Chavez? Hero or Dictator?

[Canadian_NewDemocrat]

By far one of the most controversial figures on the political stage. Initially I had great respect for this man and his ideals, though of late he's becoming more authoritarian and unilateral in his attitude towards democracy...I notice a bias in the right-wing media of the US, yet a left-wing bias elsewhere, glossing over his negative aspects...can someone put into clarity the character of Hugo Chavez, whether he truly is democratic or authoritarian, as we know he is socialist...

have we had enough Chavez posts yet?

[SaveElmer]

1. Certainly not a hero...

Wouldn't exactly call him a dictator...but he is sliding in that direction...

[harveyrunner]

112. Hero AND Dictator. A better dictator than Bush I say.

[no_hypocrisy]

2. Just another opportunist using politics to make his way in the world. n/t

[muntrv]

3. I question the wisdom of hosting the Iranian leader. We don't need to give

the bushies any more reason to invade Venezuela.

[1932]

16. Don't let me catch you in other threads saying that we need to have dialogue

with other ME countries as a solution to Iraq problem.

[muntrv]

38. WHY NOT? I'm entitled to an opinion just like any other poster.

[leveymg]

4. Historical figure

No denying that.

[scarletwoman]

5. You know, you *could* just do your own research, and reach your own opinion.

There are certainly "enough" Chavez threads for you to follow the links that are posted in them. Do some reading, do some thinking, come to your own conclusions.

I am generally, but not blindly or uncritically, pro-Chavez. I reached my opinion by doing lots of reading and research -- and for many years I, and many others, have constantly posted links to what we read -- the information that informs our opinions.

There is only one pre-requisite to doing this research -- recognize that the Ruling Elites control the mainstream media, and understand that this control leads to biased "reporting" about Chavez.

The only way to come to an informed opinion is to actively do some research beyond mainstream sources.

"have we had enough Chavez posts yet?"

Only those that are posted by the uninformed.

sw

[Peace Patriot]

6. Oh, for pete's sake! Please educate yourself...it's very important!

Try www.venezuelanalysis.com, for starters--as an antidote to the war profiteering corporate news monopolies. It's pro-Chavez, but well-written, packed with info, and tends to present warts and all.

The question is NOT whether the war profiteering corporate news monopoly meme that Chavez is a "dictator" is true or not; the question is why have Venezuelan voters repeatedly elected him, in the most highly monitored elections on earth, with increasing margins of victory? It's an insult to Venezuelan voters--and to all the intelligent and progressive people in his administration--to presume that they would support a "dictator." Further, Chavez is one man. He is one expression of a huge and momentous, peaceful, democratic, leftist (majorityist) revolution that is sweeping South America--with leftist governments elected in Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Uruguay, and soon in Peru and Paraguay (also Nicaragua--and a huge social movement in Mexico as well). The issue here is who is going to control the vast oil, gas, mineral and other resources in South America, the people who live there, and who have suffered brutal oppression and exploitation for decades and centuries, often by US-backed dictators, or US global corporate predators and Bushites in connivance with local fascist minorities. That IS the question--that the people of South America are answering, with their hard work on transparent elections, and other democratic institutions, and at last electing leaders who truly represent them. Chavez is a leader of this DEMOCRACY movement. He has also been important in inspiring and organizing new South American initiatives for regional self-determination and cooperation. What may come of this is a South American "Common Market," and common currency (to get off the US dollar). That is why he is so hated by our Corporate Rulers. Like his hero, Simon Bolivar, he is working for South American INDEPENDENCE. And he is by no means alone in doing so.

-----

Poll: Venezuelans Have Highest Regard for Their Democracy
Wednesday, Dec 20, 2006
By: Gregory Wilpert - Venezuelanalysis.com
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=2179

[Kermitt Gribble]

8. Perfectly stated!

And thanks for the link!

[Poll_Blind]

11. Well-stated, thought-provoking in a non-cliche' way. n/t

PB

[jwirr]

13. Very good. *ss and co. hate him because he nationalized the

oil and supports the needs of the people.

[CRH]

91. Well Said, Thank You, No se va Chavez. n/t

[pberq]

93. Excellent post! thank you

[McCamy Taylor]

7. Um...how about elected president of Venezuela? I like that one.

[SOS]

54. That's what he is...

but "democracy" is only applauded by the ruling class when their guy wins.

[Joe Chi Minh]

9. Well, Einstein was a thoroughgoing Socialist, so what was good enough

for him I think should be good enough for Hugo, and just as importantly for your good self, as an American caught in a robber-baron time warp!

I think you have more than enough to concern yourself with in the US at present with your own ultra-authoritarian leader, don't you?

With just a little imagination, you would realise that, unlike Bush, Chavez is under constant threat from the anti-democratic oligopoly who used to rule that country. They are very lucky they are not all jailed or even executed. Pinochet certainly didn't spare his political opponents - yet he's still held in very high regard by the right wing in both the US and the UK.

[Poll_Blind]

10. A good start is watching "Chavez: Inside the coup" streaming, free, HERE:

Google Video

PB

[IndianaGreen]

12. Chavez is a hero! Bush is a tyrant!

Too much rightwing Kool-Aide being drunk around here!

[otherlander]

14. Are YOU a hero or a dictator?

I haven't seen anything to make me think of him as either. What I see is leftist leaders coming to power throughout Latin America, though democracies for the most part. They've finally driven out the brutal imperialist governments, and there's real hope now for a united Latin America.

But I've never been one to defend the ruling class. Chavez seems to have a pretty inflated ego, but that doesn't mean anything by itself. What matters is how he runs the country. Many of Venezuela's people still live in poverty. I think he could be doing more about that. And then there's the amount of power he has over who gets a job and who doesn't. A very smart man once said, "The slave begins by demanding freedom and ends by wanting to wear a crown."

[1932]

15. Definitely a progressive hero. MSM wouldn't be trying so hard to rework reality

if he wasn't.

[Contrite]

17. Hero

and I have read thoroughly on the "subject"

[Judi Lynn]

19. Don't give up. Adequate background on Latin American history and current events

isn't a quick study.

[Judi Lynn]

21. Correction: disregard my post. I completely misread. Proof I'm "awake" far too late to post.

I seem to have seen things as they "ain't." When I re-read, I was astonished, and looked to see which post I had meant to answer, instead. Obviously I posted to yours in error. Sorry.

[LaPera]

18. Hero!

[NV1962]

20. Neither: simply a brute

He has the diplomatic graces of an aircraft carrier, the political elegance of a granite wall.

He's also clearly getting tangled in authoritarian tics, and he punches way above his weight because he exports oil, not in the least to the US.

But this manichean good/evel BS is just... eh, just as blind and manipulative as the average MSM journalist in the US reporting on him.

[Judi Lynn]

22. Yeah, we've had more than enough Chavez threads. No one here will be changing his/her mind.

DU'ers who care about Latin America finding its way to freedom do enjoy exchanging new information, however. Hope these countries, and their viciously exploited poor finally make it to a safe haven.

[GreenTea]

23. Hero

[dad]

24. The answer is HERO, my friend.

Official DU Hugo Chavez Right-Wing Falsehood Debunking Thread
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=311462

[jefferson_dem]

25. Not a hero. Not quite a dictator...yet.

n/t

[bemildred]

26. How about "Chavez: legitimate elected leader of Venezuela"? nt

[lojasmo]

27. Chavez, a good man, has done GREAT things for Venezuela.

Look it up.

[generaldemocrat]

28. I don't like Chavez, but that still doesn't mean....

that the US ala Chimpy Co. has to run around and poison our relations with Venezuela. In fact, it's our saber-rattling that has turned him into a demagogue and a kind of nouveau Che Guevara down there. To be quite honest, a lot of Latin Americans (especially Lula in Brazil) don't like Chavez and his intereference is particularly resented in quite a few Latin American countries. BUT most Latin Americans will at the end of the day show solidarity with Chavez every time the US says something stupid.

Other than that, Chavez is a populist who is riding on the crest of record global oil prices and is creating short-term policies with little long-term outlook. When the oil boom fizzles out, Venezuela will be totally screwed. He basically comes from the mold of previous Latin American populists who have destroyed their countries during the 20th century.

[Judi Lynn]

29. So especially Lula doesn't like Chavez, eh? That's not the information we DU'ers have held all this

time. Apparently you inform yourself from the viruntly anti-Chavez oligarchy opposition sources.

Well, I just snagged this ort from a quick search, printed by a source which was involved in the coup against Chavez, knowing I'd find something immediately:

CNE director regrets Brazilian president's remarks

National Electoral Council (CNE) director Vicente Díaz labeled Tuesday as "gross interference" the comments of Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.

The Brazilian ruler said Monday that his Venezuelan counterpart Hugo Chávez would win the election for president next December 3rd, DPA reported.

Díaz lamented that Lula had spoken out in relation to a topic that is Venezuelans' "strict business."

"The Brazilian president does not have to talk about Venezuelan elections. This is gross interference in Venezuela's internal affairs. Any Venezuelan feeling self-respect should condemn it. Venezuela's election is among Venezuelans. We do not want here either the United States, or Cubans, or Brazilians, or Spaniards talking about strictly Venezuelan matters," he told official TV channel Venezolana de Televisión (VTV).

During a flying visit to Venezuela on Monday, President Lula noted that Chávez is not welcome by the Venezuelan rich and is the victim of adverse lobbying on the media because he has enforced social policies in favor of the poor.

http://english.eluniversal.com/2006/11/14/en_pol_art_14A803645.shtml

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
These "journalists" don't even attempt to portray Lula as a natural enemy of Chavez'. They know they'd have a hard job selling it to anyone sensible.

[generaldemocrat]

30. Lula and Chavez are rivals....

even if both of them are socialists. They are vying for the right to lead Latin America, they are vying for a greater say in MERCOSUR. Lula believes that, as the leader of Latin America's largest economy and most powerful country, that someone like Chavez has no right to contest this power.

And give me a break with the "virulently oligarchic anti-Chavez sources" crap. I'm someone who believes that the US needs to play it nicer with Latin America than it has in the past. I've traveled through Latin America, I have Brazilian and Venezuelan friends, and I wrote my Masters dissertation on Latin America. So as you can see, I am informed to the extent where I don't have to rely on stupid propaganda from both the right and the left to formulate my opinions.

[Peace Patriot]

31. That's Paul Wolfowitz's line--that Chavez is "riding" the oil boom and that,

when the boom, fizzles, "Venezuela will be totally screwed."

What would you suggest that Venezuela's oil profits be spent on--to prepare for the future--instead of schools, free university education, adult literacy classes, medical clinics, community centers, land reform (giving peasants a few acres to grow food), small business loans and grants, wider involvement of the poor in government decisions, food price supports for the poorest of the poor so children don't suffer malnutrition, development of local art, music and media, infrastructure development (f.i., new Orinoco bridge to Brazil), the development of other natural resources, preventing the collapse of neighboring Latin economies (f.i, buying up Argentina's World Bank loans on easy terms), encouraging regional planning and cooperation (Mercosur trade group, talks on S. American "Common Market," common currency) and other far-thinking Chavez government programs?

Where would our own country be if, instead of padding the filthy pockets of Dick Cheney and Exxon-Mobile CEOs, our oil profits had been used to improve schools and medical care, support small business, help family farms, prevent poverty, and so on?

Paul Wolfowitz doesn't care about these things--just likes to make small-minded dissing remarks about programs that really help people, and marginalizing and demonizing Chavez for using his country's natural resources appropriately, to benefit the people who live there.

Your remarks have that cynical, World Bank/IMF tone, I'm afraid. You are also wrong about Lulu. He made a state visit to Venezuela two weeks before the recent Venezuelan presidential election, for the opening of the Orinoco Bridge, with Chavez. He wouldn't have done that--would have found some excuse not to--if he didn't support him. Chavez has many good friends among the new leftist leaders in Latin America, including Evo Morales in Bolivia, Rafael Correa in Ecuador, and Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua; also, Kirchner in Argentina. Even the rightwing president of Colombia has refused to participate in Bushite plots against Chavez. You're going to have to show me some evidence that he is not liked. I have seen zero evidence of that, in widespread reading.

[generaldemocrat]

33. Has Chavez invested in Venezuelan industry?

Don't get me wrong, redistribution is a good thing in Venezuela, but the reason I'm saying that he's riding on the oil boom is because little to no investment has occurred in Venezuelan industry-economy. Chavez has not diversified his economy. Which means his government will be very vulnerable if there is a steep decline in the price of oil.

As for Chavez's friends, the only real friends he has are Morales in Bolivia and Correa in Ecuador. Ortega, despite his socialist past, said he wanted to have strong ties in Washington. In Peru, Chavez's candidate lost for no other reason than the fact that he was Chavez's candidate, the Peruvians didn't appreciate the foreign interference on Chavez's part. And Mexico (one of the region's largest economies) just had an election where a center-right candidate won and Chavez's candidate lost.

As for Kirchener, Lula, Bachelet...who are the heads of Latin America's largest economies, they have kept Chavez at an arm-length. While they are all socialists, they are not populists, they don't make decisions just for the hell of it. Their economies are either recovering or growing because they have not undertook excessively populist policies. Brazil, Argentina, Chile have diverisifed their economies, they are not protectionist states, they are inserted in the global economy, THEY ARE SUCCEEDING IN PAYING DOWN THEIR DEBTS LEFT OVER FROM THE 1960s-1980s, and on top of that they have governments that value expanded welfare for the impoverished classes. Lula and Bachelet have largely left the capitalist finance engine in place in their countries, BUT they nevertheless are expanding social services to their constituents.

Brazil, Argentina, and Chile are all better models of development in Latin America because they are better oriented towards the long-term, versus Venezuela that is trying to ride the petroleum gravy train while it lasts.

[Peace Patriot]

41. You're wrong about Peru. The leftist candidate, Ollanta Humala, came out of

nowhere last year, with no experience and no money, and knocked the rightwing candidate out of the race, in the first round, with 30% of the vote. The corporatists and Bushites had to go with corrupt leftist Garcia, a NAFTA supporter. In the final election, Humala INCREASED his vote by 15%, for a total of 45%--AFTER Chavez and Morales endorsed him. Where did that 15% come from? Certainly not from the right or the well to do. It came from the indigenous, who don't care so much for colonial borders. They wouldn't see the endorsement by another Andes Indian, Evo Morales, or Chavez, who champions the indigenous and is part Indian, as "interference." Our war profiteering corporate news monopolies all spouted the Bush State Department view that Chavez's endorsement hurt Humala, and got it very wrong. And they didn't bother to ask about Morales, a 100% indigenous Andes Indian and the first indigenous president of Bolivia. When Morales was inaugurated, 10,000 Andes Indians came down out of the mountains to invest him as their leader in a special ceremony. So the truth of the matter is that Chavez's and Morales' endorsement very nearly made Humala the second 100% indigenous president of a South American country. If there had been a bit more time, and if Humala hadn't been handicapped by a brother who apparently was a bit too close to leftist mountain guerrillas and got accused of killing a policeman, Humala would have won. The indigenous are very poor and live in remote areas. It's not so easy for them to get organized to vote, and they are not used to having any political power, or expecting their vote to change anything. Garcia was well-funded by global corporate predators, and is rewarding them with global "free piracy" agreements that will destroy Peru's economy as it did Argentina's and other Latin countries. One more election cycle and the corporatists will be out for good.

[Judi Lynn]

34. I found a new article you might find interesting, if you've not read it already.

Chavez Restyles Venezuela With '21st-Century Socialism'
by Juan Forero
November 03, 2005

New York Times

CARACAS, Venezuela - Firmly in power and his revolution now in overdrive, President Hugo Chavez is moving fast to transform Venezuela's economy by bucking free-market planning with what he calls 21st-century socialism: founding state companies, seizing abandoned private factories and establishing thousands of cooperatives and worker-run businesses.

The populist government is reorganizing the country's colossal oil industry, taking a bigger share from private multinationals. Planners are reorganizing the banking system, placing stringent restrictions on lending while creating state banks. Venezuela is also developing a state-to-state barter system to trade items as varied as cattle, oil and cement as far away as Argentina and as near as Cuba, its closest ally.
(snip)

In the tumbledown barrios where Mr. Chavez draws much of his support, it is easy to see why the new system has been warmly welcomed. The hills around Caracas and the farms in the outback are filled with cooperatives and other businesses in which the state plays an important role. Workers produce everything from shoes to corn.
(snip)

Another project gives workers a stake in the ownership and management of tottering private companies. In return, management - made up of the original owners and the workers - receives government credits and other incentives.

"The businesses closed by the neoliberal system - factories and farms - are reopening, but it's done by the people," said Elias Jose Jaua, minister of the popular economy. "This is a state that has the duty to push and support this."
(snip/)

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=9041

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
It's a shock to see an article like this coming from Juan Forero. Very, very interesting.

[PATRICK]

32. What parameters of judgment?

How does Abe Lincoln stack up? We are arguing as idealists in a land that is arguably the greatest threat to Venezuela as a sovereign nation. I find the perspective uncomfortable. One could compare Hussein and Bush, but Bush and Chavez makes his "dictatorship" seem enlightened and truly restrained under real conditions.

Theoretically one can wonder how far and how irrecoverably he would go toward one man rule and socialism(not meant as a pejorative by me at least). So far he has been restrained. The fear factor, equating self and national salvation is a big spur toward more entrenched power. The counter show of heroism can be observed and whether it stems from this fear, but so far, in taking bold personal risks while mitigating any repression of rights or persons, it looks more heroic by far. When you come up with a perfect way to save your country, yourself as its legitimate protector, please pass that on to good people everywhere, but the people pressuring people to thus defend themselves "imperfectly" get a pass on
hypocrisy and intended horrors and gross violations far surpassing whatever hint of wrong is created in reaction to their aggressive assault.

Odd too that no one in the red white and blue tower is so spot checking any other Latin leader for democratic perfection. Maybe it's just the oil or the in your face challenge to the US as an ill intentioned hypocritical super rival. Maybe it is just the lazy reflex of following the corporate media cue to calumniate their targets of prejudice and discuss the points of slander "intelligently". Would we be happy if he was a good as Allende and as good as dead with a Pinochet in the wings?

[BoneDaddy]

35. Just because someone

says the truth about American corporate interests and the GW administration does not make him a hero.

Do I applaud his courage, sure. Do I think he is a hero, hell no.

[Kelly Rupert]

36. Dictator, ruling through soft power.

Some harmful policies, especially his disregard for transparency, but some positive ones as well. Neither hero nor villian, as far as I'm concerned.

[Judi Lynn]

40. Why don't you post your information about his lack of transparency.

This is something we should know more about, if the rest of us are to be as informed as we want to be.

Just post those links, if you would.

Don't think you're talking about Venezuelan elections, considering the horde of international poll watchers who were there in the last three elections, with his blessings.

Compare that to the elections here, and _Bush's refusal to allow foreign observers.

[Greyhound]

45. Care to elaborate on the "disregard for transparency" accusation? n/t

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

37. I have seen a valid argument against him.

And by valid, I mean one that isn't rapidly debunked, or is a non sequitor.

[ProudDad]

39. He's neither

He's a sincere human being who, through his own efforts, location and timing has become a potential force for good in the world.

He's flawed. He comes from an environment that has been tainted by "authoritarian" regimes uncounted (usually wholly supported by the U.S.) and so has to struggle against that imprinting. Sometimes he sounds "authoritarian" but...

HE IS NOT AN Authoritarian: http://tpub.com/content/advancement/12045/css/12045_35.htm

He IS a democrat: "one who practices social equality." http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/democrat

He is promoting democracy through the Bolivarian Councils;
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/democracy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolivarian_Circles

He's sincere in his desire to make things better for the vast majority of the people of his country. He sees an opportunity to promote a socialist, grass roots democratic future for his country by leveraging their temporary oil assets and the current weakness of the U.S. by expanding and adapting the Cuban example for Venezuela.

He must strike while the iron is hot!

If I thought I could help, I'd be down there helping.

Socialism will be the savior of the human race, capitalism CANNOT ever be. Capitalism is part of the PROBLEM, not the solution. Any system the assumes infinite resources in a finite world can't be the solution.

[1932]

42. He's a hero to the indigenous tribe in the outpost the army sent him to

when they became afraid of his popularity in Caracas.

The tribe asked him to stop European hunters from hunting them for sport, which he did.

A woman from that tribe ended up getting elected to the senate and gave an interview for a book written by Aleida Guevara, which is available at Amazon.com.

[Greyhound]

43. He's not a dictator and in light of the history of South America's national

leaders, I would have to say that he is a hero.

That is not to say that he is wholly altruistic in his actions and ambitions, but he has sparked, what can only be described as, a revolution throughout the rest of the continent. A continent that, thanks primarily to amerikan intervention on the behalf of amerikan corporations, has been subjugated, tortured, and looted for over a century, all so that we could achieve "the American Dream" and our own ruling class could become the world despots that we see today.

And no, we haven't had enough Chavez posts yet.

[IndianaGreen]

44. Confused About Venezuela?

Confused About Venezuela?

By Eva Golinger

1-16-07, 9:13 am

Over the past few days, major newspapers in the United States, such as The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times and The Wall Street Journal, have published editorials aggressively and harshly criticizing recent declarations and decisions made by re-elected President Hugo Chávez and his cabinet. A large percentage of the content of these editorials, which reflect the viewpoints of the newspapers, are based on a distortion and misconception of new policies being implemented in Venezuela and the overall way government is functioning. In the Washington Post’s “Venezuela’s Leap Backward”, published on January 10, the editorial board intentionally and mistakenly portrays the recent presidential elections this past December in Venezuela as illegitimate and unfair. By falsely claiming that Chávez conducted a “one-sided campaign that left a majority of Venezuelans believing they might be punished if they did not cast their ballots for him”, the Post wants its readers to think Venezuelans who voted for Chávez did so under duress and fear. Nothing could be further from the truth. A majority of Venezuelans publicly express their sincere admiration and approval of President Chávez in an open and fearless way on a daily basis in this country. Most Venezuelans believe Chávez is the best president the nation has ever had, and statistics prove that his government has built more bridges, railroads, hospitals, clinics, universities, schools, highways and houses than any administration in the past. The Post editorial also attempts to downplay the “only 7 million votes” Chávez received, not mentioning that those seven million votes represent more than 63% of total votes – a landslide victory to the opposition candidate’s 37% - and that no president in Venezuelan history has ever, ever received such a large number of votes in an election.

The New York Times editorial, also published on January 10, attacks a recent statement made by President Chávez regarding the nationalization of one telephone company, CANTV, and an electric company. However the Times doesn’t explain that the CANTV is the only non-cellular telephone company in the country, giving it a complete monopoly on national land-line telecommunications and control over a majority of Internet service as well. Furthermore, the CANTV was privatized only in 1991, during the second non-consecutive term of Carlos Andrés Pérez a president later impeached for corruption who implemented a series of privatization measures, despite having run for office on a non-privatization platform just three years before. In fact, as soon as Carlos Andrés Pérez won office in 1988 after convincing the Venezuelan people he would not permit “neo-liberalism” on Venezuelan shores, he immediately began to announce the privatization of several national industries, including telecommunications, education and the medical and petroleum sectors. This deception led to massive anti-privatization protests during February 1989 during which the government ordered the armed forces to “open-fire” on the demonstrators and arrest and torture those not killed. The result was the “Caracazo”, a tragic scar on contemporary Venezuelan history that left more than 3,000 dead in mass gravesites and thousands more injured and detained. The re-nationalizing of Venezuela’s one landline phone company is a strategic necessity and an anti-monopoly measure necessary to ensure that Venezuelans have access to telecommunications service. (Take it from someone who lives here. You can’t even get a landline if it isn’t already installed in your residence. The waiting list is over 2 years and you have to bribe someone to actually do the job). And furthermore, the new Minister of Telecommunications, Jesse Chacón, announced that any company “nationalized” will be fully compensated for its shares and property at market value.

The third issue put forth in the editorials is the recent announcement by President Chávez that the license of private television station RCTV to operate on the public airwaves is up for review in May 2007 and most likely will not be renewed. The government has based its denial of the license renewal on RCTV’s lack of cooperation with tax laws, its failure to pay fines issued by the telecommunications commission, CONATEL, over the past twenty years, and its refusal to abide by constitutional laws prohibiting incitation to political violence, indecency, obscenity and the distortion of facts and information. The public airwaves, as in the case of the United States, are regulated by government. Television and radio stations apply for licenses from the telecommunications commission and are granted those licenses based on conditional compliance with articulated regulations. When a station does not abide by the requirements, it generally is fined and warned, repeatedly, until compliance is assured. In the specific case of RCTV, the station and its owner, multi-millionaire Marcel Granier, have refused to comply with the law and have continued to abuse and violate the clear and concise regulations that are supposed to guarantee Venezuelan citizens their constitutional right to “true and accurate information” (Article 58 of the Constitution).

RCTV’s owner, Marcel Granier, played a key role in the April 2002 coup d’etat against President Chávez and has used his station to engage in an ongoing campaign of anti-Chávez propaganda and efforts to destabilize the nation through distorting and manipulating information to create panic, apathy, fear and violence in Venezuelan society. The station’s clear violations of the telecommunications regulations and the Constitutional guarantees that protect freedom of speech and access to true and accurate information provide sufficient reason to deny the renewal of its license to use the public airwaves. Unlike the editorial board of the Los Angeles Times (Fidel Chávez?, January 11, 2007) mistakenly claims, Chávez and his government are not “shutting down” the private media station. RCTV can continue to operate on the private airwaves, i.e. cable and satellite television. As would be the case in any country where law and order are respected, RCTV will not receive a renewal on its license to remain on the public airwaves because it repeatedly violated the law during more than a decade.

http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/articleview/4695/1/235/

[Judi Lynn]

47. Love that Eva Golinger. So glad to see she referred to the massacre

which was visited upon the poor of Caracas by one of the _Bush family friends, Carlos Andres Perez, when he ordered his troops to fire into the crowds of protesting poor people after they were informed he had raised the cost of their transportation 200%.

That point can't be emphasized enough. This man is well received in the U.S., has two homes here, in New York and Miami, and he's a celebrity with the Venezuelan "opposition," despite the fact he was caught embezzling millions and millions from the Venezuelan treasury, stashing them in banks outside the country, even New York, impeached for his embezzlement and massive corruption, and sentenced to prison, which was altered to allow him home detention, and a reduced sentence. He's a filthy, murderous bastard, and he's very well thought of by American right-wingers, as well as the Venezuelan oligarchy. He is quoted in newspapers as calling for Hugo Chavez to be shot down in the streets "like a dog."

[paulk]

59. don't you find it fascinating that Mr. Perez started out as a leftist?

"A member of Acción Democrática, Carlos Andres Perez first made his mark as a tough, guerrilla-busting interior minister and canny machine politician in Raul Leoni's administration (1963-1968). In his first term as president he was praised by the country's leftist groups for taking steps to nationalize the petroleum and iron ore industries in order to control profits. In the 1970s, he denounced advocates of globalization as "genocide workers in the pay of economic totalitarianism". He lashed out at institutions such as the International Monetary Fund, claiming that it was the equivalent of a "Neutron Bomb that killed people, but left buildings standing." As a result he nationalized Shell, Exxon, U.S. Steel and Bethlehem Steel operations in the country."



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


"In his first term as president he was praised by for taking steps to nationalize the petroleum and iron ore industries in order to control profits. He used the raising incomes from the oil industry for sustainable development programs, among the famous scholarship program "Gran Mariscal de Ayacucho", which allowed more than 60,000 young venezuelans from the working class to study in the best universities abroad. Following his policy, sustainable development is only possible through the education of the people. As first head of state, he was honored with the "Earth Care" award for his contribution of environmental protection. Carlos Andres Perez' international policy had become very important, as he called for the integration of Third World countries to regional organizations in order to strenghten their development and in order for them to gain importance in relation to the industrialized countries. He notably saw the OPEC as an instrument for ALL underdevelopped countries to improve their conditions towards first world countries. Nevertheless, he maintained excellent relations with european and north american governments during his presidency. After his first presidency, Carlos Andres Perez made a worldwide effort to create an independant, non-governmental Commission, integrated by representatives of Third World countries. Carlos Andres Perez worked with Tanzania's former President, Julius Nyerere, in the organization this South-South Commission. He actively participated in the organization International Socialists, whose Vice-President he was for three consecutive terms, under the presidency of Willy Brandt, Germany. Willy Brandt and Carlos Andres Perez, together with Francisco Pena Gomez, a political leader from the Dominican Republic, expanded the activities of the International Socialists from Europe to Latin America. Carlos Andres Perez also participated in democratization process in Spain, as he brought Felipe Gonzalez, who was living in exile, back to Spain in a private flight and thus strenghtened the PSOE. In 1988, he became a Member of the Concil of Freely-Elected Heads of Government, established by the fromer President of the United States, H.E. Jimmy Carter. Carlos Andres Perez was elected Chairman of the Harvard University Conference on Foreign Debt in Latin America, in September 1989, and receives the Henry and Nancy Bartels Award on World Affairs at Cornell University."


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


Of course, later in his political career, Mr. Perez took a turn to the right. Something we all hope Mr. Chavez avoids.


ps - maybe Mr. Perez animosity toward Mr. Chavez is rooted in the fact that Mr. Chavez led a bloody coup against him, one that almost cost Mr. Perez his life. Kind of analogous to how Mr. Chavez feels about George Bush, and Mr. Bush's (possible) instigation of the coup against him...

[Judi Lynn]

60. Let's see that information about Carlos Andres Perez being in danger at the hands

of Hugo Chavez, who was PARDONED following his serving two years for his coup attempt.

God help any country with a filthy piece of #### like Carlos Andres Perez who orders a SLAUGHTER OF UNARMED CITIZENS.
For reasons beyond understanding, when he was impeached for unbridled corruption and embezzlement of millions and millions of Venezuelan taxpayers dollars, Carlos Andres Perez was somehow allowed to slip by without atoning for his El Caracazo massacre, which signalled the beginning of the peoples' revolution against their filthy oligarchy.

You're going exactly NO WHERE with your accusations on this one. The fact that he claimed to be left-leaning in order to worm his way into an elected position carries exactly no weight whatsoever. His true colors came through when he believed he had acquired the power he wanted.

As for Hugo Chavez turning right-wing? Get serious.

On edit:

We'll be waiting for that evidence you've got that Carlos Andres Perez' life was, at any point, anywhere, in danger.

[paulk]

75. Hugo Chavez didn't lead the Feb. 27th, '92 coup?

It was someone else?

I don't understand what point you're trying to make. The goal of the coup plotters, led by Chavez in Caracas, was to capture Perez. The Royal Palace was occupied. Bullets were flying. A number of people died. Perez managed to evade Chavez's soldiers, and escape.

How is Chavez being let out of prison two years after leading the coup, pertinent? Does being "pardoned", in your dictionary, mean he had nothing to do with the coup?


I find it interesting that you demand links from others, yet don't seem to have the need to supply your own when you make claims. The impeachment of Perez was thought by many to be politically motivated, and I haven't seen anywhere any actual evidence for his malservation of funds. I don't know if he was guilty or not, and I'm not trying to defend him. I'm just saying there are two sides to this story. Something you seem completely incapable of.


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


I didn't make any "accusations". During Perez's first term he was considered a leftist. That's an indisputable fact. He's the person who first nationalized the oil and steel industries in VZ. He fought against the "oligarchy" and the multinationals.


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


Apparently you don't think that Hugo Chavez will not follow the path Perez blazed by "claiming" to be on the left in order to worm his way into power, and then, once there, let his true authoritarian colors shine forth.

I am not so sanguine.

[Judi Lynn]

76. Provide legitmate information with a link concerning the coup.

As you can tell from what I wrote I know Hugo Chavez led one of the coups. That's why I also posted he was pardoned by A Venezuelan President after serving two years.

Post that link to your bonafide information on the terrifying danger which confronted Carlos Andres Perez. I'd like to see it, as it has never been written in any of the material I've ever read.

Post the link(s).

[paulk]

79. how about you supply information that he wasn't in danger?

Since anything I post will be derided by you as "illegitimate". Like you do with anyone on this board who disagrees with you. Your first tactic is always to challenge the source, then the intelligence, and then usually the political affiliation of the person you're "debating".

Is that really the best you can do, fixate on a minor point like this? It's a red herring, and I expect you know it.


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

Did you support Perez as enthusiastically as you support Chavez back when Perez was "pretending" to be a leftist?

[Judi Lynn]

82. Don't waste your time attempting to dance around mentally. You'll just get dizzy.

Your suggestion I may attempt to say being "pardoned" indicates Hugo Chavez is innocent of leading a coup is witless.
I've never come anywhere close to a claim like that.

Perez REPRESENTED himself as being leftist in order to be elected. Anyone who follows his actions as President will easily see the non-liberal pattern.

In one of your posts you suggest I have never provided evidence Carlos Andres Perez was actually accused of malfeasance or whatever......

Whatever it was, here's a good look at something which is common knowledge:

Last Updated: Thursday, 11 January 2007, 10:54 GMT

Timeline: Venezuela
A chronology of key events

..........
1973 - Venezuela benefits from oil boom and its currency peaks against the US dollar; oil and steel industries nationalised.

..........
1996- Perez imprisoned after being found guilty of embezzlement and corruption.
(snip)http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1229348.stm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

By the way, the Venezuelan President who nationalized oil and steel in the 1970's was Marcos Pérez, NOT Carlos Andres Perez.

[paulk]

84. for someone who is always demanding that others "educate"

themselves about Venezuela, you seem rather lacking in knowledge about Venezuelan history.

Carlos Andres Perez nationalized the petroleum and iron ore industries in Venezuela. Referenced here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Andr%C3%A9s_P%C3%A9rez

and here:

http://www.answers.com/topic/carlos-andr-s-p-rez

and here:

http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9059222/Carlos-Andres-Perez

and here:

http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/people/A0838297.html


Have I provided enough links, Ms. Lynn? I know how fond you are of them.


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


I see we are at step two of your usual progression when dealing with persons who disagree with you.

Denigrate their intelligence.

It's all so predictable and boring, really.

[LittleClarkie]

46. Devil or Angel, I can't make up my mind...

heh.

[Vidar]

48. Hero: He asks for powers that Bush just steals.

[Bridget Burke]

49. Neither one.

He's a politician with some pretty good ideas.

But he is a politician. Nobody's perfect.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

50. Not the former, and certainly not the latter.

He's an autocratic but more-or-less legitimately elected ruler. He uses some deeply unsavoury methods to win elections, but he *is* elected, and he certainly isn't a dictator.

He's massively over-idolised on DU because he says nasty things about Bush, and he's no hero - his commitment to Democracy is only skin deep, and his policies are motivated more by maintaining his personal power and reputation than by the good of his electorate (not that that's in any way unusual among poiticians) and his economic policies are, I suspect, short-termist in the extreme, but he's certainly no dictator.

[PeaceProgProsp]

56. Evidence?

[Phoonzang]

51. Thought he was a hero...now i think not.

He's a petty wanna be dictator just like Bush. He uses the same tactics as Dubya...drumming up militarism and fear of the "other".

[Judi Lynn]

52. If you took the time to do your homework you'd be aware that the "other"

supported and encouraged and financially assisted the "opposition" forces as they plotted, planned, and forcibly took him at gun-point, and would have successfully taken him out of his elected office if the people of Venezuela hadn't gotten wind of what they were doing in time to prevent it, by running out into the streets and demonstrating in vast numbers surrounding Miraflores.

You're not going to fool anyone here. Most DU'ers actually stand on the right side of things, and most of us do stir ourselves long enough to read in order to know what the bleep is going on. All the facts are on our side, not the propaganda.

We are far too old and far too reality-based to succumb to childish worship of personalities, a favorite filthy accusation of the intellectually, ethically inadequate right-wing idiots.

The attempt to simplify, portray people with very deep convictions as easily gulled, willful mindless followers is a device meant to smear, belittle. People see it for the underhanded cheapness it is.

[ShortnFiery]

53. That's an awful broad brush you are employing ...

:shrug: No one human being, even a leader of a nation is either "good" or "evil." That the draw for the simple-minded people to the right wing of the republican party. That is, every thing's so simple: good vs. evil; right vs. wrong; heroes vs. killers; the righteous Bush Administration vs. the evil doers (a catch all phrase that includes everything from Al Quaeda to Democrats (and *all* who oppose Dear Leader) to the peace-only oriented groups such as Pax Christi).

Yes, black and white thinking does NOT promote the continuation of an informed middle class, i.e., the continuation of our democratic republic. :(

IMO the jury's still out on Chavez. However, he is presently the leader of a sovereign nation: Dear Leader has no business in overthrowing him via military invasion. :crazy:

[fuzzyball]

55. That all depends on whether Venezuela is richer or poorer

at the end of Chavez regime. Until that point is reached it
is all conjecture, pure and simple.

[PeaceProgProsp]

57. Poverty down and more people have health care and education

Amartya Sen would approve.

[generaldemocrat]

58. Then why is crime up......

Caracas is now officially one of the most dangerous cities in Latin America, right up there with Sao Paulo and Rio.

So if social services are supposedly being expanded, then why are there more people now than ever resorting to crime? Doesn't make sense.

[Bridget Burke]

65. Where can we see those crime stats?

They sound interesting.

[generaldemocrat]

68. Stats/Articles here.....

Venezuela leads world in gun per capita deaths according to UN report.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/17/business/worldbusiness/17crime.html?ex=1318737600&en=436a3a3cbd2eaf54&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

Crime rates soar in Venezuela
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/09/AR2006050901803_pf.html

Even left-wing Counterpunch has something to say about crime in Caracas
http://www.counterpunch.com/kozloff12272006.html

[Bridget Burke]

73. Thanks for the information.

The NYT story is indeed troubling. Crime is hurting Venezuela's economic boom. However, the writer does not blame it on Chavez.

The Washington Post also speaks of crime--although murders peaked in 2003. One man quoted indicates the police don't help the poor. But most of those interviewed are definitely upper class. And Hmm--interesting:

The frustration among crime-weary Venezuelans recently has become a political issue, erupting into several large street protests demanding that Hugo Chavez's government do something to stem the violence. Chavez's opponents are trying to make crime a central theme of the December presidential elections, demanding action from a president they say has neglected the issue since taking power in 1999....

Still, Chavez has remained popular among the general population -- most of whom live in poverty -- in part because few blame him directly for crime.

Of course, crime as an election issue did not work. Chavez was re-elected.

The "left wing Counterpunch" story also indicates worsening crime in Caracas. Here's how it ends:

Solving Caracas's social problems will surely prove to be one of the most vexing and daunting challenges for President Chavez in his second term. Gimnasios verticales and urban redesign at San Rafael are promising developments. The government will have to do its utmost to integrate other barrios into the urban fabric. Failure to do so will provide further ammunition to the opposition, which will charge that the Chavez government has failed to rein in crime and insecurity.

But the writer says the problem is not exactly new--just worsening. The article ends with a link to his book--which is mostly favorable to Chavez. Thanks!

This article from 2005 indicates the police are hostile to Chavez:

Since coming to power in 1998, the Chavez administration has faced numerous difficulties from the police force, which like most of Latin America's police forces is rife with corruption and links to organised crime. The Caracas metropolitan police force, which was under the control of an opposition mayor until late last year, has been repeatedly used to repress supporters of Chavez. During the 2002 coup against Chavez, the police viciously attacked the uprising that eventually restored Chavez to power. Dozens of Chavez supporters were killed. After a pro-Chavez mayor was elected in October 2004, the police force was restructured, but recent events show still it has a long way to go.

www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=8285

What has George Bush done about crime in DC? Does he control the police force?

[PeaceProgProsp]

98. The Kozloff article is good. It answers your questions.

[PeaceProgProsp]

97. Chavez inherited one of the most wealth-polarized societies in the world

At least now, it isn't the government murdering people (check out the Caracazao).

I've also read that crime is up in the countryside murder rates are up because labor organizers are getting murdered because of their otherwise increasing power.

Also, the police departments are notortiously corrupt, and fixing that is one of the objectives of Chavez's third term.

[fuzzyball]

63. playing Robin Hood could help the poor but will the general

population benefit? Will the middle class, who already
has healthcare usually benefit from higher taxes to pay for
health care of others? I don't know.

But like I said, you can't judge any regime by the beginning,
you have to wait for the end results.

So, I am reserving my judgement on Chavez.

[Judi Lynn]

69. Playing Robin Hood? You need to spend a little of your posting time on educating yourself, instead,

wouldn't you think? It would do you a world of good, and do wonders for your image around people who actually know what's going on there.

By the way, there IS no middle class straining away under the weight of carrying the poor of Venezuela. Thanks to the right-wing, European descended tiny oligarchy which has controlled Venezuela for all these years, there's an ENORMOUS class of people living in poverty.

Just step away from your keyboard and do yourself a favor by getting caught up reading on Venezuelan history. You'll be glad you did.

[fuzzyball]

70. I dated a woman from Venezuela and that was an education

in itself. She was most certainly from "middle class"
which you claim is missing in Venezuela.

And as I understand the definition of "Robin Hood" it
is robbing the rich and giving it to the poor even if the
poor did not do anything to earn it. If Chavez is taking
money from the ogliarchyt and giving it to the poor, what
do you call it?

[Judi Lynn]

72. You could use help with your reading skills. I said there's no middle class straining away

carrying the load of the poor on its back.

Period.

Chavez is not taking away money from the filthy rich racist elitists and giving it to the inferior, unsophisiticated poor. It does not belong to the oligarcy. Easy to grasp.

Your information you have is only as accurate or as unbiased as its source. You can't claim you know everything about Venezuela because you "dated" a Venezuelan.

There are posters here who have lived there, and maintain homes there. I would trust them.

[jarab]

61. Dictator - loved by DU and his mother. nt

...O...

[roody]

83. Loved by the Venezuelan public.

They scream for him as if he were a rock star.

[LoZoccolo]

62. I would say more of a demagogue than either of those two.

He may have been elected, making him technically not a dictator in some peoples' definitions, but he has done some Bush*-style things which have riled people up in support of him.

[happydreams]

64. World Health Organization

One way to determine the quality of a leader is to see what's (s)he's accomplished. Seems straightforward to me.

One way to do this is check how the country has faired according to WHO standards. Things like literacy, infant mortality, quality of life etc. For instance literacy rates in the Castro "dictatorship" are higher than in the US.

In the modern world how can someone be free that can't read?

Knowing the facts can go a long way toward dispelling the myths.

[Labors of Hercules]

66. scum sucking maggot?

[happydreams]

96. You talking to yerself again.

:eyes:

[malikstein]

67. Huey Long

You could ask the same questions about him as about Chavez. He, a gifted, but normal human being, fought the corporate interests for the normal folks. He wasn't perfect, but he did more good than harm for us. He got himself assassinated by the corporatists for his efforts.

The point is that there are no heros. There are guys on our side and guys on their side. We side with the guys on our side, but we keep an eye on them.

[KansDem]

71. Funny: President Chavez is referred to as a "dictator" in US Corporate Media...

...whereas dictator Bush is referred to as "president."

Just one of the many idiosyncrasies in life...

[sandnsea]

74. Advocating suspension of mayors, local govt

Officially a dictator now.

[Judi Lynn]

77. Post your links. This isn't a gossip page. n/t

[sandnsea]

80. You know it's true

If the people want to vote in socialist mayors and other regional officials, that's their right. But for Chavez to unilaterally dismiss all of these people in the name of 'corruption' is pure bullshit. If anybody in Washington, even Dennis Kucinich, categorically ended all of our local governments - everybody on this board would go ballistic. Republican puppets are no good, but neither are these socialist dictators.


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2546080,00.html
http://www.economist.com/world/la/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8522131
http://english.eluniversal.com/2007/01/15/en_pol_art_15A824761.shtml
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2007/01/14/18346832.php

[ProudDad]

86. Typical right-wing crap

Each of your sources is heavily biased.

Each of these articles are opinion pieces from right-wing sources...

Try again...

[jefferson_dem]

88. Don't you know those are simply biased bits of anti-hugo propaganda promulgated

by the corporate media? We know this because they actually question the man and his mission. Geeeeesh. :sarcasm:

[Nederland]

78. He got lucky

Nobody would have anything fantastic to say about Chavez if the price of oil hadn't gone up significantly during his term in office. To his credit, the rise in oil revenue enabled Chavez to pay for all sorts of worthy projects and programs. However, it doesn't take a genius to take a bunch of money that basically fell into your lap and spread it around so that the people love you. Any moderately talented politician can accomplish that. I'd be more impressed if he had accomplished what he did without the benefit of billions of dollars in oil revenues. As it is, I see nothing special.

[sandnsea]

81. Might not even be true

He may be operating on hope at this point, lots of promises, not necessarily any real results.

http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2007/01/14/18346832.php

[ProudDad]

87. former chief economist of the Venezuelan National Assembly

Great source...

Economics is not called the "dismal science" for no reason...:sarcasm:

[Geek_Girl]

85. He was Democratically Elected I don't think he's a dictator

I'm not a socialist so I don't believe in everything he's doing. But he was elected by the people of Venezuela and deserves respect. IMHO

[rman]

89. Why do you think Chavez is becoming more authoritarian and unilateral?

I hope you realize the US mass media do not report accurately about heads of state that don't have US interests (= Big Business interests) at heart.

It's standard procedure for the corporate owned mass media to paint any such leader as communist and/or dictator and/or terrorist supporter.

Where do you get your information about Chavez?

[Moby Grape]

90. how much does Hugo's Great Society benefits, cost the country?

please be as specific, as possible.

heard on the radio, not necessarily correct.

that Hugo-benefits include,

free health clinics.
outlet stores in the flavelas offering cut-rate
rice, beans, etc. ...cut rate means, cheaper than normal,
or cheaper than world price?

[generaldemocrat]

92. His benefits are sustainable so long as the economy grows....

If there is any economic growth in that country at the moment, then it is entirely attributable to global oil prices. IF he wants to sustain growth in the future, he needs to take some of that oil money and invest it in industries, in small-to-medium businesses, and whether he likes it or not he needs to have a working relationship with the business classes.

Because...if there happens to be a global oil shock, and if this puts a dent in his ability to deliver benefits, then Hugo will go bye-bye in no time.

[Judi Lynn]

94. You can answer a lot of your own questions, and spare yourself misapprehension

by starting to research for yourself. It's all available to you if you take the initiative.

You'll find more than enough information to keep you busy reading about the many various resources Venezuela has been developing in the last few years to both reactivate failed or struggling businesses, and create new business.

It's not that it isn't happening, it's that you haven't taken the time to find out.

[rman]

99. The benefits are sustainable so long as the nation generates income

Even though currently the economy of Venezuela is growing faster than that of any developing nation that is being 'helped' by having them join so-called "Free Trade" - growth is not a requirement for sustainability.

To generate income Venezuela has fertile soil, labor and lots of oil. The only 'problem' with Chavez is that he wants those to benefit Venezuelans rather than transnational corporations. That's why the US government and corporate mass media vilify Chavez as a bad guy. Especially in the context of US foreign policy towards Latin America this should sound familiar.

[booley]

95. Maybe he's just a guy.

Who is trying to do what is best for his country.

and some things were good ideas. Others were questionable. And Others were misinterpreted by the world at large.

But while I don't hold Chavez as some kind of progressive messiah, I also don't see him being a Dictator. Not renewing television stations that advocated for the violent overthrow of the government and trying to make sweeping economic reform in a country that still has away to go before it's a first world country is hardly on the level of a Pinochet or a Peron. And while many may find his ties to Cuba and Iran troubling (I do), if making alliences with dictators makes him a dictator in turn then it does the same for Carter and Reagan and Clinton and Eisenhower and almost every other American President we have ever had.

I can't help but notice that everytime someone goes on about how Chavez is a dictator, their arguements rely on half truths and a double standerd and implying about what he "might" do.

Lets just worry about our own country right now.

[rman]

100. If Chavez were a Pinochet, he'd be supported by the US

Like Chavez does, Allende to wanted to nationalize industry and resources.

[snowbear]

101. This is a STRANGE thread ....

The creator of it asks a very odd question, then splits the scene without corresponding again.

Bizarre.

[rman]

102. Well, the OP did sort of answer his own questions

"..he's becoming more authoritarian and unilateral in his attitude towards democracy.."

So i suppose there no real need for the topic starter to correspond about this any more.

[happydreams]

103. Maybe he was axed by....

Chavezistas!

[DuaneBidoux]

104. My opinions come from the words of his own mouth.

When I hear anyone say "this is the beginning of a socialist revolution" I get nervous. That language in the past has rarely led to increased democracy. I have nothing against socialists, if they are not strident true believers. The stand of socialism with which I am comfortable is the kind grown in Europe.

[ProudDad]

106. I see

one size fits all?

Well, which version of European Socialism are you comfortable with? UK semi-fascist/big brother/socialism? Denmark/Norway? Swedish semi-total, highly regulated Socialist/Capitalism? German faux-U.S. style Capitalist/Socialism? French? Spanish? Belgium? Netherlands?

They're all different. Other than the privileged upper class twits, Europeans are mostly "strident true believers".

One advantage Europe has is that they had a VERY strong Labor movement rather than the cowboy capitalism rampant in the U.S. and they were able (and were forced by their people) to create societies that shared the bounty once they recovered from the killing fields of WWII.

I suspect what Sr. Chavez is doing is trying to find a Socialist model that would fit well in South America. They have a rough road to hoe. Mainly, they have to overcome centuries of colonization and installed dictators (most recently installed by successions of U.S. administrations).

I would think that a "democrat" would want to support an attempt to share the resources and income of a country with the less fortunate... :shrug:

[DuaneBidoux]

113. I am most comfortable with the Swedish brand of socialism.

But you\'re right, one size never fits all.

But as I said, I am rarely comfortable with revolutions (socialist or otherwise). There are times when, unfortunately, they are necessary (as in the French and American revolutions) but the history of revolutions tends to be bloody and tend to lead toward a reduction in freedom and democracy. Democracies tend to grow under the ocnditions of well tended plants, authoritation or totalitarian regimes tend to grow out of revolutions.

It is not a \"done\" deal. There are without doubt exceptions, and perhaps Chavez will be one. I\'m not ready to label him either hero or villain. I think it is much to early for that. I am simply uncomfortable with his leadership style.

[Maestro]

105. I like his anti-* stance but I am concerned

about his type of leadership. I have some Venezuelan friends, middle class Venezuelans, whose parents were/are teachers, college professors, airline pilots, doctors, petroleum engineers etc.... According to them, their lives are seriously compromised. Again, this is according to them. The working class and poor certainly have a voice in the government with Chavez, but he seems set on refusing to lead the whole country, only those who were ignored before. While this is nobel, he can't expect to truly be considered a true leader if he doesn't want to incorporate everyone into the fold. He seems to be purposely excluding anyone who wasn't considered the working class poor. Not all of the middle class or even upper class were corrupt and greedy. I certainly do not mind in the least a leftist leader in South America. I would love to see one here in the US as well, but a leftist doesn't always have to make himself out to be a revolutionary. This is what Chavez seems to be doing allying himself with Casto and the constant anti-American rhetoric. Sometimes he appears to me to be the South American loud-mouthed version of Ahmadinejad And I have serious doubts about this "rule by decree" that was just passed in Venezuela. This doesn't sound like a democracy, but perhaps I am missing something.

And now he is attacking Henry Ried. The saga continues.

[ProudDad]

107. I think it's up to the "middle class"

who participated in the coup and its aftermath to come to Chavez rather than Chavez bending to their desires, don't 'cha think? :shrug:

How many Venezuelan friends do you have? Why are they not in Venezuela helping their country (if they aren't)?

I know a couple. They remind me of the hard-core Miami Cubans who "lost" their privileged positions when Sr. Castro took over and raised the standard of living of the majority... They want it ALL again and are pissed that they don't have it...

[Maestro]

108. Again, not everyone participated in that coup.

And as a leader one needs to try to represent everyone. Certainly there are hard-core righties in Venezuela that just want to step all over and exploit the working the class. However, I still think that Chavez needs to tone down the rhetoric and work on continuing to stabalize the economy and bring true reform to the working class, steady jobs with benefits and the like. It looks like he is headed in the right direction with unemployment down and the desire to create a South American bank to fund business cooperatives in South America. This is what is needed. However, I still have concerns about the latest "rule by decree" and just recently the Venezulan stock market took a huge jolt.

http://english.eluniversal.com/2007/01/17/en_eco_art_17A825513.shtml

So, it would seem that Chavez just can't talk, but needs to put his talk into real action to affect the lives of all Venezuelans even those that initially opposed him. If he is good for Venezuela, he is good for all people. This is one reason I detest *. He is good for only a small minority of people in the US.

As far as my friends go, they seem moderate to leftist, at least when it concerns US politics. But yes, they do not like Castro. They are not fond of this US government either.

[Judi Lynn]

109. "And now he is attacking Henry (Harry) Ried (Reid)?" Obviously NOT.

He ANSWERED Harry Reid's remarks by saying HARRY REID IS WRONG. That doesn't constitute an attack, after all, does it?
Not in a rational world.

From everything we've seen written, the wealthy, and the merely very comfortable of Venezuela CONTINUE to feel the protection of their distance from want, from fear about what the next day will bring them. There have been far more than enough articles written and published, even in the corporate media, to make that fact very obvious.

Here's one example, there are more available to post:

Posted on Mon, Nov. 13, 2006
Venezuela riding wave of prosperity
By Gary Marx

Chicago Tribune
(MCT)

CARACAS, Venezuela -

~snip~
Like many Venezuelans, Rodriguez is flush with cash as this South American country rides an unprecedented wave of prosperity fueled by high oil prices, cheap credit and massive government spending that has created a new elite and bolstered President Hugo Chavez's popularity less than a month before he seeks re-election.

From a $50,000 Hummer to a $500 Dolce & Gabbana cell phone to a $10 glass of Buchanan's 18-year-old Scotch whiskey, Venezuelans are spending money like never before as the economy grows at a 9 percent clip this year.

Car sales are up 70 percent the past 12 months in a nation where gasoline runs about 18 cents a gallon, and the Venezuelan stock market has soared 70 percent since January. Housing prices in Caracas have tripled in four years, economists say.

It seems as if a new restaurant or late-night lounge is opening every month in Altamira and other wealthy Caracas neighborhoods. Banks are even offering credit for nose jobs, tummy tucks and other cosmetic surgeries in this beauty-obsessed nation.
(snip/...)

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/world/15999759.htm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



It's THESE people who need help so desperately, the people who have been crowded onto the sides of hills around cities, without running water in many cases, or electricity, in many, and certainly without a prayer of access to sanitary plumbing, obviously without any chance of fire protection, when a fire breaks out and sweeps away the entire neighborhood, or when rains come and the sides of hills are plunged into mudslides, taking the little tin, cardboard, etc. houses all along, killing off the people who perish without any way to escape.

The land has been taken by a tiny minority of wealthy landowners, the poor have been screwed. They have lived this way forever while the European-descended people took the profits generated from their labor, and kept them locked out of the world altogether. As you see, they still are determined to keep that filthy, evil system intact any way they can, and they DO, along with their cohorts in the corporate media here, and corrupt politicians, struggle to overthrow the first leader who has promised to help the poor.

They want it ALL. If Latin America's new leaders are murdered or sabotaged someway, you will see they will be replaced by MORE new good leaders. Your group is not going to win this time. Change is most assuredly on the way.

[Maestro]

111. Hey JudiLynn sorry for getting the spelling wrong.

I was writing that with two little munchkins climbing over me. Anyhow, I am really not concerned with Chavez. I don't see him as a threat to anything. And like I said in my original post he can bash * all he wants. I am right there with him.

I only ask you not respond to me with things like, "Your group is not going to win this time." I am not with any group. I am simply stating some opinions of mine as the OP asked. I am well aware of the political dynamics of Latin America. My MS is in Spanish Culture and Civilization which included an enormous study of how Spain and Europeans in general raped "The New World." Again, as I said before I am well aware there was a definite ruling class in Venezuela before Chavez. My worries continue to be that Chavez is ignoring, or at the very least with his rhetoric, making the lives of others who were not part of the working class uncomfortable. I hope the Mr. Rodriguez in the article to which you linked didn't have much invested in the stock market because it just took a huge hit as of 16 Jan.

Throughout Latin American history, there have been reformers who come to power only to begin to rule absolutely even after doing much good. Porfirio Díaz of Mexico comes to mind. He basically continued the good work of Benito Juárez, but then basically became a dictator by decree. Sound familiar? Chavez is doing much good for his country, but there are signs that have me worried. We bash * for making the US look like idiots in the way he handles himself especially in foreign policy and rightly so! Chavez strikes me as being just the same arrogant twit sometimes. "El caciquismo" has ruined many a good country in Latin America and South America. This refers to the fact that there seems to be that one person who thinks they are the savior, strong man, protector, what have you, of a country. This idea leads them to put aside democratic ideals for the sake of the country in their eyes. In reality, it just causes the country to stagnate and nobody wins. Is Venezuela headed this way? I couldn't tell you. All I am saying is that there are worrying signs. Nonetheless, those that feel compelled to promote Chavez like some sort of prophet, can go ahead. I'd rather worry about the poor in this country. I could take or leave Chavez. I'm indifferent if not just little concerned about some of his actions. That is about it.

[Judi Lynn]

110. Venezuela dismisses US concerns on Chavez

Venezuela dismisses US concerns on Chavez

Associated Press
Sunday, January 21, 2007 (Caracas):

Venezuela condemned the US government on Saturday for what it called unacceptable meddling after Washington raised concerns about a measure to grant President Hugo Chavez broad lawmaking powers.

The National Assembly, entirely made up of Chavez allies, said in a statement that it "emphatically rejects" the remarks by State Department deputy spokesman Tom Casey, who on Friday said Chavez's plans "have caused us some concern."

Casey referred specifically to a measure that won initial approval Thursday in the National Assembly and would grant Chavez authority to pass a series of laws by decree during an 18-month period.
(snip)

The National Assembly said in its statement that those remarks were "an unacceptable intervention in our nation's internal affairs" and demonstrated Casey's "crass ignorance" about a process that is spelled out in Venezuela's constitution.
(snip)

Vice President Jorge Rodriguez said the US "expresses worry every time Venezuela exercises its democracy," adding that Washington never objected when past Venezuelan governments approved the same sort of measures.

"The spokespeople of the US government have to calm down," Rodriguez said, suggesting they need some "sort of Valium."
(snip/)
http://www.ndtv.com/morenews/showmorestory.asp?slug=Venezuela+dismisses+US+concerns+on+Chavez&id=99782

[dollydew]

114. Chavez, A Bridge Too Far?

Until now, I have given him the benefit of the doubt. I realize that his press in the US has been largely negative. So has the press about anyone (including Americans) that disagreed with WH policy. This move for an "Enabling Act" is beyond disturbing. That's the same Act passed by Hitler that gave him dictatorial powers. I can't support any government (or leader) that goes down that road. I have one disclaimer though. Even Kissinger and Bush admit that Iraq is about oil. Venezuela has quite a bit of oil also. Chavez is saying he will nationalize several major industries. This will cut-off many major western companies. If, and I say if, the constitution of Venezuela allows Chavez to do this well.... :scared:

[Judi Lynn]

116. Venezuela has nationalized industries for years.

You knew this, right?

Last Updated: Thursday, 11 January 2007, 10:54 GMT

Timeline: Venezuela
A chronology of key events

........

1973 - Venezuela benefits from oil boom and its currency peaks against the US dollar; oil and steel industries nationalised.
(snip)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/country_profiles/1229348.stm

[SemperEadem]

115. to his people who are not wealthy land owners/corporatists, a hero

to everyone else, particularly those opposed to what he is doing for his people and the Catholic church, a dictator.