Interesting. What Chavez is showing by example is that 'bour. democracy' is only democratic by name.
The game plan is always to enrich the capitalist classes, to keep downward pressure on wages, and make available raw materials and natural resources on the cheap.
The US is an example of this: wages are going down, people are loosing benefits that have been won by decades of working class mobilization and struggle. More, much of this is accomplished by controlling the flow of information and producing 'mind-candy' types of entertainment and sports.
Here in the US the working class and middle class are largely asleep and apathetic.
Indeed, Chavez is showing by example that democracy can only be achieved by empowering the poor, the heretofore exploited and marginalized classes. The model of 'strengthening the middle classes' with the hope of lifting all boats is flawed from its inception--as it is most often predicated on the neoliberal pipe dreams of privatizing resources, eliminating regulations and labor laws, and engaging a race to the bottom.
I suppose it's uplifting that Chavez is keeping his word after falling short on the annual housing and Polar plant agreements. Though one has to wonder at the motives since many venezuelan could use support rather than poor americans that are probably still richer than middle class venezuelans.
Brett,
That has been acknowledged, I actually did a post on it. And the person responsible for the housing program has been replaced.
As to spending money overseas you may have a point. But that is just one more policy issue for people to take account of when they go to vote.
What are the chances that the votes will be opened and manually counted if there are some people that question the results?
Brett - ...Though one has to wonder at the motives since many venezuelan could use support rather than poor americans that are probably still richer than middle class venezuelans.
Poverty is poverty, it is commensurate to the standards of well being in any given scenario and cannot be judged linearly across socio economic dissimilarities.
There are also budgetary confines that regulate where monies are appropriated. Governmental bureaucracies do not allow for shifting of monies from differing programs that any particular office oversees, easily. Looking at the revenues the government receives and allots, in total, and not taking into account where those monies go for differing programs is not looking at the how budgets are set and kept in the right light. .
Its easy to look at the big picture, make assumptions, and wonder, but the small picture gives the viewer a much better resolution on how these things really work.
"if there are some people that question the results?"
There will always be some who question the results. Even if they had opened them during the RR then the claim would have been they printed up dummy papers to put in the boxes in place of the real ones.
To do a full manuel count with witnesses from both sides that has to be agreed to in advance. It wasn't in the RR because neither the observers nor the parties to the elections demanded it. An audit under international observation was seen as sufficient - until one side decided they didn't want to accept the results no matter what.
Also, as my most recent post says, you have to wonder where all this worry about finances comes from. The opposition didn't care when it was causing the country billions of dollars of lost revenue during its "strikes". Where was the concern then? The Bronx project is a pittance by way of comparison.
Poverty is poverty yes that is correct. But to see such an increase in the last few years of many homeless in the streets of venezuelan cities is disheartening. Its errie similar to the '80s when there was an increase of homeless people during the Reagan "trickle down" years.
Brett, the increase was during the strike. Prior to that it was decreasing. Since then no numbers have been released. The numbers the opposition has kept using are from 2003 as more recent ones are not out yet. The economy grew 17% last year and about 10% this year. Think maybe poverty went down a little? I do. We'll see when the numbers come out.
In addition you have the 30% increase in the standard of living of the poor in one year, 2004 alone, documented here:
http://oilwars.blogspot.com/2005...s-he-do-
it.html
Commenting by HaloScan
