|
The Reichwing lies, constantly, about everything. The corp/fascist press trumpets their lies as if they were reliable information or rational opinion. This becomes the brick wall against which progressives, who represent the vast majority, must bang their heads to justify even the mildest of decent policies, like providing free heating oil to the poor in the dead of winter--or providing health care to all.
Having poor people die from cold and exposure in their hovels in the dead of winter, and having pandemics of tuberculosis and other preventable diseases, because the poor can't afford medical care, are not even good for rich people. This is what progressive policy--the overwhelming and positive trend in human history--is all about --dragging rich people, kicking and screaming, to the common sense realization that, if there are no roads, if there are no public hospitals, if there are no public schools, if there are no fire and other emergency services, if there were no Social Security and Medicare, if there were no environmental regulation of air and water quality, if there is no regulation of banks and financial institutions, if poor and middle class people cannot afford medical care, if there are no laws about product safety, etc.--that is, if a society fails to provide commonly funded "common good" programs, that society is unlivable, even for the rich.
Against this RATIONAL and DECENT notion, the Reichwing in this country--funded by global corporate predators and war profiteers, and given a Big Trumpet by the corpo/fascist media--pose the IRRATIONAL and INDECENT idea that the well-off have no responsibility for society at all. Thus the parameters of public debate become, not which progressive "common good" projects are best, or how best to organize them, or how to pay for them in the fairest way, but rather, whether or not to entirely abandon human decency and the "common good" --a completely irrational and anti-democratic position.
The Chavez government has its viewpoint on the "common good"--supported by consistently high approval ratings of nearly 60% from the people of Venezuela, in polls and elections. It is a mixed capitalist/socialist system that produced a sizzling economic growth rate over the last five years (2003 to 2008) of nearly 10%, with the most growth in the private sector (not including oil), while accumulating a $43 billion international cash reserve ("rainy day" fund), based on two main principles: social justice (decent schools and medical care for all; pensions for the elderly; decent wages; help to small business; maximum citizen participation in politics and government, etc.) and use of the country's resources to help the people who live there and also to help create viable trading partners among the country's neighbors (thus, Venezuela, for instance, helped bail Argentina out of World Bank/IMF ruination, with low cost loans and barter trades).
While the Chavez government are aggressive socialists, a close ally like Brazil, led by Lula da Silva, has goals that are increasingly similar to those of the Bolivarian Revolution, but have a much bigger portion of capitalism in their economic mix. Each country is different, but the trend is overwhelmingly toward the "common good"--rather like our society once was (from the 1930s and FDR through the 1970s and Jimmy Carter).
The best thing for the people of the U.S. would be to join with these countries in adjusting capitalist/socialist policies to achieve the greatest good. We should be partners and cooperators with the great leftist democracy movement that has swept South America and half of Central America. Instead, what are we talking about here? Consider this section of the Boston Globe article:
---
"There are many in politics who believe that in a state as liberal as Massachusetts, with a philanthropy as respected as Citizens, that the Chávez connection would not amount to a significant obstacle for Kennedy.
“'I don’t think you’re going to persuade the public that Citizens Energy and delivering free oil to people who can’t afford it is a bad thing. I really don’t think that’s going to stick,’ said William F. Weld, a Republican and a former governor of Massachusetts. “(Kennedy’s) not loony left at all, and I think he could be very good in office.'
"But in a taste of what Kennedy might expect from a Republican opponent in a general election, or even a conservative Democrat in a primary, one operative said the issue could be pivotal in a campaign.
“'If Joe were to become a candidate, he would have to answer some very uncomfortable questions about his personal and business relationships with Hugo Chávez,’ said Eric Fehrnstrom, a Republican political consultant and adviser to Mitt Romney, the state’s former governor. 'Chávez is not a friend to the United States, and he has used his PR machinery and oil to spread anti-American propaganda - and played Joe Kennedy for a very convenient stooge.'’’ --Boston Globe
------
Consider that "but," first of all. Despite the utter unreasonableness of the right, the nutball rightwing position is treated as a reasonable position. Guess why? Cuz when the campaign gets going, the Boston Globe and the rest of the corpo/fascist press are NOT going to ask the corpo/fascist tool candidate any common sense questions about it--like, WHY is Chavez "not a friend of the United States"?, or, WHAT EXACTLY has Chavez done to harm the United States?--but instead they are going to unquestioningly repeat and promulgate those Reichwing views, as if that were a reasonable political discussion.
Now, ask yourself those questions--WHY is Chavez "not a friend of the United States"?, or, WHAT EXACTLY has Chavez done to harm the United States?
Is it not true that all the harm has gone the other way? The US and its "free trade for the rich" policies harming the people of Venezuela, who give Chavez a 60% approval rating for, among other things, fighting back? And is it not true that the US (Bushwhacks) supported the Reichwing military coup against Chavez's elected government in 2002? And is it not true that this has been typical behavior by the US over the last forty years?
And still Latin Americans are extending a hand of friendship to the US--including the Citgo program--after all this bullshit we have done to them. Of course it's P.R. No question about it. But it is also REAL. Real, material help to the poor, here. To call it "P.R." is to call it bullshit. George Bush bringing "freedom" to Iraq is bullshit. The Chavez government providing free heating oil to the poor of the US is not bullshit.
The Boston Globe then drags out one of their on-call "experts"--a member of the Reichwing Venezuelan government prior to Chavez--to say the following:
"But that comes at a cost to his own people, who earn an average of $8,300 per year, said Ricardo Hausmann, a minister in the Venezuelan government before Chávez took power.
“'It would be very awkward to imagine that in a democratic society, the average Venezuelan would vote to subsidize somebody significantly richer than they are,' said Hausmann, who now directs Harvard’s Center for International Development." --Boston Globe
It would be "very awkward to imagine"? Venezuela IS a democratic society! Provably so! Their elections are not only internationally certified as transparent and aboveboard, their elections are far, FAR more transparent than our own! And their levels of citizen participation put us to shame! The "average Venezuelan" strongly supports the Chavez government. Provably so! So what is this bullshit--from the Venezuelan Reichwing--that these things "would be very awkward to imagine"?
The Boston Globe assembles all the bullshit they can find, from all the bullshit sources we see used time and again, to promulgate and trumpet a pack of goddamn lies about Chavez that we have not seen since the WMDs that weren't in Iraq.
I am not objecting to the Boston Globe reporting what the Reichwing will try to throw at Joseph Kennedy. But that is not what they are doing here, in the subtext.
Did you notice that they didn't quote ANYBODY rebutting these bogeyman charges against Chavez?
They let a member of the former Reichwing opposition government of Venezuela--a government that open fired on protestors, slaughtering hundreds of people; a government that destroyed Venezuela's economy and couldn't give a fuck about most Venezuelans--questioning Venezuela's democracy now that the Left is successfully running the government--and presuming that the "average Venezuelan" is too stupid to understand Chavez government foreign policy, and NOT PROVIDING ANY REBUTTAL.
The subtext of this article is that the Reichwing (corpo/fascist) position on Chavez is reasonable. It is not. The Boston Globe is arguing for it. They present no evidence to the contrary--and, believe me, there is plenty of it. They therefore help the Reichwing here push Joseph Kennedy into a defensive position on one of the best "help the poor" projects in the country, and the best--in fact, the only--example of what our government should be doing to create friendly and cooperative relations with Latin American democracies. Working together. Solving common problems. Discussing ways of serving the "common good." Instead of demonizing Latin America's elected leaders and trying to overthrow their democratic governments!
Here's what Lula da Silva, president of Brazil, said about Chavez: "They can invent a lot of things to criticize Chavez, but not on democracy!"
How come that viewpoint is not in this article?
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
