Your view of Chavez in light of recent events

I'm going to create a pretty nuanced poll to try to gauge the feeling of DU on this.

I have enough problems with my own country's leadership to worry about someone else's country's leaders.

But recognizing Chavez for what he is doesn't necessarily obligate someone to support intervention.

in yer humble opinion?

He's a loudmouth making no plans to relinquish the reins of power.

She seemed content to hang on the wall the one time I got to see her. Who knew? :sarcasm:

It AMAZES me that people defend Hugo Chavez here and then go ballistic over S. 1959. Hugo Chavez is actually doing what people think erroneously S. 1959 does.

STOP LETTING PEOPLE MANIPULATE YOU BY PLAYING TO YOUR BELIEFS.

And, there is no need to shout.

Go do some reading on the RCTV story and stop expecting other people to do your work for you. I've already posted it too many times to this board.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1582162,00.html



http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/11/29/venezu17447.htm



http://www.freemedia.at/cms/ipi/freedom_detail.html?country=/KW0001/KW0002/KW0032/&year=2006



Do you want more? I got more.

national papers, still publish cartoons of Chavez that depict him as an ape because of the rampant racism of the upper class? How long would such a publication remain open here?

Careful, now.

Why do you keep going back there? Isn't it engrained in your mind, yet, that it's not okay to punish or suppress political speech just because you don't like it?

How many times have we called Bush Chimpy? Or Chimpy McCokespoon? Or the Chimperor? Or that dumbass piece of shit in the White House? Would it be OK for the White House to come along and shut down DU because of our name calling? Hell no. That's called "bullshit."

Now, I do have to add a caveat to that.

I'm actually for deconglomeration of the media companies in the U.S. But it's not because they don't like one particular person, or they just have a point of view I don't like. I don't think you can just shut down Fox News because they constantly lie (you might have an argument if nothing but out-and-out lying was going on). It's because of the effect of having only 6 media companies on how informed our citizenry is. The political understanding of our people is just dismal.

But also note my remedy- I don't think the government should swoop down and take over those *particular* companies that it disagrees with. I'm saying those companies need to be chopped up, to begin with- not become a branch of the government. And, not only that, the reasoning is content-neutral- it's power-based. Too much control over the airwaves. Companies with over such and such amount of influence over the public (however that might be calculated) will have to be cut down, to increase competititon.

That's totally different from what Chavez has done, though.

to publish horrible racist slurs. How much more free can you get?

on the amendments, unlike some real dictators like Mushareff.

So did Hitler.

http://www.vicuk.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=156&Itemid=30

You know, the one where if he doesn't win, he threatens to cut off oil to America for interfering. The one where he's making a huge power grab. That one.

is considered "making a huge power grab"...would that mean he's delegating the power to those who participate in the vote? Jeez Luiz, how undemocratic of him!

And considering the gazillion sanctions and economic freezes that the USA has called for and actually implemented against so many countries of this World, nations who "might" have suspect weapons programs, who "might" give support or comfort to enemies, who "might" have terrorist nerve gas caches disguised as aspirin factories...oh wait, that's right, we bombed that one...and then consider the massive, destructive attack and total invasion and continued occupation of a sovereign nation, which only sixteen words, "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.", supposedly justified...please, tell me, how do Chavez's threats differ significantly from the actions and policies of the government of the USA?

Nothing in any of the reforms being put to a vote guarantee that such changes will be used by Chavez to eliminate any basic rights. What crystal ball are the critics of his policies, both past and present, looking into?

He survived a definite "state of emergency" a mere five yrs ago and could easily have legally struck back at those enemies, but pressed for "national dialogue" instead, condemning those who usurped the democratic process to a judgment of their peers, in the court of public opinion. Those who participated in the takeover certainly were not labeled "enemy combatants" in some Gitmo-like prison or subjected to disappearance by rendition, as they surely would have if such a coup had occurred in our own country.

Seems to me that people like you would be more concerned with demanding a restoration of some moral authority to your own government, or disturbed by changes to a Constitution which actually affects you... looking at the laws of War, Geneva Conventions and such, or maybe the right to due process and writs of Habeas Corpus that have been altered right here since 9/11, torture, rendition, secret prisons...of which every single one does have an affect on people living both here and in other nations of the World.

Some folk have strange criteria for determining who exactly their enemies "might" be.

Jesus Christ, you paint him as if he's Barney Fife with a bullet in his pocket.

I can criticize Bush AND Chavez. One doesn't exclude the other. Thanks for assuming that I'm not concerned about the loss of human rights here, but actually I'm concerned about it in both places, thank you very much.

when I try to figure it out, it must be a way to counter balance the oligarchy's power -- via their media and so on, because the oligarchy has shown no compunction about creating social chaos at the cost of human life. And the Chavez government, if anything, has erred on the side of tolerance and caution through out its history.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

You never had shit to back up your idiotic claims anyway.

by the tenets of socialism?

what is your opinion of socialism?

You're reading way too much into my use of that word.

In actuality, I used that word because it was used in one of my favorite movies, "The Big Lebowski." That's it.


And I shouldn't be surprised that someone would try to pidgeonhole me. Par for the course on DU (it's just easier thinking like that).

The truth is that I'm a pretty fair and smart guy who understands very well how capitalism can lead to oppression.

:hi:

so quit trying to convince me that he's the evilest fuck on earth or that he's subverting democracy - as if the US has ever spread "democracy" anywhere. :spray:

We're talking about Venezuela amending its Constitution, and thus we should be thinking in terms of constitutional principles.

What makes a constitution and a country's political environment strong and healthy?

to defeat the referendum.

Sure.

through coercive techniques. Even if the other side is using coercive techniques.

Show them where they are wrong. Make your argument, and make it strong. But the other side gets their say, too.

For one thing, there is this very odd situation where most of the media is owned by the opposition.

"We're talking about Venezuela amending its Constitution, and thus we should be thinking in terms of constitutional principles."

I'm so glad that you want to isolate the discussion about Venezuela to this one issue. I'm wondering if you have even bothered to read what is actually in proposed amendments to the consitution.

leadership, you do realize.

The manner in which Chavez is attempting to accomplish his goals is unbelievably important for the future of the country. He's setting the tone for the implementation of a new Constitution.

of bloody intervention in the region. You can try to separate them, as you have, but I for one am not going to talk about Chavez without talking about the CIA, about our imperialism in the region, about what is going on in Venezuela in entirety, not within the little bit of it that fits inside your discussion comfort zone.

So have you read the proposed changes to the constitution in this referendum? If so, what do you think about the entirety of the proposed changes, rather than this one Bullshit Media driven issue of term limits?

I'm not terribly opinionated about either way. There are many advantages to communal property laws, but they can be dangerous as well. In particular, if private property can be taken by the government without court approval (apparently the case here), that may be a very bad idea- it subjects property to overly-political influence, which cuts both ways.

And throwing out term limits, while not a horrible idea per se, also mandates that all political views be rigorously debated in public forums. Where there is any hint that power is being used to sustain itself (which could very well happen where private property can be taken for political reasons) term limits are absolutely necessary to maintain the integrity of political discourse.

economic laws of government are not that important. Socialism vs. capitalism is usually just six of one or a half-dozen of the other- where the foundation of the government itself is based in a healthy political discourse.

The details of it all are just transient. What matters is that the people themselves are always informed well enough to be able to effectively address problems their society faces. Education and the approach to problem solving are paramount. Where people are able to do that, in the long run things will work themselves out. What makes me hesitant is when I see that open approach and the political foundation itself being torn down in the name of some issue that itself will become irrelevant in time.

in an economy where something like 40% of the workforce is working irregular jobs. So is a constitutional prohibition on gender and sexual orientation discrimination. So is universal educational access through university level. Land reform, the age-old rural challenge of latin america, is also in the mix, and can make a huge difference in the lives of people.

"details of economic laws of government are not that important." Well I could hardly disagree more. Take for example the detail of corporate personhood and how it has aided and abetted the transformation of a republic of free citizens into a duopolistic plutocracy. These mere details end up making huge differences. The proposed constitutional changes promote a mixed economic system in venezuela, a system with a vibrant private sector, democratic socialist control over the major resources of the nation (i.e. oil), and empowerment of collective grassroots economic organizations. It is an interesting model. Attempts to dismiss this as simply a rehashed marxist-leninist command economicy are really missing the point of what they are up to.

socialism. Social security is one of those things that was necessary for our society if we didn't want millions upon millions of people who could not work due to disability or old age to be out on the streets with nothing to eat. Maybe it's conjecture, but social security is probably more responsible for our increase in average lifespan since the 1930's than advances in healthcare. But in a different country on a different day, social security may not have been necessary- in fact, a similar problem might have been dealt with in a different manner altogether by other people.

Further, while you understand that there is a problem with corporations, I think your pointing to corporate "personhood" as root of it is mistaken. The problem with corporations goes much deeper, to the way in which they are defined- the problem is the corporate veil itself. It's the lack of accountability for those the corporation truly answers to (shareholders). In other words, the corporation was an ill-conceived idea. They have grown and become so successful that they have basically taken over the world. Wow- it worked. Too well. They made a lot of money for the world without regard for the wisdom of the way in which they did it.

Anyway, my point about the "details not mattering" is that, paradoxically, the details that are most right for a given society in a given situation will be worked out by its people when those people are well informed, politically engaged with each other and have due influence on their government. Often, a system might work equally well with one method or with another. The point is that you don't need to get married to a particular ideology as long as a society is open-minded and has the ability to take necessary steps when problems come up (like FDR did in the 1930's).

the text of these proposed reforms and millions of copies have been distributed, hotlines set up, even sattelite trucks sent out to the provinces so people could hold town halls?

I'm not saying I agree completely with all the particulars. But as far as I can tell, every effort has been made to facilitate an informed debate among the electorate. You'll never read that in our press.

and then discussed in town halls?

If that is true- that is fucking awesome. Seriously.

I don't know if it worked or even got close to reaching everyone but, damn, I admire the effort.

Maybe we should not look for role models in countries where the constitutional safeguards have so obviously failed.

US Americans trying to tell the rest of the world how they should or should not amend their constitutions - it would be outrageously funny were it not so sad, really.

This is about the principles of the Enlightenment upon which our country was at least purportedly founded.

USA we just have a pres who changes our constitution and shits all over it and we don't get to vote on it ..

now what was anyone saying about democracy in Venezuela????? who are we to say, and who the hell are we as citizens, who have seen our constitution subverted, to talk?

I lived in Venezuela under Perez..and if you think that was a bed of roses ..i have a bridge for you..Under perez the US oil companies controlled the Venezuela Government..

their parks then? nothing but garbage heaps..oh yes you could vaguely see the outlines for baseball ..and fences around the parks..but the parks were piled high with garbage as high as the fences.

and poor children..well i saw many poor children that looked like they has measles or small pox..but the marks..they were burn marks ..3 year olds being sold by their older siblings for the rich to put cigars or cigarettes out on their body parts for a bolivar..and for the entertainment of the rich...and all the rich and elite were owned by our government


so please spare me ..of all the socialism bullshit and the complaints about Chavez..look deeper into our over governments crimes in that country for years and years ..and to the lack of a middle class and the poor and how they were treated while we wielded our power over their oil!

do i think Chavez is perfect..hell no..but he is damn well better than the puppets we had running that country.

fly

But if they truly have a free election in VZ, and the people want to live under an autocratic presidential government, it's their choice to do so.

I mean aren't they kind of exclusive?

Consent can be manufactured.

found naked, bound and murdered lying in a roadside ditch?

None? Oh. Well I guess he probably isn't a U.S. ally then.

I saw pictures on the MSM of that big rally against Hugo recently. It might have been an editing mistake but all I saw were a bunch of good looking young girls chanting something in Spanish that I guess was anti-Chavez. Looked a lot more like a party than a serious protest against a repressive and dictatorial regime. I guess those girls haven't been tuning in to FOX and CNN and the rest.

Seriously, I really beleive his main crime against nature is trying to get the people a share, instead of just signing his country over to the US and its clients.

That doesn't make you wrong, even though it CAN get you murdered. Hugo had better watch his ass.

:thumbsup:

If you do, you are biased. The only un-biased folks are those that praise his every move.

Kinda like Freak-Republic and how they talk about bush and discount anyone who disagrees with them.

You are either with us (or him) or against us (chavez).

Criticism is a no-no :)

present your crit rationally so we can enjoy a good argument and not suffer ridiculous claims like Charlie Brown abused Snoopy.

it saves me from posting something similiar. We were just framed as "kinda like freepers" because we support Chavez in his endeavors to save Venezuela from fascist oil diggers.

like calling someone a racist with no justification whatsoever,
EXCEPT the person had the audacity to question your opinions?

I've seen that happen to a number of people who dare disagree
with you.
When pressed to provide proof-POOF- the ignore button is hit
and the questioner, the one attacked with extremely offensive
names, is persona non grata.

Yeah, it's ridiculous alright.

Good argument?

Right------!

only the ones that praise him?

:shrug:

Why do you think "The Straight Story" is somehow superior to that of the gay community?

It's their country and their lives.

I'd vote "no" in the referendum.

He's clearly too egotistical to be a good national leader, his economic policies, even though their general direction is decent, have been clumsily implemented, and his power centralization is dangerous.

Is the opposition any better? That's an open question at best.

is "an open question at best". :eyes:

Unfortunately, it's not.

A fake, arbitrary "socialism" implemented from above from an egotistical president with authoritarian leanings is not equivalent to actual, genuine popular empowerment.

How many people have been lifted out of poverty? Any idea?

How many new voters? Any clue?

How much has the economy grown in the process? Have a guess?

So I'm not sure what you want me to "back up." I did reference clumsy economic policies, but I was chiefly thinking of inflation and the non-solution of price controls.

figure out what you meant by that. I should have just asked.

and is not imposed top-down.

Real socialism requires popular engagement, popular power--which does not equate to electing the same guy for decades of rule, especially not a guy who is more concerned with expanding his personal power than with building the institutional structures of public power. (Why does he want the constitutional reforms? Because in the abstract, they are better? No--because they will help him, personally, now.)

A real socialist, who by necessity must be a real democrat, would recognize that the Revolution can, will, and must live on without him, that the process is not centered around any particular individual but rather around the economic empowerment of the people. Whatever his opinion on term limits, he would step down when his time was up because he would recognize that it doesn't matter whether or not he personally is in power.

Hugo Chávez is not a socialist at all (how many years did it take before he was willing to utter the word?), but a rather typical left-populist: his first aim is, egotistically, his own personal power, and to pursue it he is willing and eager to woo the public with socialist rhetoric and leftist policies--ones that, naturally, involve centering power in his hands instead of directly in the hands of the people.

Initially, there is nothing wrong with this--it is a sort of mutually beneficial deal that, while imperfect, is much better than the alternative of a government controlled by the oligarchs. But when the power in the hands of the leader becomes so great that democracy and the rule of law themselves are threatened, when the institutional limitations on concentrated power are evaded (even if it is for a good end), this relationship starts becoming dangerous: even if you trust Chávez, can you say now that you trust every one of his successors?

has made many efforts to empower the people and to institutionalize their engagement. If he wanted to become an autocrat, he really fucked up big time. It would have been easier, much easier, to sell out to the United States in the first place.

I've posted this before in Chavez threads but never gotten a response. It's the most passionate post I've ever read on DU. I hope someone gets a chance to read it now.

Thu Sep-21-06 12:28 AM
Response to Reply #30
80. and most that ran Venezuela before Chavez were Updated at 11:40 PM

Edited on Thu Sep-21-06 12:30 AM by flyarm
US OIL puppets..i know..i lived there and i can assure you the way the government was in Venezuela before Chavez..only gave a damn about one thing..and that wa s the richest of the rich played ball with the US oil companies..and they didn't give one rats ass about the people..they ruled with an iron fist..

there were 18 yr old military boys on the streets with machine guns..every quarter of a mile..to keep the poor in control..

Americans were god and ruled Venezuela..to the bitter destruction of the Venezuelan poor!

Like i said..i lived there..and it was horrible..before Chavez for the majority of Venezuelans..

i saw little poor children who had people put their cigarettes out on their arms and chests for a boulivar..


there was no middle class..there was the oil boys and the companies that catered to the oil boys..and nothing else..

i saw children with their teeth rotted out with only points in their mouths..and blood on their gums..

there were no doctors for the poor..

there were only the very very rich..and the very very poor..

nothing in between..

i lived their 2 times with my husbands business..and each time we returned home i got down on the ground and kissed it!

the crimes against humanity before Chavez was disgusting..but it was run by our oil corps..and the Kuwaiti's had their hands in the oil as well.. so you heard little of it! there was no possibility of decent by the poor..they had no voice. NONE!

the pres of Venezuela and the VP were owned by US corporations..and don't you even attempt to tell me other wise..i knew the VP of Venezuela..and i danced with him 2 times on Christmas and New years and told him off..of what they did to their people..and he laughed at me..and said i was an American idealist!

fly]
\
Reply #95
111. i just get sick of people talking about what they know nothing of.. Updated at 11:40 PM

Edited on Thu Sep-21-06 02:07 AM by flyarm
when we lived there under previous governments ..one time machine gun fire went off in the caracas hilton where we lived..for 6 months..not once but twice!!..yes machine gun fire went through the lobby by young military ..

there was no freedom under previous presidents..

we were there 2 times through xmas..

my husbands boss sent xmas gifts to my son and myself..and for my husband in a duffel bag..a motorized car for my son..and the military was at the door of the hotel and took it all way from my husband and would not let him go into the hotel with gifts..xmas gifts!

my husband took a bus for some road trips..and several times had their bus stopped by military that got on the bus with machine guns..and put them in their faces ..and took their watches and money..and any other jewelry they had..

this was under the presidents that the * cabal liked, the ones that stole every thing they could from the people of Venezuela.


There were days my son and i sat at the hotel pool and we had helicopters flying over head and the pool,.. so close you felt like you could reach up and touch them..with guys hanging out of the helicopters with machine guns pointed at us..i would run my son and I up to our room and hide..as best we could..

it was terrifying...

there was no hope at all for the poor..none at all..the young men had only the choice of military unless they were from the very rich families..

or working in the american oil fields for pennies...

so bullshit is bullshit.,.

i saw it..and i lived it..and i can tell you..Chavez may not be perfect..and i am sure he is not..but he could be no worse than what those poor people lived under for so many years with our oil puppet presidents and governments down there!! and they were ours!..they were owned by our oil companies!

I lived with the oil people at the rich hotels i lived in..and the pilots for our oil companies..and the pilots for the Kwaiti's...they used to show me the Krugerrand they got as tips..big ones!!

my husbands boss had a Renior in his freaking bathroom!

yes a real one!!

like i said..bullshit is bullshit..the previous governments were American oil company owned..and our government ran them ...

fly

Venezuelans need to be careful that they aren't basing their long-term future on their short-term emotion. They need to ensure that their country will be prepared to effectively address problems it faces for decades, centuries to come.

When you're talking about a constitution, you can't think in terms of "us vs. them." The ideas have to be broader than that if the document is going to stand the test of time.

Draconian legislation
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2319401&mesg_id=2319455

is doing/has done as if it somehow justifies irresponsible thinking.

you'd think some may be more concerned with the attacks on our own Constitution, right now; resolutions sitting comfortably in Congress with easy passage just moments away...bills supported by both parties, I might add.

If so many are worried about Constitutions in South American governments being changed, why no outcry about the one that we can actually do something about, eh?

When I see the number of topics posted here condemning Mr. Chavez, I can't help but wonder.

This is a big deal. Like I posted in another thread, they have a real opportunity here to do something great. But the approach being taken concerns me.

We have too many problems right here that need our attention.

* won't help and in fact has cut the budget for the low income heating program.

Chavez helping out is a good thing, imho.

Citgo is involved in distributing discount-priced home heating oil, a program started last year
by Joseph Kennedy, a former Democratic congressman and son of the late Sen. Robert F. Kennedy.
The nonprofit Citizens Energy, which Kennedy operates, provided 100 million gallons of home heating
oil at a 40 percent discount.

--------

What is the Oil Heat Program?

http://www.citizensenergy.com/english/pages/OilHeatProgram

In partnership with CITGO, Citizens Energy works with thousands of oil heat dealers and local fuel assistance agencies
in 16 states to provide deliveries of home heating oil to those in need. This year the Oil Heat Program will provide eligible families a one-time delivery of 100 gallons of home heating oil.

The Citizens Energy Oil Heat Program will begin authorizing deliveries on December 3, 2007.
http://www.citizensenergy.com/english/pages/33/need-assistance">Please click here for further program information and to learn how to apply.

Does your State Participate?
http://www.citizensenergy.com/english/pages/OilHeatProgram

But my concern about a number of other issues that are far more important render my feelings toward Chavez nil.

I mean beyond, "Absolute power corrupts absolutely." You've said that a couple of times already.

After Chavez has achieved his goals, he will sit comfortably atop his new country with all the powers he gave himself in order to reform still firmly in place. Then, when dissenters appear, he will crush them. Its always after the goal is accomplished that the man becomes the dictator.

Imagine that!

And when Mexico and Canada join that unholy union the U.S. is fucking toast.

Run, hide, the sky is falling...

:rofl:

Can either become a great man of the people or the newest tyrant of the people. If current global trends stay the same, I expect a lot more nations to pick between open and closed government systems.

keep in mind these are the WMDer non journalistic crapasses war rootin' slimebags in nice suits that work for the military industrial complex.

gracious!

and the hero worship I see of him here is often disturbing in it's childlike quality. Some people were just born to worship authoritarian figures, I guess.

He's not the devil. He's not the biggest problem in the world by far, but he's certainly not the second coming either. I have to admit I get a HELL of a kick out of watching him make fun of Bush, but I don't let that blind me to the less savory side of Mr. Chavez.

This is every Chavez thread on DU:

OP: Some article.

Anti Chavez poster: He's a dictator.
Response: No, he was elected. Fact, fact, fact.
Anti Chavez poster: You worship Chavez!

I don't know why our mods' heads haven't exploded yet or why we just keep repeating the same damn thread. I keep hoping to find out stuff I don't know which is hard to do because our media is in full tilt propaganda mode.

"I have supported Chavez in the past, but what he is now doing is making me look at him again as a person."

a "person"?

are circulating.

I swear, there's a book here on the smearing of Hugo Chavez.

That "I always voted for Chavez but I won't vote for this". It's like the callers on Washington Journal that say, "I've always voted for Democrats BUT . . ." And it has been repeated in several corporate media hit pieces -- just like the president for life stuff and now, the rigged election meme.

This is a well done poll and it has been interesting. Thanks.

I mean, what kind of sick individual pushes a "meme" saying Chavez is a "person".

/wtf

"A vote 'yes' is a vote for Chavez -- a vote 'no' is a vote for (US President) George W. Bush," he said.

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5ht7JdsQWVI697Qh32oZn6W_RyP0g

"He who says he supports Chavez but votes 'no' is a traitor, a true traitor," the president told an arena packed with red-clad representatives of pro-Chavez local community councils. "He's against me, against the revolution and against the people."


http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/11/23/america/LA-GEN-Venezuela-Constitution.php

Quite frankly, I tend to think that his insistence on making this about himself backfired as a campaign strategy.

is there anything of substance regarding the anti-Chavez BS or is this all more conservative flamebaiting?

Did I offend you by pointing out the obvious?

How about the first POLL RESPONSE I made, tailored to WHAT MIGHT BE THE VIEWS OF PEOPLE ON THIS BOARD, the one stating "I've always supported Chavez, and will no matter what he does." Does that show bias, too?

Or is the bias merely in asking the question of what people think about what he is doing?

How about the first POLL RESPONSE I made, tailored to WHAT MIGHT BE THE VIEWS OF PEOPLE ON THIS BOARD, the one stating "I've always supported Chavez, and will no matter what he does." Does that show bias, too?

Or is the bias merely in asking the question of what people think about what he is doing?

Really, I don't think I have any place to judgment. Since I'm not living there, I don't know the situation and what it's like. That's something the Venezuelans have to figure out.

Now, if he starts invading his neighbors or executing dissenters, then that changes things. However, I don't see any reason to think he would do that. It wouldn't be in his interests anyways. That would just certain people an excuse.

that sold the Iraq war?

Was consolidating power unto himself, just as Chavez is now, people on this board would be calling for his head.

Dictators, left OR right, are still....dictators.

I still remember '92, when Col. Hugo Chavez tried to use the military to overthrow the elected government of Venezuela.
Yes, it was corrupt.
Yes, the country needed reform.

But military coups are never a good idea.


But if he calls himself a socialist all the while concentrating all power unto himself, that makes him a 'good' dictator.

i guess things are just hunky dory if the dictator is supported by little lord pissy pants..with no elections.

but if a president calls for elections..he is a dictator...wake me up someone .please..

fly

are not being monitored. Lying straight up! They really don't seem to care that we know better. THAT'S scary.

Confessions of a Economic hit man..

http://www.democracynow.org/2005/5/17/confessions_of_an_economic_hit_man

May 17, 2005


Confessions of an Economic Hit Man: How the U.S. Uses Globalization to Cheat Poor Countries Out of Trillions
We play an interview with, John Perkins–author of “Confessions of an Economic Hit Man”–who says he says he helped the U.S. cheat poor countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars by lending them more money than they could possibly repay and then taking over their economies.

The protests this week in Bolivia come as Latin America is seeing significant success among popular progressive movements. From Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, Lula da Silva of Brazil to the changes of government in Uruguay and now Ecuador, there is a continent-wide trend that has Washington concerned. The US has long exploited countries throughout Central and Latin America for the natural resources, labor and land. Over the decades, this exploitation has been backed up by force and through devastating policies dictated to puppet regimes. Our next guest says he helped the U.S. cheat poor countries in Latin America and around the globe out of trillions of dollars by lending them more money than they could possibly repay and then taking over their economies. From 1971 to 1981, John Perkins worked for the international consulting firm of Chas T. Main. He described himself as an “economic hit man.” He"s written a memoir called Confessions of an Economic Hit Man. When he joined us in our fire house studio, we asked him to begin with how he came to be recruited first by the National Security Agency–far larger than the C.I.A.–and then this so-called international consulting firm of Chas T. Main.

John Perkins, author of “Confessions of an Economic Hit Man.”

Also, his great interviews on Amy Goodman.

He lays it out very clearly.

If Chavez was a dictator he would just declare himself President for life, he would not hold elections. One thing critics of this referendum seem to not understand is the only way this would make him President for life is if people kept re-electing him every few years. He is not doing away with elections as a dictator would do, he is only doing away with term limits. I happen to believe term limits are a good thing in most cases, but a country can still be a democracy even if they don't have term limits.

Chavez does not pose nearly the threat to Venezuala's democracy as those who attempted to violently overthrow him in a coup a few years back do. I believe that Chavez's opposition poses the greatest threat to Venezuala's democracy because they have shown that if they don't get their way in an election they are more than willing to overthrow the elected leader and replace him with a corporate puppet. If you are looking for would be dictators in Venezuala, Chavez is not the one to be focused on it is members of the opposition who would like Venezuala to be a dictatorship that answers to the oil industry.

tax dollars$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

and lets stop continuing the msm and * policy of propaganda.

fly

but his group oversaw the elections in Venezuela!!

Soo Venezuela had their elections validated by an outside source..where ours were not.

fly

Chavez was legitimately elected by huge margins, and there were no reputable claims of election fraud in any of the elections which Chavez won. There is a world of difference between Venezuala's internationally monitored election and our Diebold monitored elections.

I don't like consolidation of power, regardless of where it is. As well, the idea of a lifelong president concerns me. It's a short step from 'president for life until voted out' to simply 'president for life.' Dictators aren't necessarily made overnight or in an explosive coup. There's such a thing as creep. History is replete with tyrants who came to power fully supported by the people.

I believe a periodic infusion of new blood and fresh perspective can do good for a government, too.

That said, this is a decision for the people of Venezuela to make. Their vote is what counts. Chavez may be a great man, or may not, and the consequences either way will be theirs to live with.

You hate socialism and ignore national socialism.

Do I know you? Have I offended you in some way?

Anyhow. I thought my position was pretty clear in the original post. I don't like the possibility of a lifelong president, as I fear it could be twisted to remove the whole 'if you vote for me' part. I don't like consolidation of power, I think fresh blood in a government can be a good thing. I also ultimately believe that my opinion is insignificant compared to the voting desires of the Venezuelan people.

:sarcasm:

How can he hate Christmas when it's his birthday, after all?

:sarcasm:

buddies and the other group is the people who want meaningful change and realize it isn't going to happen with gotcha politics set on maintaining the status quo.

One fuking thing is for sure if this specie goes extinct it will deserve what it gets.

.