Yes, please handle me.

It is obviously stupid to be suspicious of power grabs. Over half of Venezuelans are apparently as stupid as me to be equally suspicious.

PJD: I like your approach. Just ask a responsible question and you get a really stupid answer from GoGreen88.

Moonraven: Thank you so much for your well informed posts to this tread and others. I will check back to see how you handle GoGreen88. Good luck.

eshu - great post, I whole-heartedly agree.

"While the setback was either a reflection of complacency among his supporters or a burgeoning fear that the reforms package might deprive even the poor of what little private property they own, the opposition, such as it is, seized upon it as a sign that the president's grassroots base was beginning to erode."

I make note of the use of the phrase, "even the poor", to dictate the meaning of this article.

The Idea of capitalism is one where there is a separation between the same people where being better is about having stuff. The haves vs. the have-nots. Nothing to do with self worth or being a good person.

Even this piece inaccurately portrays Chavez and the proposed reforms.
I am tired of having so many minds who rely on the corporate mainstream media to have their thinking limited and bounded be the decision makers all across society.

Common Dreams has become just another anti-Chavez site.

This same story is straight off the anti-Chavezwire services.

Someone put his name on it--which to this poster is unethical.

Just a couple of quick comments: Not only did Chavez deny that he did not respond to pressure from the military to accept the results of the referendum: The generals who were with him at Fort Tiuna when the results came through ALSO flatly denied it.

Chavez says that he isn't "pressurable"--and I believe all the evidence of the past 15 years indicates that he, indeed, is not.

The conclusion of this "piece" is pure propaganda: Chavez never has said that his reforms were "marxist" revitalizations.

Clever juztaposition of quotes, but it has to be seen for the propaganda that it is.

Now onto THIS WEEK'S news:

Today in Buenos Aires the presidents of Venezuela, Brazil, Argentina, Bolivia and Paraguay are signing into operation Banco del Sur (the president of Uruguay, currently on bad terms with Argentina over a group of polluting paper mills on the border between the two countries, will sign tomorrow when he arrives for the installation of Cristina Fernandez de Kirschner as president of Argentina).

Banco del Sur was proposed by Chavez in 2006 and quickly seconded by Kirschner, as Argentina has gone through the wringer due to the hassles with the World Bank and the World Monetary Fund.

Colombia has asked to join the bank later.

The bank is big news because it should finally offer financing for South American countries without the neoliberal strings attached that have created such a financial disaster all over the region over the past 25 years.

The most interesting thing about this article is that it reeks of the usual western arrogance. Here is analysis presented by people who can point out repeatedly the errors of socialism- a relatively young political theory and practice- but can only do so from the perspective of capital, which, a mere decade after consolidating its hold on the world, with relatively low levels of oppposition for five centuries, and with today what it calls its strongest economy ever,remains a system which cannot refrain from unneccesssary colonial wars, gated communities, deathsquads and mercenary governments defended by mercenary armies. It really should be obvious to all by now that if capital really were a system that rewards the zenith in human potential, there wouldn't be such a flock of sociopaths in the leadership of every government where capital dominates. But the depths of ignorance and self-satisfaction that capital breeds among its best and brightest prevents the merest glimmer of self-recognition.

"...rejected his package of constitutional reforms, which would have enabled him to stand for election indefinitely and put the country even more firmly on a socialist course...
The reforms - rejected by a slim margin of 50.7% to 49.3% with an abstention rate of 44% - would have restricted private property, shortened the working week from 44 to 36 hours and extended social security to casual labour."

I think the problem was one referendum for all four reforms instead of four referendums, one for each. Passing three out of four would have been great.

What Chavez needs is MORE referendums using modern communications. He needs to take a lesson from the Swiss who have few natural resources but have one of the highest per capita incomes in the world, thanks to direct democracy.

All wage-earning workers naturally despise having to compete against their fellow humans to sell their labor for the benefit and further enrichment of a small minority who are already wealthy and powerful, but whose greed is without limit.

They likewise naturally long for the day when they can truly actualize their labor and talents, on their own terms, for the benefit of their fellow workers, their societies, and for humanity.

The most important job of capitalism is to prevent workers from thinking of themselves in the above terms - that instead, greed is natural and "all men desire to be masters of a world of slaves" to quote one Capitalist apologist of the Chicago School. But deep inside, the worker knows better resulting in alienation and unhappiness.

As long as this state of affairs exists, there will be the dream of Socialism and solidarity.

http://www.coanews.org/article/2007/pass-the-torch

http://archive.coanews.org/tiki-read_article.php?articleId=1323

http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=22418

Chavez needs to make this more about his ideas and less about himself. No one should have to choose between being "Pro Chavez" or "Anti Chavez". The nature of the ideas of the party he represents need to be debated. Otherwise, his becomes just another "personality cult".

In another vein, some would have us believe that only leaders of "capitalist" societies have been tyrants. This would leave out such wonders as Csaucescu, Hoxha, Stalin, Kim, Pol Pot, Mao,ect. None of which could be considered capitalists, but bad all the same.

Viva Chavez !

Too bad President Crackhead couldn't have been as pro Democracy as Chavez when he cheated to beat Gore in 2000 and cheated again to beat Kerry in 2004.

Chavez could teach President Crackhead and all of our corporate whore congresspigs a thing or three about democracy

OpEdNews.com has better, unbiased coverage, imho

bligh please read up on the Spanish Civil War ( or better put Anti Revolution)"Homage to Catalonia" George Orwell is a first hand account of the events from 1936 through 1939.

What you will find is that there is little difference in despotic governments whether they call themselves Capitalists, Communists or Fascist.

They all have a common goal :The poor will serve the elite.

Therefor they all hate Anarchists or any ideals that strive for equality.

Don't get me wrong I fully agree with your first paragraph.It is the Bolivarian Revolution that should be central , but the right doesn't like to talk about treating all people as equal.

"formernadervoter December 9th, 2007 3:33 pm

Even this piece inaccurately portrays Chavez and the proposed reforms.
I am tired of having so many minds who rely on the corporate mainstream media to have their thinking limited and bounded be the decision makers all across society."

Now that post should have been completed with some links to resources the rest of us might then be able to use and get some real education. Otherwise, as it stands, which is very bare, it's very non-informative.

I agree with the post, but it's still and FAR too bare.

"moonraven December 9th, 2007 3:33 pm

...

Just a couple of quick comments: Not only did Chavez deny that he did not respond to pressure from the military to accept the results of the referendum: The generals who were with him at Fort Tiuna when the results came through ALSO flatly denied it.

..."

That could use some clarification. F.e., does "he did not respond" mean that the military did apply pressure and Chavez gave no response to it at all; or that the military applied no pressure, so there was none for Chavez to need to respond to; or ...?

"The conclusion of this "piece" is pure propaganda: Chavez never has said that his reforms were "marxist" revitalizations."

I've never read or heard of him referring to any of his policies that way, either; always reading and hearing Bolivarian. Was Bolivar influenced by Marx? I don't know, but it's very possible that he wasn't and that there's still some strong similarities between the principles of these two men. After all, we're all humans, and while some individuals seem to sometimes have totally unique ideas, we can "stumble upon" someone else later on and find that he or she has very, strikingly similar ideas, while the two people have never heard or read of what each other has said, in no way, not directly or indirectly.

That is, humans have more in common than we have for real differences; although we do have some strikingly differing principles for living by, some or many seem awfully prone to GREED, while some of the rest are very generous, and so on. Nonetheless, real needs are very common to all of us; wants differ very much based on culture, but [needs], necessities are very common, quite universal. So Bolivar and Marx could have strong similarities in terms of policies, while knowing or learning nothing from one another.

And the Sunday Herald "piece" does indeed seem to bear propaganda.

" moonraven December 9th, 2007 3:41 pm

Now onto THIS WEEK'S news:

Today in Buenos Aires the presidents of Venezuela, Brazil, Argentina, Bolivia and Paraguay are signing into operation Banco del Sur ....

..."

That should also have been a post complemented with links to resources, but since that wasn't provided and I recalled having read at least one article on Banco del Sur at www.globalresearch.ca , I did a Web search.

"The Bank of the South: An Alternative to IMF and World Bank Dominance",
by Stephen Lendman, Oct. 29, 2007

"Imperial Sunset?
For the first time since its rise as a superpower the United States is facing a serious threat to its hegemony across the globe",
by Aijaz Ahmad, for Frontline, India's National Magazine from The Hindu, hinduonnet.com, March 24-April 6, 2007,

There's a copy of the latter article at GR, but it only provides a hyperlink to the hinduonnet homepage, so the following is the direct link for the Frontline article, which provides a couple of pictures, which are omitted from the GR copy.

http://www.flonnet.com/fl2406/stories/20070406004500400.htm

In checking if I indeed had the article by Stephen Lendman bookmarked, I noticed that I appear to not have yet read it yet; while having thought to have done so. Am pretty sure I did, but if not, then I expect it's good; even if I don't always agree with him ([or anyone else]) fully, this should be another of his articles that provides qualitative information.

In the Frontline article, people wanting to immediately start with the part referring to Banco del Sur just need to scroll down to the subheading of "LATIN AMERICA".

Some of what that article says on Latin America and/or Venezuela may possibly be outdated, already, but it seems nonetheless interesting to me and others might appreciate what the four paragraphs say.

Lastly, and I don't know that it's actually true, but if it is true that Chavez lost due to his wanting the constitutional change that would permit presidents to keep running in elections, then I don't see why people would fear this; well, except for anti-Chavez people. NONE of his supporters, so far, should fear such a constitutional change, for the fear would then strike me as to be interpreted as these people misbelieving that it means elected for life, which is not the same thing. As I understand it, he'd be keeping the country or govt democratic, just that he'd be eliminating the law dictating that presidents can't continually run again. Running doesn't mean being elected; it just means being granted the right to run for re-election.

As far as I'm concerned, I'd definitely be interested in a democratic kingship, one in which wasteful multi-party'ism is diminished and therefore less costly to the population, while who ever is king must be elected and be impeachable, etc. If elected, then the person must be un-elected, if and when there's just cause to remove the person from whatever public office they were elected to, that is.

Chavez is not asking the population to support changing the constitution in this manner for any ill reason; his intentions are to work for Venezuela and Latin America.

And the Frontline article reminds that he's not anti-capitalist, but that he "puts a human face" on capitalism; only being against GREED and all of the related hellish corruption that evidently always accompanies greed.

The capitalists of Ven. have nothing to fear from him; if they supported him, then they'd be doing themselves and the whole country, population a LOT of GOOD. "What goes around comes back around", applying to both good and bad things; including "spreading (or distributing) the wealth". The wealthy don't do themselves anywhere as much good by being hellishly piggish, as they would by making sure to spread the wealth. They would learn that indeed, "what goes around comes back around"; and an old parable or teaching says that reward can be multi-fold more than what we generously gave without demanding anything in return.

Well, evidently getting rich renders most of the "winners" atrociously DUMB. Sooner or later, they are shooting themselves in both feet, or blasting them off, entirely; while also taking down, brutally, many innocents and thinking that that is all they're doing that's harmful. They know they harm others and very badly, surely; but they sure don't seem to realise that they're also harming themselves.

GREED evidently is very BLINDING. It renders the greedy blind and deaf, and, as revealed through their spoken reasoning, very incapable of truly intelligent reasoning; hence, dumb in more ways than only blindness and deafness.

They fool too many people, naive people, but they don't fool all of us with their nearly incredibly poor reasoning abilities, so intelligence. Being rich does not render a person brilliant; it instead intellectually and spiritually cripples many who become rich. It renders many of those people very devoid of morality and therefore sound, healthy principles; like SOUL-[LESS].

Attnh Mike Corbell--

If you check out: http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/

you can search their archives for a pretty complete history of the development of the Bank of the South. They are also an excellent source of news from within Venezuela, particularly the details of the Bolivarian socialist program being adminstered there.

I, for my part, admire Mr. Chavez. If for anything, his courage and insight into his describing the murderous swine ruling THIS country by the grace of a population of lemming-like drones. Infact, I like ANYONE who has the testes to call U.S. "leaders" and the corporations who feed 'em their high protein diets what they are; murderous foul bastards.

Vive Castro! Vive Chavez! Vive Morales!
Where there is oppression there will always be those to fight for justice!
People of good will support the cause of these revolutionaries around the world. I am shocked that the Spanish King (I didn't know Spain still had a king for one) had the gall to tell a foreign leader to shut up...reeks of the old days of imperialism. Bolivar must be fuming in the great beyond.

Paraphrasing PJD: Workers naturally long for the day when they can truly actualize their labor and talents, on their own terms, for the benefit of their fellow workers, their societies, and for humanity. The most important job of capitalism is to prevent workers from thinking of themselves in the above terms - that instead, greed is natural and "all men desire to be masters of a world of slaves"

The positive and the negative always co-exist within human nature and one has to manipulate them to achieve a net positive. The "masters and slaves" business is of course negative so it has to be dampened like all the other negative forces. The people must operate by free will so the only things we can do besides work on our own self-discipline is to discipline the children, set good examples, and ensure that the organizations take only positive actions. There need not be any compromise - if there is any significant negative element in an organized action, it is simply canceled (kind of like the "do no harm" medical ethic).

So to implement the prescription, we eliminate our dependence on organizations. We build alter-economies. The localism movement accomplishes this among other good things. Our individual/local self-sufficiency is necessary in order to stick to the prescription of having organizations do only positive things.

It is dependency which gets us in trouble - if we become dependent on an organization, then when someone corrupts it we become enslaved to the corruption. So we have to selectively engage or disengage the organization. Thereby mass individual self-sufficiency and selective exchange/association are used to build net positive energy in societies.

Hi!
I'm from Venezuela and I live IN VENEZUELA, so I KNOW what's going on here more than many of you, right?
So it pisses me off when people trying to be smart or trying to prove they're very update with news around the world or maybe just trying to be alternative talk about things they don't know for sure. like:
"Viva Chavez !

Too bad President Crackhead couldn't have been as pro Democracy as Chavez when he cheated to beat Gore in 2000 and cheated again to beat Kerry in 2004.

Chavez could teach President Crackhead and all of our corporate whore congresspigs a thing or three about democracy"

or
"Even this piece inaccurately portrays Chavez and the proposed reforms.
I am tired of having so many minds who rely on the corporate mainstream media to have their thinking limited and bounded be the decision makers all across society."

and what 15 years are yu talking about?
"Common Dreams has become just another anti-Chavez site.

This same story is straight off the anti-Chavezwire services.

Someone put his name on it–which to this poster is unethical.

Just a couple of quick comments: Not only did Chavez deny that he did not respond to pressure from the military to accept the results of the referendum: The generals who were with him at Fort Tiuna when the results came through ALSO flatly denied it.

Chavez says that he isn't "pressurable"–and I believe all the evidence of the past 15 years indicates that he, indeed, is not.

The conclusion of this "piece" is pure propaganda: Chavez never has said that his reforms were "marxist" revitalizations.

Clever juztaposition of quotes, but it has to be seen for the propaganda that it is."

I'm not against all the things Chavez says but I'm not in favor of allof his proposals either (I'm not an extremist so you know) but the reality is that he's made our country even more poor, we can't find milk or eggs and sometimes meat (what? yes! and we're a country that HAS and HAD BEEN VERY PRODUCTIVE IN THIS AREA!
in the past the National Guard didnt attack civilians as they do now, ORDERED by the president...we've never had so much deaths, crime...
I could just go on and on...so unless you come AND LIVE HERE AND KNOW THE TRUTH FOR YOURSELF DON'T COME TRYING TO BE AN INTELLECTUAL AND TALKING ABOUT THINGS YOU ABVIOUSLY DON'T KNOW NOHING ABOUT, ok?

Just wanted to say that :)
thanx for reading, bye from Venezuela!

People are not ants, termites, or bees - there has to be room for individual initiative and achievement. This was seen in the old Soviet Union when 30- 40% of the crop production came from the 2% of the land that was set aside as private plots.

treehugger12 December 10th, 2007 8:10 am
wrote:
"the reality is that he's made our country even more poor, we can't find milk or eggs and sometimes meat..."

Why are you blaming that on Chavez? Hasn't it ever occured to you that capitalist pigs in Caracas control the mass produced, and imported milk, eggs, and meat?

The enemies of Chavez are supporters of Bush, they'll do anything to piss off the people who they know will then incorrectly blame it on Chavez.

All of the tactics recommended by the CIA are or have been used:
http://www.chavezcode.com/2007/11/operation-pliers.html

Operation pliers has been blacked out by the U.S. corporate newsmedia. The U.S. oligarchy and the Venezuelan oligarchy are the same.

"Dictator for life". That's what Chavez wanted and almost got. All of you Chavez aplogists should be ashamed of yourselves.

It doesn't matter if the dictator is "your guy", going from a democracy to a dictatorship is very bad (do I really need to explain why?). If you don't agree with that then I hope you don't vote...

Mike Corbeil:

Sorry if I was not clear. The generals indicated that they had made no attempt to pressure Chavez.

Site where one can find actual news in English about Venezuela: venezuelanalysis.com

It was started several years ago by Gregory Wilpert, a sociologist (former Fulbright Scholar in Venezuela) and journalist to fill the gap of resources in English.

Since Bolivar died in Santa Marta, Colombia, in December of 1830 I find it extremely doubtful that he had read anything by Karl Marx.

treehugger:

Not so fast.

Just because you live in Venezuela doesn't make you CONSCIOUS.

I live in Latin America (Mexico) and I spend a lot of time in Venezuela. I see plenty of unconscious folks running around there--especially folks with your level of English skills.

As another poster correctly pointed out, the shortages are not caused by Chavez--but by folks like you in the opposition. The opposition folks own the supermarkets and also most of the distribution centers for food. The shortages also happened 5 years ago during the lockout against PDVSA--and they were caused by the same folks who caused them now.

If every time in my little village mercado here I couldn't find what I wanted to buy I ran out in the street and shook my fist against the IMPOSED--not democratically elected--president, Felipe Calderon, folks would think I was a damn fool and I would feel like one.

Treehugger, you are barking up the wrong tree.

Please consider taking your hostility and coverting that energy into getting the supermarket owners in Caracas to stop the shortages.

GoGreen88 wrote:

"Dictator for life". That's what Chavez wanted and almost got. "

-------

Why spread lies GG?! Chavez would have had to be elected at the end of each term to stay in power.

---------------

"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."
Joseph Goebbels, German Minister of Propaganda, 1933-1945

*****

"One reason that propaganda often works better on the educated than on the uneducated is that educated people read more, so they receive more propaganda."
Noam Chomsky
------------------

A few of the big fat lies that many Americans believe:

- The War on terror is a war on terror
- The USA has liberty and justice for all
- The US Dept of Defense is primarily concerned with defense
- The war on drugs is a war on drugs
- The USA is a democratic republic
- American Presidents are elected by the people
- The US state department is looking out for the interests of the American people

etc!

The rightwing is always ready to use the republishing of now 2 anti-Chavez pieces in the past few days--

WHO AT COMMON DREAMS IS DECIDING TO REPUBLISH ANTI-CHAVEZ PROPAGANDA?

The rightwing is always ready to use the republishing of now 2 anti-Chavez pieces in the past few days--

WHO AT COMMON DREAMS IS DECIDING TO REPUBLISH ANTI-CHAVEZ PROPAGANDA?

And why does the posting mechanism jump the gun?

Too many bugs in this site--and most of them, I suspect, have only 2 legs.

This site promotes itself as PROGRESSIVE.

If I wanted to receive rightwing propaganda I would just go straight to Fox News!

gogreen,

Now, please explain how removing term limits would have led to a dictatorship? Was he abolishing elections?

A final comment to treehugger:

"A month before the referendum, opposition leaders met with US officials in Prague, including Paul Wolfowitz, who urged them to "organise acts of economic sabotage against infrastructure, destroy the food transport and delivery chain ... and organise a military coup with all means possible" to stop the constitutional reforms."

And you have the nerve to blame the president of Venezuela for shortages.

Chavez's stated goal was to be president for life, and abolishing term limits was just the latest in power grabs, after that abolishing or fixing elections is the obvious next step, the constitution was the only thing standing in his way.

I'm all for Latin & South America standing up to the US and doing what is best for them. But Venezuelans rightly saw what Chavez was up to and (barely) put a stop to it, good for them.

It is the Venezuelans who have had to live with the consequences, and perhaps they knew too well where Chavez was heading, as exemplified by Chavez's good friend and fellow socialist revolutionary, but one who ended up as dictator for life:

"90 per cent of the population, according to public opinion polls, supported Castro. However, Castro did not keep his promise of holding free elections. Castro claimed the national unity that had been created would be destroyed by the competing political parties in an election."

Or do you love Castro too? Again, that's great he stood up to the US, but a dictator is a dictator. I for one would not want to live under a dictatorship, maybe you do. Do you realize you can't even use the internet if you're a Cuban citizen?

Moonraven:
It's apparent that the CommonDreams editor(s) either 1) isn't interested in the revolution going on in Venezuela or 2) isn't interested in supporting it. CommonDreams would be a great front for the nsa or cia - they're obviously in a position to finger and/or censor/edit some of the words of some radicals. Maybe it's just a thinly disguised trap. :-)

GoGreen:
"Chavez's stated goal was to be president for life" - that DOES NOT make him a dictator! Get a dictionary you fool. He would still have had to have been elected each term. This apparently incorruptible man wants to serve the Venezuelan people for the rest of his life. The poor man has the most powerful, corrupt, and inhumane men (in Venezuela & Washington) fighting him every step of the way with every conceivable dirty trick they can find, and you're apparently just a queer little cheerleader for them. Shame on you!

Max:

You could be right. Putting up a phoney progressive site would be a stroke of propaganda cynicism--if not genius.

I am not suggesting that folks who write comments be edited or censored, as I am a believer in free speech--even for those who flagrantly abuse that right at the expense of others.

But I do feel that the editors of this site should be republishing PROGRESSIVE articles--not print versions of Fox News.

Rebel Farmer: More than happy to oblige with information.

Not so sure I have an inclination to mud-wrestle with the likes of GoGreen, however. He or she makes a big deal out of Chavez' friendship with Castro--as if that makes them twins. I suspect, for example, that Bush has some friends who are not retarded. I have African American friends, but am not African American.

There is a real problem on the right of the political spectrum with logical thinking--it's been substituted by jingoism, racism and crying wolf.

But the funniest part of Go Green's pitch is that he/she says he/she wouldn't want to live under a dictatorship--yet apparently lives quite happily under the dictatorship of The Bush Gang of Totalitarian TwoSteppers.

Or is the hallmark of a democracy that it spies on its citizens, prevents them from voting, kidnaps them, declares them to be illegal enemy combatants--and doesn't provide habeas corpus as part of its system of justice?

News to me.

"queer little cheerleader"

Nice one, really added some weight to your argument. So you're an idealist socialist who is also a homophobe? Shame on you for being a bigot!

"Chavez's stated goal was to be president for life"- that DOES NOT make him a dictator!

I guess you don't think elections can ever be fixed, or that Chavez only wants this one last change to the constitution. Do you think Chavez will really stop at a certain level of power? Oh right, he only wants power to help others (like Castro) - but as history has shown time and time again, absolute power corrupts absolutely..

Sorry that you don't allow any realism to creep into your idealism.

And to answer your question about CommonDreams, they aren't interested in pushing Chavez progoganda but instead do some actual reporting on the matter. Funny you should think a consipiracy is behind it - CommonDreams must have done all the Bush / Cheney bashing over the years in order to gain credibility so they could tear Chavez down, makes perfect sense...

See how I stayed away from childish personal attacks but still made my point? At least give me credit for that...

moonraven - I fear power grabs by both the left and right, and yes I am as upset with Bush/Cheney as anyone. I am counting down the days until they are both out of office, hopefully they won't be able to attack Iran first... Our poor country (and the world) will take many years to get over the damage they have done.

One thing the US desperately needs, is term limits in Congress. That would help our troubled democracy more than anything. Oh wait, term limits are a bad thing, I forgot...

And the reason I keep mentioning Castro is that he is the perfect example of the endgame of socialist revolutionaries, and he and Chavez appear to be idealogical twins. I know there must be some positive examples of socialist revolutionaries with happy endings of free societies and a socialist and lasting utopia - care to mention a few? I am honestly curious, as I bet the list is small to non-existent..

Okay GoGreen,

1. What are YOU DOING about the power grabs in your own country?

Given the destructive history of YOUR country--especially NOW--in regard to everything on the planet, it would make a lot more sense for you to attack the beast that's the number one enemy of life than to cry wolf about the leaders of other countries whose language you clearly do not speak and which, I suspect, you have never visited. In short, what's it to you?

2. You did not respond to my question about the obviously totalitarian state YOU are living in. Upset about Bush and Cheney? Get your butt over to the White House and demand they resign. What does Chavez have to do with YOUR country's problems?

Since you don't like to answer questions, I will answer that one for you: NOTHING. If anything, he has raised some gringos' consciousness about the shithole they live in.

2. Sorry, but I don't believe that Castro is a perfect example of anything you wrote. He is one of the smartest folks on the planet, and what he is an archetypal example of is a leader who has survived and moved his country forward--despite the best and worst efforts of 10 different US government adminstrations to destroy him and his country.

3. If you actually read anything about Venezuela besides gringo-centered anti-Chavez propaganda, you would be aware that Chavez has indicated ad nauseum that Cuba is not a model for Venezuela.

And your attempts to lump all socialist thought and process into the Stalinist camp serve no useful purpose whatsoever.

Chavez' Twentyfirst Century Socialism may not be the clearest model, as it's an evolving and endogenous model for Venezuela--but one thing he has made very clear: It is not the socialism of the twentieth century.

Socialism is a very broad term--basically any system or process that promotes the wellbeing of people, not capital.

Just because one application of it didn't work doesn't mean the concept is faulty. And it's well worth trying a new tack--especially when we can see the grisly option of savage capitalism is rapidly destroying our planet.

TJ:

1. He has invested in local agriculture. You obviously are not a farmer or you would know that developing agriculture takes time:

First the had to pass a law to allow for an agrarian reform

Then they had to fight off a strike or two, a coup, a 2 month sabotage of the petroleum industry BEFORE they could start the reform.

They have disbursed a lot of land--mostly government-owned--and mostly to coops.

That all takes some time.

And when you consider that due to the oil-based economy Venezuela's agricultural sector started shrinking in the 1920s, and by the 1960s they were importing 80% of their food--the highest in the region.

I think you want a magician, not a democratic leader.

I hate to tell you, but behind those screens there are just little men, Dorothy.

The opposition controls the distribution networks for food in Venezuela. The same shortages occurred 5 years ago during the PDVSA sabotage. By the same people. They are just going to have to be "authoritarian" and liberate the food. Again.

1. What are YOU DOING about the power grabs in your own country?

Voted against Bush in both elections, tried to persuade as many people as possible to do the same, took part in several protests in my "gringo" city. I admit I have not tried to single handedly overthrow the president, but I guess that's because I am a realist.

"In short, what's it to you?"
Am I not allowed to give my opinion on this matter? I'm not funneling money to Chavez's opposition or anything like that, I believe the Venezuelans should have whatever leader they want, I was just congratulating them on blocking Chavez's power grab and trying to open people's eyes on this board about it.

2. You did not respond to my question about the obviously totalitarian state YOU are living in. Upset about Bush and Cheney? Get your butt over to the White House and demand they resign. What does Chavez have to do with YOUR country's problems?

See my response to 1).

"NOTHING. If anything, he has raised some gringos' consciousness about the shithole they live in."

I didn't learn that from Chavez. I learned that after 9/11 when I discovered Chomsky and researched the dark side of US history.

"2. Sorry, but I don't believe that Castro is a perfect example of anything you wrote. He is one of the smartest folks on the planet, and what he is an archetypal example of is a leader who has survived and moved his country forward–despite the best and worst efforts of 10 different US government adminstrations to destroy him and his country."

Castro is a dictator, and you are defending him as I thought you would. Nicely played on my part, right?

Too bad Cuban citizens are barred from using the internet cafes - only tourists can legally use them. Do you now realize you are defending a dictator who bars its citizens from doing what we are right now - debating on the internet?

"3. If you actually read anything about Venezuela besides gringo-centered anti-Chavez propaganda, you would be aware that Chavez has indicated ad nauseum that Cuba is not a model for Venezuela."

Ok. Chavez has spoken.

"And your attempts to lump all socialist thought and process into the Stalinist camp serve no useful purpose whatsoever."

I didn't mention Stalin.

"Socialism is a very broad term–basically any system or process that promotes the wellbeing of people, not capital. Just because one application of it didn't work doesn't mean the concept is faulty. And it's well worth trying a new tack–especially when we can see the grisly option of savage capitalism is rapidly destroying our planet."

It is not capitalism that is destroying the planet, but out of control consumerism, take some personal responsibility in the matter. The computer that you're typing on has a carbon footprint and use of oil and other resources that you are directly responsible for. Capitalism didn't force you to buy it.

I am not saying pure capitalism is the ideal. But I do know that if I didn't get paid to go to work, I would not. That's why extreme socialism fails, why work when the state provides everything - but how can the state provide everything if no one works?

I find it funny that Venezuela's socialism is only supported by selling oil on capitalistic markets. Shouldn't Venezuela be socialistic with its oil and give it away for free?

Anyway, it was nice debating with you. If Chavez does stick around somehow after his current term, I hope for Venezuela's sake you are right about him...

Moonraven said:
"... And your attempts to lump all socialist thought and process into the Stalinist camp serve no useful purpose whatsoever.

Chavez' Twentyfirst Century Socialism may not be the clearest model, as it's an evolving and endogenous model for Venezuela–but one thing he has made very clear: It is not the socialism of the twentieth century.

Socialism is a very broad term–basically any system or process that promotes the wellbeing of people, not capital..."

xxx

Those are all excellent points. For anyone who doesn't know, I'd like to add that "social democracy" means socialism. It's what happens when the government is truly by and for the people. Social democracy is the way of the future for mankind. The corporate news media and the bastards in Washington habitually demonize any form of government that differs from the totalitarianism that controls the USA economy and military. They lie, because the truth will destroy them.

-------------------------

P.S. To those who think that corruption of all idealistic and gifted powerful political leaders is absolutely inevitable: You're totally wrong! Most of them will make some mistakes but as Chavez has said, the roosters are crowing on a brand new day. The American empire is finished. The dollar is sinking like the titanic. It's just a matter of time til the empire run by insanely greedy lunatics becomes nothing more than a bad memory.

"A [social democracy is] a mixed economy consisting mainly of private enterprise, but with government owned or subsidized programs of education, healthcare, child care and related services for all citizens."
Wikipedia .

"The [Chavez] reforms would have restricted private property"
This Article

Please explain how the state will figure out the restriction of private property. Can the state take something you already own?
How will the state decide how much to take, and what if the state wants more next year?
After a while, there is nothing left for the state to take - does that not scare you?

Social Democracy is supposedly a more moderate form of socialism, and I do not believe includes the eventual elimination of all personal property, a prominent feature of extreme socialism.

I hope Chavez is everything you say he is, as the warning signs are all there...

For anyone who doesn't already know...

Before Hugo Chavez, the 60 to 65% who lived in abject poverty in Venezuela (while the others lived in luxury) had NO HOPE that things would ever change. President Chavez has given them hope for the future. Chavez's enemies in Venezuela are VERY connected with the same bastards in Washington who have the blood of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people on their hands. They are out of touch with their humanity and will use any and every dirty trick that they can to prevent Chavez from succeeding. Beware of those who speak out against him.

Here's one excellent site for information about what's going on in Venezuela:

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com

Hard to debate if you keep ignoring my valid questions.

If he has truly helped those people pull themselves out of poverty and be supported by themselves and their community, then that is very commendable and should be applauded, but that has nothing to do with reducing private property rights and removing term limits now does it?

Again, I hope you are right about him. Maybe he'll decide to stop selling oil by the millions of barrels that will be burned and turn into greenhouse gases that is killing our planet... That would be my ideal leader...

Tijuana--

"First, if 35 to 40% or Venezuelans lived in luxury..."

by luxury, i mean it in a relative sense: hot and cold running water, underground sewage, refrigerators and air conditioners, college educations, decent careers,laptops and home computers, international travel, not rolls royces and caviar.

"...There is no excuse for this; Venezuela could be an agricultural exporter if it wanted to be...."

They're working on it. As Moonraven pointed out, it takes time. The oligarchy is not cooperating at all. In fact they do everything they can to sabotage all advances.

"...History is a circle, and it tends to repeat itself. Right now, I look at Venezuela, the wild spending, the bold anti-American pronouncements..."

You are repeating a lie that many fools believe. President Chavez is NOT ANTI-AMERICAN! He is like me and the people I respect the most- he is anti-war, anti-genocide, anti-oligarchy, anti-elitist. Tijuana, you're seeing what the bastards want you to see, and spreading their bullshit.

dear MaxheMust

IT IS Chavez fault, WHY you might ask. I'll tell you :)
He's making producers (not big companies, not capitalist industries just average people that have their "farms") sell the product for less that it costs to make in the first place, so they wont do it because on less than a month they'll be broke and then even less people will have those essential things at their house, so it's not the CIA it's not capitalism it's jsut Chavez with crazy ideas, ok? Next time learn the facts first

moonraven (read the above) and the thing with PDVSA and the the lack of supply back then was a TOTALLY different thing, so dont go mixing up stuff ( I didnt and don't agree with what happened then) and I'm not saying I'm CONSCIOUS, but that I LIVE what's happening...
Sorry if you feel I'm hostil didnt mean it like that, but I'm just saying get your facts right, ok? :)
one last thing, its not the same coming for some time than actually live here, friends of mine have been shot, me and tons of other students have been repressed badly (everyday when I go to college they're a bunch of National Guards near campus, just trying to scare us off...you think that's right?) well have a nice day!

I also want to add some things:
* Chavez talks about that coup he had to deal with, well he back in the days attempt 2 coups that failed (so his weren't coups just something really similar?) and that got him in jail, ok? so the coups I think he should get over it cause he has done it himself, so that would make him kind of a hypocrite, or am I wrong?
* The changes he wanted to make to the constitution would have given him the power to dicide over: education, property, economics...he would have total power over almost everything...now correct me if I'm wrong, all that plus "indefinite elections" doesnt it sound like all the power on one man? and what else could someone think? the idea of some people here and some of the Venezuelans it's not so far fetched as you make it seem, so lets just listen each other and well get new conclutions, or not, well see, ok?

One last thing, the people in the goverment (President,ministers, governers, etc) are the first ones supporting capitalism. They dress with designer clothes, drive around in fancy cars like hummers (you know how much the cost), go to fancy dinner places, etc. So dont say they do what they preach, do say that they dont lie at all, ok>

have a nice day y'all!! :)

oh! one last thing MaxheMust, Chavez anti-war? it's kind of an extreme thing to say, dont you think? he was (well and still wear, acts and talks like) a militar, so anti-war I think you're streching the truth A LOT. Also consider that he sends the military and other arm forces against the students, that doesnt seem very pacific either. that's all :)

GoGreen:

I really have little to say to you.

1. You didn't know about the dark side of US history until 9/11?????? You must be about 20 years old now, right? Guess you were not fortunate enough to be born Native American like I was.

2. You have not played anything nicely in regard to Castro. I can defned anybody I feellike--and use whatever criteria I choose to do so. You obviously have way too much time on your hands so you post here without having any information to contribute to the threads.

3. You have done NOTHING to stop your obscene US dictatorship, so don't squeak about Cuba. Your vote probably wasn't even counted.

4. I specifically use computers in Internet cafes although I certainly have the resources to buy my own computer--because I have a low carbon footprint and plan to keep it that way. I also don't have a car. For the same reason. Don't make assumptions that just leave you looking foolish.

5. As for your not working if you aren't paid--it's clear that you are not VOLUNTEERING any time like I am to try to solve the planet's problems. Either you are too materialistic or you are too lazy. Neither of which instances is proof that SOCIALISM doesn't work--especially since you are not a socialist.

It was a big bore discussing with you.

treehugger:

Just a couple of quick comments.

Perhaps the shortages SEEMED different 5 years ago, as you are a kid and were an even younger kid then. But they are NOT different. It's the same opposition strategy and its aim is the same--to overthrow the government that the MAJORITY of Venezuelans elected.

According to the latest Latinobaromtero poll, something like 72% of Venezuelans believe in democracy and value it and are happy with Venezuela's democracy.

What's your problem.

I saw the opposition student violence in June when I was in Caracas for a month. I also saw the students who took their speech that was prepared by someone else to the AN You are not very politically bright kids, either, since you left the evidence behind on the podium when you walked out like a bunch of spoiled hijos de papi.

Caracas has crime. I know that. Just like Mexico City==from where I am typing this post=has crime. My boyfriend, a venezolano, was robbed in Caracas a few years ago. But I feel safe there==and I do NOT feel safe in cities like Quito==where even I was robbed in one of these internet cafes.

Things are relative. You are too young to know anything about the conditions that led to the Caracazo==or to the ONE coup attempt by Chavez. He did not make two as he was in jail when the NOvember 1992 coup attemot happened.

You are a privileged kid, studying at a private university. What are YOU doing to make Venezuela a better place+

Work on that for a few years, and then come back and tell me about it.