Talk:Social Knowledge and the Civil Economy

Hi John, I think there are some aspects of this text I think could be made better.

The statement “In addition, while there are a high number of civil society organizations (CSOs) in Ecuador, the level of civic engagement and citizen participation in the formation and implementation of public policy is low.” is very questionable. To just name some of the most prominent landscape-changing actions of civic engagement and citizen participation in the formation and implementation of public policy, take notice of the participatory way in which the Montecristi Constitution was originated, drafted and adopted; the popular referendum approval in 2011 which gave rise far reaching reforms in the security sector, the judicial branch, the elimination of banking proprietary interests in media organizations, banning casinos, banning public spectacles to kill animals, and criminally mandatory affiliation of workers in social security; also see the participatory budget constitucionalization and implementation, among many others. Plus, Ecuador stands out today, historically and globally, in terms of how much citizens feel represented by state action. Blanket statements of this kind are misleading and unfounded. Statements relating to freedom of association and expression are not supported. The passage reads “Since the passage of Decree 982, civil society organizations have lobbied for changes to the laws and regulations governing their activities. Their primary concerns relate to the restrictions on freedom of association and expression.” Also, see “Freedom of political expression and association are fundamental attributes of a free, open, and democratic civil society. Civil economy organizations should not be constrained from exercising these rights as a consequence of their status as non-profits or social benefit associations. Recommendation: The dissolution of civil organizations by the state for reasons of legitimate political action should be removed.” Human Rights Watch is cited as the source in the first citation. Human Rights Watch thinks freedom of expression includes freedom of defamation, in one landmark case to legitimize the 30S police and military coup on the legal and legitimate government of Ecuador, which is against the national and international laws.

HRW thinks in effect orchestrating a coup, as the media did in Venezuela in 2002, is part of freedom of expression. The government was criticized by HRW not because it closed any media, but because it stopped financing RCTV (and this was shown as if it had closed it, though this would have been perfectly legitimate). There are countless examples. The source is no source at all, unfortunately. The stuff about the media here, I am afraid, just naively repeats what media powers, often undemocratic, say about Ecuador. See Jeremy Bigwood’s work also on the web on Venezuela and Bolivia. Some work on this I’ve done on relevant stuff is here: http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=35372#.U2fQN6JjLhE Also, Ecuador has had a problem with NGO’s for a long time, related to their high number, and because they have frequently been vehicles of private and foreign corporate and state interests. What legitimate political actions of what NGOs are you talking about? To level the criticisms expressed these things deserve a much deeper analysis, including analysis of the laws and action of the state. Currently, the text just says that the laws are restrictive but not in what respect and on what substantive basis on these issues.

The parts on access to NGO information requires textual analysis of the law, before implying that Regulations on NGO requirement to provide information are unconstitutional, illegitimate or undesirable.

The general remarks tending to conclude the overall desirability of “more NGOs” unregulated by the state are a bit naïve. Ecuador is one of the countries with most NGOs. The problems posed to democratic sovereignty by NGOs in the region should be addressed in order to be able to say the things said here. I recommend reading Eva Golinger on The Chavez Code, and García Linera on the Geopolitica de la Amazonia, to begin. NGOs in Latin America are frequently the cover for violent and non-violent super PACs operating for US interests. The same thing applies to media companies.

Anecdotally, I recently asked the Director of Diario Hoy and former Inter American Press Association president Jaime Mantilla, whether it should be legal for media companies to receive CIA funding to orchestrate coups against democratic governments, as various members of his organization have done (for instance in Chile and Venezuela). He rejected the law banning such actions, not the interest.