords fucking up each others shit.
That would be the same El Salvador that’s had the world’s highest murder rate since I was a kid, would it?
Their murder rate is way down thanks to the efforts of the man you are criticizing for having too much power.
Before him, that’s when gangs were running rampant and contributing to the murder rate you recall as a child.
This is why people overwhelming support him. It turns out, results speak louder than ideologies.
Retards will not understand this last part, though.
I’m tunisian and i know dictators excuses very well to stay in power. Lot of people was kidnapoed, tortured and killed by Ben Ali. Ben Ali excuse was about protecting people from Islamist extremist.
“Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."
The oposition literally invited the gangs to decide what to do with the country.
It’s documented in video.
Study the case first before giving a strong opinion.
What the world really needs right now is another narcissistic dictator.
Dictatorships are not intrinsically bad.
You can have good dictators, even if they are rare.
If you can’t comprehend this, then you are a victim of propaganda and indoctrination.
Sometimes, it’s easier to convince the masses to vote against themselves than it is to convince a dictator to sell them out.
For example, Mexico vs. El Salvador.
15 years ago, nobody thought Mexico would have a worse gang problem than El Salvador. Without Bukele’s heavy-handed approach to suppressing gangs, they would still be running rampant like they are in Mexico.
Name one “good” dictator. This shit has played out plenty of times and it always ends up the same.
Even one of the most revered OG dictators who willingly gave up his power after just 16 days was still an asshole.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucius_Quinctius_Cincinnatus
A benevolent dictator is still a dictator.
Most of society throughout history has been ruled by dictators. There are probably a few who would pass for decent rulers, statistically speaking. A few, out of thousands.
But even if you’re lucky enough to get one of the good ones, some shit bag will inevitably take their place and everyone is absolutely fucked with nothing they can do about it. Even rebellion is less and less of an option as militaries becomes increasingly efficient vs. armed citizenry.
It’s a losing bet every time. Not ever worth considering in any modern society.
Dictator didn’t mean back then what it means now: It was a time-limited emergency position, then oligarchy resumed. The Romans would call our current-day dictators tyrants and they tended to go the way of Caesar: Stabbed in the back (literally) by the senatorial power they usurped.
You said that they are rare, so what do you do if the ruler is bad and has the power to ruin the country for decades and can pass the rule to his song who may be bad too?
One good dictator is one thing but what happens after him? What are the chances he’ll be succeeded by another supposedly benevolent dictator? It also increases the chances someone gets tired of the dictator and coups him which may turn into yet another bloody civil war.
Democracy sucks but it’s the best system we have,
One can argue for his emergency decisions to handle the gangs but democracy should be restored once the dust settles.
Dictatorships are not intrinsically bad. You can have good dictators, even if they are rare.
Yet they can’t handle competition, accountability or limits to their power? Fuck off fascist.
The results speak for themselves.
Try to focus on pragmatism over whatever other ideology you think trumps it.
Mexico is democratic and they’re practically run by gangs. Do you really think that’s preferable for the people of El Salvador?
Should they go back to being ruled by gangs just to look good in the eyes of indoctrinated Westerners?
Non sequitur post of the year fellas.
“The results speak for themselves” was a perfect way to undermine your own argument.
Care to elaborate?
No
Results? If you want to talk results let’s talk about millions upon millions of dead Jews, political prisoners, and homosexuals.
That’s just one bad example, right? How about the millions that starved because of bad management in a single party regime, I’ve got two of those to pick from.
Read a fucking book and try not to choose Mein Kampf.
about millions upon millions of dead Jews, political prisoners, and homosexuals.
I didn’t know Bukele was responsible for all that.
You’re seeing where he starts. There are plenty of examples of where he ends.
And there are no exceptions?
It’s just a law of the universe?
What about all the atrocities committed by democracies?
This is what I mean by you being indoctrinated.
Ah, yes the old “enlightened despot” routine.
Europe tried it. Ended up with guillotines and the Great War. After that they tried it again but without the royalty branding and we got World War Two.
But thanks to your comment now I see that my history books indoctrinated me. My belief that the enlightened despot of Germany that pulled their economy out of the Great Depression, built up a modern infrastructure, and was a champion of animal rights was a bad guy is clearly just propaganda influencing me. I should get redpilled and cheer for people’s power over their own government being taken away.
God Lemmy has the biggest whack jobs on the Internet.
Maybe it’s because it creates such nice little echochambers.
This is a bad take here because the guy is clearly dishonest.
But here is an interesting take: The Rules for Rulers - CGP Grey https://youtu.be/rStL7niR7gs
Dictatorships are not intrinsically bad.
You can have good dictators, even if they are rare.
Hard disagree there.
But it really depends on what you value as good and bad.
For instance, if you think that people have an inherent right to have a say in how they are governed, then a dictatorship can never be good because it infringes on that right in the most serious of ways.
If you think a stable and sustainable system of government that will last beyond the life of a few leaders is important, then dictatorship is not a good system, because one good dictator creates no guarantee that the next dictator will be good, and establishing a system of dictatorship affords a bad dictator that much more power to ruin lives.
if you think that people have an inherent right to have a say in how they are governed
What about when people vote against their own interests?
What about when the majority suppresses minorities?
What about when people vote against their own interests?
They have the right to do so.
What about when the majority suppresses minorities?
That is a bad thing. But talk about a dictatorship?? That’s one person suppressing everybody else.
So it’s better to be ruled by gangs than a dictator?
The people who were afraid to leave their homes that can now go outside made the wrong decision by electing a government to solve their problems?
Or, more realistically, you’re too indoctrinated to understand how their real problems are more important than your philosophical ones.
That’s one person suppressing everybody else.
Oh no! Somebody think of the gangbangers!
The fuck are you talking about?
You’re replying to things I didn’t say. Are you hearing voices or something?
Try again. Do better.
If people vote against their own interests, it is solely their fault, there is no way around it, deal with the consequences and do better next time. Saying that people must be protected against themselves means that you believe that your fellow human beings are inherently inferior to you and that they are not rational beings, akin to animals.
If you believe that you have intellectual superiority but you are not able to communicate that to your fellow countrymen, then you have failed thoroughly at being a politician, or you are not as superior as you think you are.
Dude looks like the darkest timeline’s version of Johnathan from Queer Eye.
My latin American country needs someone like this dude to get rid of both local and foreign crime, which is going to run rampant at some point
Sure they like him now. Just wait a few years.
if he lives that long
I fully expect to get downvoted for this but as much as im anti-dictator (like any normal person) you cannot deny he has objectively been a good thing for the country so far. He has decimated the gangs which has caused a 70% decrease in the homicide rate, going from the highest in the world to the lowest in Latin America. And him being talked as a “dictator” isnt really accurate either. He was elected Mayor of the capital at fist, was extremely popular so ran for president and won, democratically, in a landslide. And his policies, specifically with that gangs has kept him at a mind-boggling 90% approval rating, making him the most popular leader of any country, and he is running for re-election fairly and democratically, because why would he even need to rig the results when hes so insanely popular?
Yes there is Plenty you can criticise him for (being anti-aborition and anti-gay marriage for example) but in that regard he is no worse than any previous leader of the country.
You can deny it. He has been arresting thousands of people with zero evidence they are involved in gangs. Police have quotas on how many “gang members” they have to arrest to make him look good so they arrest random people to fulfill the quotas.
He’s a fascist and the fact he gets so much support because he’s “arresting the criminals” with so little pushback is scary
Here’s a story on it by a really great journalist https://youtu.be/jQcTYgOuEzA
You can deny it
No, you really cant. You can do what you’re doing which is criticising the method and thats very fair, but the results are undeniable.
Police have quotas on how many “gang members” they have to arrest to make him look good so they arrest random people to fulfill the quotas.
Thats an unsubstantiated claim and the couple of reports thats based off claims its orders from specific regional police chiefs, not the government, you can argue his government should do a better job monitoring those things, but you cant pin that on him personally.
He has been arresting thousands of people with zero evidence they are involved in gangs.
This claim has more evidence but independent organisation (HRW and Cristosal) only had 200 complaints in the first couple months after 25,000 arrests (its difficult to find more recent figures). So even if we assume all those complaints are valid and those people were wrongfully arrested then thats <1% of arrests being innocent, which is pretty good honestly.
he gets so much support because he’s “arresting the criminals” with so little pushback is scary
Because you dont have the context. Its easy to think of it as scary when you live in a relatively peaceful developed country, but for the people actually from El Salvador that had to deal with extremely violent gangs that could murder you for basically any reason at any time with no consequence and a government that was making deals with those gangs to keep the citizens organised, its an incredible relief, and yes he is actually arresting criminals and massively reducing the homicide rate. The fact that any time he is brought up, even on that Youtube video you linked Salvadorian people come out universally in support of him and point out how your “journalist” can only go around the country making her documentary without being murdered is because his policies, just goes to show how much good his policies are doing.
and again, dont get me wrong, im opposed to a lot of right wing populist policies and im against undemocratic dictators (which I think he is only on the borderline of) but human lives are more important to me than political principles.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/jQcTYgOuEzA
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
People on this site insist that we need to eliminate the Republican Party in the US, effectively making it a one-party system in a democracy.
Doesn’t sound so bad now, does it?
We do need to eliminate the Republican party but that’s far from the only problem with US politics. Honestly, moving away from a first past the post voting system would force both Democrats and Republicans to do better, or get replaced by parties that better represent their constituency.
Research the Weimar Republic. Getting rid of first past the post, can have the opposite effect, giving the crazies more power than they would under first past. Fringe groups, especially left leaning, always want transferrable vote or proportional because that way they’d get more representation but they always seem to ignore it can backfire.
Protip: Your argument has more weight if you use modern examples if you can find them, rather than the Weimar republic. Sounding like you are escalating to the end of Godwin’s law does not help your point.
Which is annoying because I agree that it can backfire if done wrong.
Oh look, the socialist doesn’t like a working knowledge of recent history. Transferable vote systems and proportional aren’t all that that common. and an example of the possible results less than a hundred years ago isn’t irrelevant. I’ve looked at the systems before, and quite often the result of the formulas used is a majority of someone no one really wanted.
Multi-party, new party…maybe…but single party, I’m not sure I’ve heard anyone advocate for that, certainly not a lot of people.
Bunch of people in this comment thread have no idea what they are talking about. I have family in various parts of el Salvador and ever since bukele came into office politics is all they fucking talk about. It’s actually quite annoying but the people there absolutely love him and his party. Maybe I am biased as I also have family that hold positions in nuevas ideas. Either way I don’t think I’ve ever heard of a Salvadorean that didn’t love the direction the country is going.
He’s not a dictator yet, but he’ll have the opportunity to rewrite the constitution with the numbers his party will get in the next election. He seems to have signalled this is what he plans to do. Given his economic policies and the fact that he runs a police state (even if it was temporarily needed to get rid of gangs I doubt it will stop), he looks a lot like Pinochet which gives some people pause.
That said it’s up to the people of El Salvador to decide if it’s worth the risk to hand one party all the power.
Edit: current election not next election
Imagine the opposition was inviting gang leaders to decide what to do with the country.
That’s what happened and it’s documented in video.
Why would anybody vote for them?
So a dictatorship.
A candidate being so insanely popular the other parties dont stand a chance isnt really the same as a dictatorship.
El Salvador’s El Presidente.
“The opposition will retire and may not be seen for a while.” - Tropico
Quick photoshop job.
This is gold
This whole “democracy is colonialism” stuff needs to end lol
Especially since a decent portion of the US democracy was lifted straight out of the Six Nations. They straight up copied the Native Americans in the New England area of the country. Which is why when you look at the Greek version of Democracy, and the US version, there’s a ton of differences
It’s the first time I heard about that… is that a common nonsensical political trope?
Considering Latin America has had multiple coupes caused by the US I can see why their populace is bit suseptical to that sort of rhetoric.
Multiple coups, stolen elections, entire systems of control and oppression by American corporations (banana republics), etc.
In Cuba they literally went from super racist and clinging to Spain, to multicultural and trying to get independence from Spain, then back to Jim Crow type racism because of US influences.
Latin America also has a rich and beautiful history of democracy and relative cultural unity so it’s still surprising to see all these dictators come to power. Almost every single country (if not every single one) that revolted against Spain from 1808-1825 ended up becoming a democracy. We need to put this thought at the forefront so as to avoid dictatorial strongmen.
Bloody Ancient Athenians coming over here and taking our right to be governed by dictatum.
