Safe return; tragedies; election; Baby Owen’s welcome

I’m back in South Bend, delighted to be with my own family and delighted by how delighted they are that I’m back.

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

The big news is the tragedy in Israel. As with the Ukrainian tragedy, I have nothing useful to say, and I’m reluctant even to share others’ links, although my Internet go-tos – friends and foes – have offered up plenty of material. I’m doing my utmost not to condemn Joe Blow on the street or in the pulpit for taking this or that stance, for confidently allocating blame.

The other news is that Daniel Noboa, Alvarito’s son, is Ecuador’s President-elect. The populists hounded the last President, a businessman, out of office. Now the people have elected another businessman to replace him.

Ecuador will play soccer against Colombia tomorrow.

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

This is one of the better birth announcements I’ve seen.

Owen appears to be his parents’ fourth child. (I barely know these people, but all my memories of them are favorable.)

Behold the principle of diminishing returns.

Muerte cruzada

“That was the secret of secrets,” said Queen Jadis. “It had long been known to the great kings of our race that there was a word which, if spoken with the proper ceremonies, would destroy all living things except the one who spoke it. But the ancient kings were weak and soft-hearted and bound themselves and all who should come after them with great oaths never even to seek after the knowledge of that word. But I learned it in a secret place and paid a terrible price to learn it. I did not use it until she forced me to it. I fought and fought to overcome her by every other means. I poured out the blood of my armies like water – ”

“Beast!” muttered Polly.

“The last great battle,” said the Queen, “raged for three days here in Charn itself. For three days I looked down upon it from this very spot. I did not use my power till the last of my soldiers had fallen, and the accursed woman, my sister, at the head of her rebels was half way up those great stairs that lead up from the city to the terrace. Then I waited till we were so close that we could see one another’s faces. She flashed her horrible, wicked eyes upon me and said, ‘Victory.’ ‘Yes,’ said I, ‘Victory, but not yours.’ Then I spoke the Deplorable Word. A moment later I was the only living thing beneath the sun.”

(From The Magician’s Nephew.)

In Ecuador, the political situation isn’t as dire as this. But it’s close.

On the verge of impeachment, the president, Guillermo Lasso, has spoken the Deplorable Word. Or, rather, he has invoked its watered-down, constitutional equivalent, the muerte cruzada (“mutual death”).

The legislature is hereby dissolved (although this won’t go unchallenged). Lasso’s tenure is now slated to end in six months. Meanwhile, general elections will be held. The victorious legislators and executive will serve out the remainder of the original, pre-dissolution term of office, which will continue until 2025.

Lasso, in theory, could win his election and be “resurrected” as president. Until then, it will be his prerogative to govern by decree, unchecked by the legislature (but not by the courts).

The BBC explains.

My dad made the point that muerte cruzada amounts to a check on legislators, discouraging them from overthrowing the president – spuriously or otherwise – as the Ecuadorian Asamblea Nacional has been wont to do.

In this case, it was the legislators’ foolish attempt to oust Lasso that provoked Lasso to oust them from the government.

A longer-term consequence is that from now on, every likely presidential impeachment can be expected to result in a dissolution of the legislature. Immanent impeachment virtually guarantees a comprehensive reset.

That might not be such a bad thing.

More worrying is the period of governance by presidential decree. I hope that things will turn out all right this time. But it’s not the sort of privilege I’d be glad for just any president to exercise.

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

Karin had planned to take a few days off, for enjoyment. Then, she tweaked her lower back, was unable to walk, and ended up taking Tuesday and Wednesday off, for recovery.

The children were mercifully docile those days.

Meanwhile, in Ecuador …

On Sunday, Ecuadorians voted.

Andrés Arauz is the candidate of the correístas, the followers of that notorious ex-president, Rafael Correa. Arauz received the most votes of all the candidates, but not enough to win outright. A runoff election on April 11 will determine who becomes the new president.

Arauz’s opponent – Sunday’s runner-up – is TBD.

There are two contenders. One is Yaku Pérez, of Pachakutik (the indigenist party). The other is the 2017 runner-up, the banker Guillermo Lasso, who trails Pérez by less than one percentage point.

(Only the top two vote-getters will qualify for the next round. The rules are explained here.)

El Universo’s map of results shows the election playing out along ethnic lines. Pérez leads in virtually every province that has a large percentage of indigenous voters. Elsewhere, Arauz leads. Lasso is ahead only in Pichincha (the capital) and in sparsely populated Galápagos.

(Votes, not provinces, are what matter. Looking at provinces just helps us to understand regional and demographic trends.)

My hunch is that if Lasso were edged out, his supporters wouldn’t turn to Pérez in large enough numbers for Pérez to surge past Arauz in the next round (though Lasso himself would endorse Pérez over Arauz). Similarly, should Pérez fail to qualify for the runoff, his voters wouldn’t likely favor Lasso enough for Arauz to be defeated.

I have left thirty percent of the voters unaccounted for: those who didn’t choose any of the top three candidates. There is reason to think that those favoring Xavier Hervas, the next highest vote-getter, would migrate to Pérez (Hervas’s fellow lefty). Even so, I believe that Arauz will win in the second round.

I’m not at all optimistic about the correístas’ ability to govern. In the past, they have practiced gross patronage. Their economic strategy has been to take oil from indigenous peoples’ lands in order to pay for handouts and public works (and white elephants).

Anti-correístas, though, are in the curious position of having to promote aspects of both the free-market agenda (Lasso’s) and the ecologically-minded, “plurinationalist” agenda (Pérez’s) over that of Arauz, who is arguably the centrist among the three candidates. This is because any joint effort to defeat the correístas will have to bring opposite sides together.

Meanwhile, the international press seems not to have as much to say as in 2017. My mother did send this rather bizarre story from The Guardian detailing the connections between a smear campaign, birdsong, and Colombian guerrilleros. And this report from CNN gives a sense of the appeal of Pérez, the election’s dark horse.

An election and two fairy tales

Yesterday, Ecuador held the second round of its presidential election. Different exit polls showed different winners. At 9:00 p.m. (U.S. Eastern Time) came the official percentages: slightly more than 51% for the ruling party’s candidate, Lenín Moreno; slightly less than 49% for his opponent, Guillermo Lasso.

I looked at social media. Fraude, fraude, some people were fuming at 9:02 (in my opinion, prematurely).

Lasso is asking for a recount. He’s citing how long it took to tally the votes after the first round. Of course, in that round, with more candidates, the ballots must have been harder for the vote-counters to read; and there was a narrower gap between one realistic outcome (Moreno’s outright victory) and the other (the need for a runoff vote). So it isn’t surprising that the first round’s tally was issued more slowly.

But let Lasso have his recount. I’d like the result to be clear.

One antagonist of Lasso’s is Julian Assange, of WikiLeaks, who for some years has been sheltered from criminal prosecution in the Ecuadorian embassy in London. Lasso had pledged that if he were to become president, he’d evict Assange after thirty days. Encouraged by the election results, Assange tweeted: “I cordially invite Lasso to leave Ecuador within 30 days (with or without his tax haven millions).” All in good fun. Assange later clarified: “It was a joke to which Mr. Lasso lent himself. All is forgotten and I wish him the best in bringing Ecuador forward” (my translation). He also highlighted this strongly positive U.S. diplomatic cable about Moreno.

In the global press, the dominant story is that this election is ideological: socialism (Moreno) vs. capitalism (Lasso). Moreno’s victory means that the recession of Latin America’s “pink tide” has been interrupted. But a different trend is apparent from the Ecuadorian map: Moreno won all of the coastal provinces; Lasso won all of the “jungle” provinces and nearly all of the mountainous ones (as well as Galápagos). Ecuador’s starkest division is still regional, not ideological. Years ago, the ruling party was much stronger in the “Lasso” provinces; since then, it has alienated them. Whether Moreno will reach out to them remains to be seen. But I doubt whether Lasso, the guayaquileño banker, would have made them happy.

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

On Saturday, Karin & I watched two movies. By coincidence, both were about the breaking of an ugliness curse (à la “Frog Prince”).

The first movie was Penelope. It featured Christina Ricci, cursed with a pig’s snout for a nose.

A houseguest brought this movie to us. I’d already seen it. No matter: I’d forgotten how many of its “bit” roles are played by actors I’m fond of. Nigel Havers of Chariots of Fire and Downton Abbey! Richard E. Grant of L.A. Story … and Downton Abbey! From 2005’s Pride and Prejudice: Mr. Bingley! (Our houseguest and Karin were swooning over Mr. Bingley.) Toward the end: Reese Witherspoon! She’s also the movie’s producer! (We watched with one eye on the TV screen and the other on Wikipedia.)

The second movie was the new CGI/live-action Beauty and the Beast. We watched it with Karin’s sister, Lily, at the cinema in Niles, which is distinguished for its cheap tickets and cheap food. I garnished my cheap hot dog with some free and rather painful jalapeñoes.

Again, it was amusing to learn who the actors were. After the spell upon the Beast’s castle had been broken, we realized we’d been watching … Emma Thompson! Sir Ian McKellen! Ewan McGregor!

As for the Beast –

– he was none other than Cousin Matthew! Of Downton Abbey!

This new Beauty and the Beast has one huge flaw. Unlike its predecessor, it doesn’t visually convey the humanity of the Beast’s servants: the Teapot, the Clock, the Candlestick, etc.

Consider Lumière, the Candlestick. Though he’s rendered in exquisite (sculptural) detail, the viewer must strain to catch glimpses of personality in his eyes. (Let me stress: I’m not complaining about how Lumière moves or speaks.)

To compare: When we watch 2001: A Space Odyssey, it’s much easier to read the “eye” of the HAL computer.

And in the cartoon Beauty and the Beast, Lumière is no sculptural masterpiece; yet his personality is written all over his face.

The election, pt. 2

The percentages aren’t going to change. A second voting round will take place. I’m glad – not because I want Lasso to come back and defeat Moreno, but because I want the outcome, whatever it is, to be clear to the whole country. Let the whiners have one less thing to whine about.

They sure have been whining the last couple of days. They began to accuse Moreno’s party of election fraud as soon as they saw that his share of the votes would be very close to 40%.

They’ve based their argument on how long it’s taking for the votes to be carefully tallied. What they don’t acknowledge is that it’s normal for this process to take several days in any election, and especially in a close election.

TeleSUR, the Latin American news agency, describes these accusations as what they are: whipping up discontent. (Then again, one might object, TeleSUR is based in countries where there is much sympathy for Ecuador’s ruling party.)

Here are a couple of reports from Britain – trustworthy ones, I hope.

The Guardian.

The Financial Times.

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

UPDATE: The next voting round will be held on April 2.

Ecuador’s presidential election

Yesterday, elections were held in Ecuador. The votes are being tallied to see if a second round will be required in the presidential contest. By rule, to be declared the winner after just one round, a presidential candidate must receive 50% of the votes, or else he or she must receive 40% of the votes and outdo the next vote-getter by 10%.

This year, it’s close. As of this writing, the top vote-getters are Lenín Moreno with 39.08% and Guillermo Lasso with 28.43%.

Moreno is the candidate of the ruling party. He served as Rafael Correa’s vice president from 2007 to 2013. Lasso, a banker, was Correa’s closest opponent in the election of 2013.

My Facebook “friends” who discuss Ecuadorian politics tend to belong to the upper crust, and their aim is to get the socialistic ruling party out of office. They have nightmares of Ecuador turning into something like corrupt, disorganized, impoverished Venezuela. Thus they oppose Moreno. What Lasso stands for is not their focus.

My own views – impressionistic, not scientific – are that Ecuador is a society that needs large-scale economic redistribution (socialistic or otherwise); that although Ecuadorian socialism depends on unreliable, unsustainable revenue from oil, as Venezuelan socialism does, Ecuador will not cast its lot irrevocably with oil as Venezuela has done; and that the ruling party has shown far more competence than any other recent party.

There also is the question of authoritarianism, a charge frequently brought against Correa’s regime. To be sure, Correa has exhibited more than a dash of authoritarianism in his personality. But everything I’ve read suggests that the opposite is true of Moreno. Indeed, he has concerns that are very unusual for a politician. (For a few examples, see this article from 2013.) Moreno seems to exhibit genuine goodness – a quality which, in this age of Donald Trump, the world may finally decide it needs its politicians to have.

I must sleep now. From afar, these are my thoughts.