Showing fragments matching your search for: <strong>""</strong>

No matching fragments found in this document.



    The trouble in Peru came when he bested its  real  conqueror  (from  the
Argentine), La Mar, in a petty triumph over adding  Guayaquil  to  Colombia.
Bolivar wished to look triumphant again and didn't  notice  it  really  cost
him the support and Peru the support of La Mar-who  understandably  resigned
and went home, leaving  Bolivar  Peru  to  conquer.  Unfortunately,  it  had
already been in his hands. La Mar needed some troops to  clean  up  a  small
Royalist army that was all. La Mar didn't need  Peru's  loss  of  Guayaquil-
which never did anybody any real good anyway!

    Bolivar would become inactive  when  faced  with  two  areas'  worth  of
problems-he did not know which way to go. So he did nothing.

    Brave beyond any general in history on the battlefield, the Andes or  in
torrential rivers, he did not  really  have  the  bravery  needed  to  trust
inferior minds and stand by their often shocking blunders. He  feared  their
blunders. So he did not dare unleash his many willing hounds.

    He could lead men, make men feel wonderful, make men fight and lay  down
their lives after hardships no army elsewhere in the world  has  ever  faced
before or since. But he could not use men even when they were begging to  be
used.

    It is a frightening level of bravery to use men you know can  be  cruel,
vicious, and incompetent. He had no fear of their turning on him ever.  When
they finally did only then he was shocked. But  he  protected  "the  people"
from authority given to questionably competent men. So he really never  used
but three or four generals of mild disposition  and  enormously  outstanding
ability. And to the rest he denied power. Very thoughtful  of  the  nebulous
"people" but very bad indeed for the general good. And it really caused  his
death.

    No. Bolivar was theatre. It was all theatre. One cannot make such errors
and still pretend that one thinks of life as life, red-blooded and  factual.
Real men and real life are full of dangerous, violent, live  situations  and
wounds hurt and starvation is desperation itself especially when you see  it
in one you love.

    This mighty actor, backed up with fantastic personal potential, made the
mistake of thinking the theme of liberty and his own  great  role  upon  the
stage was enough to interest all the working, suffering hours  of  men,  buy
their bread, pay their whores, shoot their  wives'  lovers  and  bind  their
wounds or even put enough drama into very hard pressed lives  to  make  them
want to live it.

    No, Bolivar was unfortunately the only actor on the stage and  no  other
man in the world was real to him.

    And so he died. They loved him. But they were also  on  the  stage  too,
where they were dying in his script or Rousseau's script for liberty but  no
script for living their very real lives.

    He was the greatest military general in any history measured against his
obstacles, the people and the land across which he fought.

    And he was a complete failure to himself and his friends.

    While being one of the greatest men alive at that. So we see  how  truly
shabby others in leaders' boots amongst men must be.




                                MANUELA SAENZ


    The tragedy of Manuela Saenz as Bolivar's  mistress  was  that  she  was
never used, never really had a share and was neither protected  nor  honored
by Bolivar.

    Here was a clever, spectacular woman of fantastic  fidelity  and  skill,
with  an  enormous  "flaire",  capable  of  giving  great  satisfaction  and
service.  And  only  her  satisfaction  ability  was  taken  and  that   not
consistently nor even honestly.

    In the first place, Bolivar never married her. He never married anybody.
This opened up a fantastic  breach  in  any  defense  she  could  ever  make
against her or his enemies who were legion. So her first mistake was in  not
in some way contriving a marriage.