Venezuela: The Great Anguish of George W. Bush

[chlamor]

Venezuela: The Great Anguish of George W. Bush

Monday, Mar 21, 2005
By: Jorge Arreaza - Temas

The following is an inexorable truth: the U.S. government does not know what to do with the Bolivarian government of President Chavez. Our revolution is too democratic, too humanistic, too profound and too transcendent; and is therefore beyond traditional capitalist analysis and beyond the comprehension of a government of a country where values revolve around individualism. They try, through their declarations and their media and commercial power, to convince the world that President Chavez is a tyrant: an autocrat. Likewise they try to lead us all to believe that ours is a totalitarian, repressive, restrictive, un-democratic and even communist government. However, the radically democratic reality of Venezuela throws them for a loop and lands them face down. Their worry is evident. Their accusations against the Venezuelan government are now not monthly or weekly, but have become a part of the daily routine of their sensationalist foreign policy.

Meanwhile, Venezuela supplies petroleum and its derivates to the U.S. with absolute punctuality and security. Neither Australia nor Spain are better trading partners of the US than Venezuela. We are too important for them to risk losing the energy that we supply. They know well that the Bolivarian process is irreversible, which is why signs of a possible assassination attempt have emerged. However, what most worries the US is not the characteristics of a sovereign and popular Venezuelan government, nor, perhaps, a sure supply of oil; what causes them extreme anguish is the possibility of the Venezuelan process proliferating throughout Latin America. The leadership of president Chavez in the region is impressive, in spite of the communicational blockade and the media prevarication that our government has been subjected to since 1999. It is therefore conceivable that a revolution such as ours could be emulated by any of our countries. It does not require ousting governments or appealing to armed struggle. All that is needed are political will and an ethic to use representative democratic electoral mechanisms to assume power and to begin governing for and with the majority: for and with the excluded. In this sense, the democratic spirit and essence of the Bolivarian Revolution is much more "reproducible and contagious" than the revolutions of Allende, the Sandinistas, and of Cuba.

The White House, the Pentagon and the Department of Defense do not know how to transform the profound democracy of Venezuela into a dictatorship, nor a President re-legitimized several times at the polls into a tyrant, nor a people that support their government and actively participate with courage in shaping their destiny into a people that is asleep and frightened. This week they have tried to convince the rest of the world that the neighbors of Venezuela share the worry of Washington and fear that President Chavez could subvert democracies and conspire against the governments of the region.

More:
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1401

[Pachamama]

1. Yes, and they have some of the largest oil & energy reserves in this

hemisphere....

So what can they do to get those reserves? Its got to be a daunting question that they try to ponder each day....guess the "spreading" of Democracy as a reason to invade won't fly, so what else can they come up with? :eyes:

[confludemocrat]

2. Question is, will the other econ powers of the world speak up

against Bush and by doing so come to the aid of Venezuela and its democratic principles.
We can no longer rely on any but people like those in this forum (within this country) to fight back or expose the ugliness of these hateful Republicans and their will to trash the planet.

[Judi Lynn]

3. Venezuela buys Argentinian bonds.....

Venezuela Says Argentina to Sell 7-Year Bonds (Update3)
March 21 (Bloomberg) -- Venezuela said it will buy $500 million of 7-year bonds that Argentina plans to sell within two weeks, the first bond sale for Argentina since its 2001 default.

Edgar Hernandez, Venezuela's deputy finance minister and president of the Bandes development bank, declined to disclose the size of Argentina's planned sale, in an interview with the state Bolivarian News Agency. Argentine Economy Ministry spokesman Armando Torres didn't return phone calls seeking comment.

Argentina's 2005 budget allows the country to sell as much as $2.45 billion in bonds this year, Economy Minister Roberto Lavagna said last week. The sale would be the first by Argentina's Treasury since February 2001 and follows the country's debt restructuring last month.
(snip)

``Chavez is consolidating his alliance with Argentina,'' said Abram. ``He wants to be a regional leader and getting Argentina's support has been high on his agenda. For Argentina, this is good because it very much needs the money.''
(snip/...)

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000086&sid=apJ0h0zYE6OE&refer=latin_america

[applegrove]

7. No buying USA bonds? Oh my!

[Judi Lynn]

8. They'll be sorry!

Here's something which will have you doubting your sanity!



From the same site:

"God's Word instructs us to honor and submit to our government's leadership. Prayer is the first and most powerful way to do this."

--Bill McCartney, Founder, Promise Keepers

http://www.presidentialprayerteam.org/?id=911


:wtf:

[Selatius]

4. It's a shame that corporatism could gain power in our nation

What does that say to the health of our representative democracy compared to that of, say, Venezuela and our other neighbors in Europe?

We are the fallen compared to Venezuela. How could two republics based on roughly the same governing principles turn out so completely different? Our Constitution is a benchmark, but it lacks the innovations that have been incorporated into newer republics.

Nowadays, when people want a cutting edge example of modern federalism, they turn to models like German federalism as opposed to US federalism. If people want an example of how to remove a sitting president, they look to nations with recall provisions like Venezuela, not the US. If people want a model that comes closest to their political ideals, they look to models that easily accomodate multiple parties, not just two parties, and if people want a model that actively tries to divorce itself from the corrupting influence of outside money, they look to nations that label outside money as nothing but "bribes," not accept it as a form of freedom of speech.

What are our values compared to Venezuela? What values are Venezuelans instilled with that cause them to turn out the way they do compared to the values that are taught to our kids?

What do we teach our kids? Do we over-emphasize success over happiness? Do we push rugged individualism and cutthroat competition far more than mutual cooperation and friendship? What is our dream? Is it "the man who dies with the most stuff at the end of the game wins"? Or is it "the man who dies with the most fulfilled life wins"?

[applegrove]

5. What to do when all the 'strong men' are gone. What a loss for George

W. Bush and his ilk. Perhaps the neocons played one over on Bush and boxed him into a new policy of 'democracy'.

The 'strong men' are gone... how is a GOP Oil Industry patsy supposed to get things done? Poppy will not have any good advice to give because he knows not much about controlling Oil in a democracy.

Oh my gosh! Countries can now be divided up into three types:

1) countries that have real democracies and hate Bush and his 'war precedents & perpetual war'. These true democracies will destroy and threaten or dis-elect anyone who supports Bush (Spain, Italy, Turkey, England perhaps).

2) countries with strong men and strong oligarch regimes who support Bush (long time supporters often) who are now facing the outbreak of democratic movements who want to get rid of the powers that be.

3) Poland

Oh - No!

[Judi Lynn]

6. You've done D.U. proud, applegrove.

You didn't forget Poland.

[Vladimir]

9. From the same site, don't know if people have seen this

but its an interesting interview... my apologies if it has already been posted.

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1224

“The Main Obstacle Is the Administrative Structure of the Venezuelan State”

GW: The opposition has been saying recently that the expenditures for social programs that PDVSA is supporting are not sustainable because right now there is a lot of income, but who knows what will happen a year from now, which could require cutting back all of these programs. What is your response to this, that this is unsustainable?

AR: These people are discovering lukewarm water. For countries that have such a high dependency on oil, not only for social spending, but for spending in general, are very conditioned on the fluctuations of the prices and of the oil income. This is nothing new. It does not require any genius to reach this conclusion. But as long as there are resources, it is normal that these should contribute to the extremely important problem of poverty in Venezuela. This would be more sustainable to the extent that the resources are oriented towards increasing our productive capacity and that they diversify these.

<snip>

GW: Recently there have been efforts to create “steering committees” (comités de guía) within PDVSA, which would contribute to the self-management of the company. How do you perceive such efforts, efforts of workers to participate in the management of PDVSA?

AR: The main obstacle for advancing towards the objectives that are proposed in the Bolivarian constitution of Venezuela is the administrative structure of the state. This structure is of no use for any project, neither for a revolutionary project nor for a conservative project – for many years already. I recall a book by a neo-liberal, Pedro Tinoco, who wrote about “the efficient state.” Twenty years ago he criticized the structure of the state. There are embryonic structures that are emerging, of a new institutionality. What is the CTV<2> today, if not an empty drum? There is a search for new forms of organization, for a new institutionality and within this are also the oil workers.

The steering committees for a part of this search. Here in the board of directors there are two workers, among the eleven members. In some areas of the country there have been some first experiences of co-management, but these are still very new experiences, embryonic. They still are not fixed into an institutional form. Within these are the steering committees that have emerged as a new experience.

and of course a lot lot more in the full article...