<HTML xmlns:o = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"><HEAD></HEAD>
<BODY dir=ltr>
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
<DIV>And how does this differ from what most academics do and have done since
WWII and before? What makes political science, political scientists, or
social scientists differ from any other academic including physical scientists
and engineers, business administration types, educators, or even fine arts types
who have generally bought into the established positions and viewpoints and used
their positions, credentials, authority, and work to legitimate and
support established policies, ideologies, and practices? Why not
point out that this particular interview is but merely of an example of
what is generally the case for what most academics do, think, support, and
reinforce without any serious question or analysis. You might also
note that this is the sort of interview that journalist tend to also accept
without any critical analysis or questioning as either unproblematic truths or
non-extreme borderline opinions.</DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: none">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt tahoma">
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
<DIV style="font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A title=davegreen84@yahoo.com
href="mailto:davegreen84@yahoo.com">David Green</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> February 02, 2013 4:38 PM</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net
href="mailto:peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net">peace-discuss</A> ; <A
title=sf-core@yahoogroups.com
href="mailto:sf-core@yahoogroups.com">sf-core@yahoogroups.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> [Peace-discuss] Political science as
propaganda</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: none">
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #fff; FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; COLOR: #000; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">
<DIV>The following letter in reference to the link below was submitted to the
DI; a related letter will be submitted at a later date to the NG:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><A
href="http://illinois.edu/lb/article/72/70237">http://illinois.edu/lb/article/72/70237</A></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 10pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Calibri><SPAN
style="mso-ansi-language: en" lang=EN><FONT size=3>This letter responds to an
interview with political science professor Damarys Canache about her native
Venezuela, conducted by the University’s News Bureau and available on its
website. It appeared in the News-Gazette on January 20</FONT><FONT
size=2><SUP>th</SUP></FONT><FONT size=3>.<VAR
id=yui-ie-cursor></VAR></FONT></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 10pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT size=3><FONT
face=Calibri><SPAN style="mso-ansi-language: en" lang=EN>When asked why
President Hugo Chavez has won honest elections, Canache refers to his “use of
institutions and resources of the Venezuelan government to build and maintain a
large base of electoral support.” She doesn’t mention significant decreases in
poverty and increased access to education and medical care. Chavez has used oil
wealth to benefit the majority. It’s not clear why this is not a legitimate,
desirable process, nor how this makes Chavez’s programs different from our own
history. Canache’s view of political science strongly implies that elected
leaders should not respond to the basic survival needs of the majority that
elects them.</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 10pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT size=3><FONT
face=Calibri><SPAN style="mso-ansi-language: en" lang=EN>Canache states:
“Although Chávez has won three presidential elections, many scholars contend
that Venezuela today is best characterized as a competitive authoritarian
regime.” Again, it’s not clear why an elected leader using his constitutional
authority to improve the lives of those who elected him is authoritarian rather
than democratic; nor why Americans shouldn’t desire such outcomes in our own
country.</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 10pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT size=3><FONT
face=Calibri><SPAN style="mso-ansi-language: en" lang=EN>The reality is that
Chavez is demonized by American politicians and media because he opposes U.S.
imperialism. We have historically supported ruthless Latin dictators as long as
they complied with “U.S. national (read corporate) interests.” Canache invokes
her academic authority to legitimize the propaganda that has for two centuries
been used to justify violent American control of the hemisphere. I would suggest
that her views reflect the petulance of privileged Venezuelans whose
aristocratic authority has been undermined by a charismatic leader and a
successful popular movement. This obviously is to the detriment of what is
called “political science” on our campus.</SPAN><o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"></FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV>
<P>
<HR>
_______________________________________________<BR>Peace-discuss mailing
list<BR>Peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net<BR>https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss<BR></DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>