geez, OW, what is sad is that your distorted reading of the situation.
You use the US model as some sort of touchstone of interpretation. In the US the corporations and the state are one--this is the empire.
In the US, CNN is an effective propaganda tool of the corporate/state nexus. In a true social democracy, this hoodlum clown, Ravell, would have beengl punished for participating in the coup, and Globo would be history.
What is sad is that you fret about Venezuela, when your own corporate/state group of thugs murder millions through this propaganda.
Yet you fret about Venezuela. geez, cognitive dissonance.
Well, SR, I'll give you this. At least you managed to write your comment without saying that the Venezuelan government is justified for investigating and threatening a media site for reporting on an event before official government sources acknowledged its existence.
Hopefully this means you have some democratic ethos.
Slave Revolt, you do not deserve the country you live in. Pack up and go to Venezuela, it is the only coherent thing you can do.
ow, sorry, I know I shouldn't say so: "I TOLD YOU SO!!!"
BTW ow, and don't dodge the question: do you still think Pdvsa is running smoothly and does not have serious problems??? I have another "I told you so" ready to shoot at you.
Well, there is precident to consider. Globo and Ravall have an inclination toward using mass media to subvert and destabilize the elected government.
Again, in a democratic society they would have have the franchise shut down, in a moment.
The elected government has the franchise on directing the flow of information during a national disaster. Period.
"The elected government has the franchise on directing the flow of information during a national disaster. Period."
What national disaster? There was a mild earthquake in which I believe no-one was killed.
Now in the case of Katrina we had a true disaster and we had a government that didn't even know there were thousands of people stuck at a convention center and slowly starving to death until CNN broadcast that fact to the whole country (including the idiots that were supposed to be in charge of the rescue). Was CNN wrong to expose the extreme incompatance of the government in a moment of crisis? I certainly think not.
Ravell and Globo can suck big time. But reporting news and being as critical as you want of the government are pretty widely accepted freedoms.
Impartial, certainly there are many who can tell me "I told you so" I am not sure you are one of them. You haven't been here that long.
Regarding PDVSA do you have some information that is not publically available. As far as I know the company is functioning fine, it just has a whole lot less money as all oil companies do right now.
"Well, there is precident to consider. Globo and Ravall have an inclination toward using mass media to subvert and destabilize the elected government."
Right SR. Great. You know, after 9/11, there was a precedent to consider. Muslim extremists have an inclination toward doing crazy shit and killing whoever they can.
So I assume you have no issue with Iraq or Afghanistan?
Go away. You're as useless as ever.
Eric, I don't understand your point with Iraq or Afghanistan. Please, explain.
----------------------------------------
Slave,
You are now a social democrat? Give me a break! Democrat my foot.
In a social democracy you would be able to speak your mind not just in a private media outlet but in national TV. Actually, as an example: in German and Dutch and Belgian PUBLIC TV you can have this: a chancellor/prime minister debating openly with the opposition - not just one party but several ones - and a lot of very harsh criticisms flowing back and for.
I don't like Angela Merkel. Still, sometimes I have seen German journalists in STATE TV asking her such hard questions that I have felt sorry for her. They have done the same with each one and all the others.
Globovision sucks big time but at least they do dare to have open discussions where Chavismo can speak their mind. We don't have that in public national-wide VTV. Globovision can be seen only by a fraction of Venezuelans because you need cable TV or a dish or live in Caracas.
CEPR ( in particular Mark Weisbrot ) and Venezuelanalysis are both propaganda outlets devoid of any intellectual honesty whatsoever - that's hardly news.
OW,
To the rhetorical question at the end of your post, the answer, sadly, is yes, Venezuelanalysis, (and Weisbrot, and SR, BoRev, etc.) will all walk down the path to Castroism together.
Call it ideology, religion, kool-aid, whatever, in the end these guys have all bought into a kind of faith system that allows them to walk through the looking glass together into that surrealistic twilight that enables them to interpret Chavez's actions as moving toward greater freedom and democracy - as expressed in Cuba. H.G. Wells would have loved it...
The sad fact is that even as Wilpert, Weisbrot, et al cheer the demise of free speech and the onset of dictatorship in Venezuela, none of them would dare live in it, for they know that under systems such as that coming to Venezuela, they know that they could never, ever, write subversive thoughts like those you express here and get away with it.
The final - and even sadder - irony of all of this is that Chavez and his supporters are right; this is all happening as a result of free elections. You can truly and sadly say that Venezuela and Venezuelans are getting what what they deserve and want...
Wilpert is husband to one of the employees at the Venezuelan consulate in Boston (or some other US city).
Venezuela is a sad case. There are two main groups:
1) a bunch of people who only care about themselves and whose only mission, to quote a blog of one of them, is
"ver salir salir a Chavez del poder"
and
2) a group of people
who pretend to help the poor, who know how to talk the talk to the poor but who basically also care about themselves and have no respect for democracy (of course, they say they do, but theirs is a "participatory" democracy)
This latest group has caused more harm than the first, but Venezuela has no chance while either of them rules.
There are lots of people who believe they will be different. Mostly they don't bloody care about improving the standard of living of all Venezuelans. The ones blame problems on "the lazy", the others on the "thieves".
Most on both sides are lazy thieves who don't want to accept their own responsibility.
"...will Venezuelanalysis gladly walk down that path with them?"
Yes. Most definitely.
You miss two things that make the Conatel investigation even more depressing. First, Globo didn't "bash" the government as Venezuelanalysis claims. It simply pointed out that the government's seismic office web server was down. Every time there is a quake here that happens. It will be a big problem if there's ever a more serious quake. Globo, like any news outlet would, then used its second choice - the U.S. Geologic Survey. And rightly, even nationalistically, complained that it had to rely on a U.S. agency for information about a domestic disaster.
Second, Conatel was just handed over last night to a new agency. The Telecommunications Minister must have pushed back on these investigations, one way or another. In any case she's now out of a job, her ministry has been disbanded, and the rich "chavista" who couldn't win an election despite all of Chavez's campaigning, Diosdado Cabello, is now in charge of Cońotel. I mean Conatel. No, it makes no sense that the infrastructure ministry would be in charge of investigating misuse of the airwaves, but I guess Chavez's circle of loyalists is shrinking.
SR's silence is deafening.
hedgey,
Good points.
6 hour workweek.... keep squeezing what remains of the private sector.
This will have looong lasting consequences....
SR's central point still stands however, that Globo et al in the private media are/were not disinterested parties but active participants (on whatever level) in an opposition seeking to not criticize but facilitate teh overthrow of the Chavez gov't. Comparisons to the US or European media are instructive in pointing towards better models of journalism but are apples and oranges when thinking about Venezuela. SR's point about corporate media serving empire is prehaps rhetorically over the top but pretty muc hture. As any anti-chavista will tell you who controls the messaging and how is fundamental to how politics, economics, all of it play out on the ground. It builds consent.
All that said, Chavez needs to keep his hands off the private media as much as possible. It's counter-productive, it stifles legitimate dissent, and I'll buy a slippery slope argument here. The earthquake thing is a prime example of overreach on a minor issue, at least as the facts stand now. And these situations where you need a critical media, where political expediency can stifle mobilization of resources to face a humanitarian crisis.
At least you managed to write your comment without saying that the Venezuelan government is justified for investigating and threatening a media site for reporting on an event before official government sources acknowledged its existence.
OW, this isn't what the government is investigating them for. You've simplified it and manipulated it in order to try to make it sound ridiculous, and, in the process, have become an applogist for Globovision's irresponsible use of a media.
Globoterror's crime is not that they reported that there was an earthquake. (Please point to any government officials who have said that, or what you base that comment on).
Globoterror's crime is taking advantage of a moment of emergency to give the impression that the government was not prepared, or capaple of responding to a potential national disaster, creating a feeling of instability in the country.
Now, I agree that this time it was a pretty minor offense, and that the government is making too much out of it. But I think it was the last straw for Chavistas. Globovision uses any and every little occurance to try to destabilize and create unease among the population. It is one thing to criticize the government. It is another to try to use your media to try to create mass unease among the population by making them think the government is not able to respond to an emergency, or that the country is on the brink of chaos.
I remember a time a couple years ago when Globovision was reporting this "urgent breaking headline" about how the government was "taking over their installations" and was going to shut them down. They had the thumping suspense music in the background and it really did create the feeling that the country was on the verge of something terrible. Turned out it was all a lie, and globovision had to admit later that the government never took over any of their installations. But it didn't matter. They had already created unease among the population.
Your CNN example is pretty pointless. The obvious difference is that during Katrina the US government REALLY WAS very unprepared and there REALLY WAS a situation of chaos and emergency. CNN wasn't trying to take advantage of a minor ocurrence to create a feeling of unease. They were reporting about a real tragedy that was happening.
Globovision, on the other hand, takes advantage of situations that clearly are not a national emergency, and tries to use them to create the false impression that the government is totally incompetant and incapable of responding. They did the same thing with Swine Flu, when the truth is that Venezuela hasn't even been barely hit by Swine Flu, if at all.
Taking advantage of these things to create a sense of mass fear and unease is their crime. They've been doing it for years. I think enough is enough.
the government had a strong case against Globovision after the coup, and didn't pursue it
the station was clearly acting in concert with the coup plotters
but the government let it pass, and now finds itself dealing with this sort of petty nonsense
I've written about this a long time ago, but, instead of permitting the manipulation of a system whereby the corporate licensees get rich (frequently by picking fights with the government) and the government panders to its base (by engaging in acts of faux belligerence against them), in an ongoing farce, the goverment should broadly democratize the media dismantling the system entirely
SR is correct on his fundamental point: no rational person would describe the corporatized media, as it exists, not only in the US, but in Europe, Japan, China, and much of Central and South America, as part of the foundation of a socially democratic society, rather it is an essential means by which the dissemination of information is contained within socially acceptable bounds by an economic elite
and governments around the world have facilitated it by giving corporations licenses that provide them sole access to the airwaves, as well as monopolies that allow them to control cable systems
any purported "social democrat" that defends this system is a neoliberal capitalist, pure and simple, which is not to say that the Chavez governmental response is any kind of meaningful opposition to it, as I have said, they merely feed upon one another
Geez...first these dollar/eurokinder became tired of the Leninist...then of the Marxist, now they do like the Social Democrat, which was kind of softy before...
Richard, you have no idea what democracy is.
And you obviously don't speak any other language than English and perhaps Spanish.
Tell me where you can find an open media. Tell me what country has ever been social democrat according to you.
then what is democracy?
and whom does it serve?
And you obviously don't speak any other language than English and perhaps Spanish.
Tell me where you can find an open media.
Actually, the "media" was much more open before the advent of radio and television, because anyone and any group with a printing press and distribution system could publish and get their message out to a lot of people.
Just look at how broadsheets, leaflets and newspapers proliferated in use in the 19th Century and into the early 20th, as people became more literate and more capable of pooling together the resources to publish and distribute. And, of course, they were hard to control, it required police suppression.
Now, with radio, television and cable dominant, they are much easier to control, just turn the airvwaves and rights of way into a "public" resource, and then auction them off to the highest corporate bidders, which is generally what has been done. Indeed, the term "media" as a descriptive term came into creation partially because of these features.
To presume that there is anything "democratic" about this is nonsense, as is the notion that media in this form, under this sort of corporate control, is going to do anything except propagandize on behalf of the wealthiest, most powerful people in society. Unfortunately, this IS a relatively new development historically, and it will have to be reversed if we are going to abandon the current neoliberal order.
SR, you know what your problem is?
You don't seem to realize that the left and the right, and even those in the middle do nothing more than pull for their own interests. Its human nature. What Globo does on its small coverage area, the government does trough VTV, ANTV, Telesur, etc... but I don't see you complaining or even talking about it.
You "hate" how the "right" and cnn and the empire manipulate everything but you turn a blind eye when the government ignores crime, sidesteps the constitution and violates its own laws.
Even if Globo participated in the coup back in 2002, so did Chavez back in 1992... so whats the difference? That you can identify and side with one side of the spectrum shouldn't make you blind to the whole picture.
OW,
Las mascaras se van cayendo. Poco a poco se ve como el CEPR,Venezuelananalysis and the "experts" that have always supported the government will continue to support it out of blind faith... porq por los reales baila el mono.
Richard, give me a break. First of all: you have the internet. It is just for an elite like you and me, but there people can find their voice and their ears, whatever they think.
Then you have the TV and radio channels in the German, French, Dutch, Scandinavian sectors. You even have some in Britain. You can see how prime ministers and top businessmen get grilled
on a regular basis here; you will probably now say it is all faked. It is far from optimal but 1) it is way better than in the US or Latin America, 2) it is way way better than what you have in Venezuela.
In Venezuela Globo can reach only less than 30% of the population and most Venezuelans don't read, they simply don't bloody read, anything, unless it is perhaps some on crime description, baseball results and horse races.
That hasn't changed since the military-president is there, quite on the contrary.
Globo sucks and yet you can hear there often Chavistas talking and protesting. You do not get it in VTV or other military-government channels.
You are talking about "social democracy" as if it were a unique system. Thanks God real social democrats know they are part of the game of democracy where there is always competition, when only governments are social democrat or liberal a la UK or a la continent or conservative or whatever, but not a whole system.
Just show me your proposals. They will all be based on much more force and control by one single bloody group.
if I try to broadcast over a licensed frequency, I can be fined thousands upon thousands of dollars, and put in jail, that's the American system you defend, it depends upon financial and criminal penalties to be enforced, now that's force
my view is that the notion of licensed frequencies should be eliminated to the greatest extent possible, and reallocated locally,and this could be done in many way, say, as just one example, per lottery for use over a designated period of time
also, the notion of "interference" is used to deny access even when it doesn't exist, or has a marginal consequence, and this should no longer be done
it is always amusing to experience the interests of capital defended in the language of personal liberty
It is always amusing to experience the interests of fascism how on the name of "people" .
"should be eliminated": who is going to eliminate that? the state? which state? which people? and what if other "people" oppose?
Lottery? Who shall participate? What periods? What channels? TV? Radio?
Who is going to cover and even listen to such a thing? THINK THINGS THROUGH, for Goodness sake, and see where the control falls. It will never be in that magic thing you call people but on some other interest that is no more kosher and no more "people" than what we have now.
And even if those are the top countries:
http://www.internetworldstats.co...s.com/
top20.htm
People are getting access to almost whatever they want now on the Internet, at least outside such countries as Cuba and China.
Or do you propose to "suggest" very strongly to people what they should read as Chavez wants?
Kepler: you didn't need to prove my point again
and good to see you confirm my implicit point, that the state, through the granting of the licenses, has, in collusion with large corporations, created a permanent property right for media conglomerates that otherwise didn't exist, shouldn't exist, but can rely upon people like you defend it
do you really believe that the only way to regulate media is by granting it to the highest bidders and using the power of the state to fine and incarcerate anyone who challenges it?
apparently so
"will Venezuelanalysis gladly walk down that path with them?"
Definitely. They defend their "revolution" till the bitter end and defend even such ridiculousness as this new "procedure" against Globovisión.
Shortly after a brief earthquake near Caracas last Monday, Ravell reported unofficial information before authorities had made informed declarations about the situation, and used the occasion to bash the government for not responding quickly enough.
- So, according to V'Analysis, the media are only supposed to report once the government has given them "informed declarations" - well that for sure is how VTV acts, but not a serious media outlet. It means basically that it is only legitimate to report "offically sanctioned" information.
- Bashing the government is now considered an offense, yet more evidence of how V'Analysis thinks.
- Usually, a serious media outlet would say "cónchale, nos ganaron!" - how can we make it better next time, what did *we* do wrong? However, mediocre Chavismo prefers to "shut them down when you cannot beat them".
And, now, consider this: you could say exactly the same about VTV and other government media: "...its virulently pro-Chávez spin on the news, sympathy for violent government protesters, and its biased coverage of last November's regional and local elections." Naturally, you won't read this on their site. 
And, what's more, is that VTV is supposed to be the *national* TV channel, implicitly for *all* Venezuelans, not just those that elected Chávez (!)
the "socialist" as opposed to the "anarchist" approach, is to combat centralized corporate media with centralized proletarian media
needless to say, it's a failure, and ignores the fundamental problem, the concentration of media in the hands of either a corporate elite, or a bureaucratic one
Richard, learn German or Dutch please, and let's talk later. What media? We have internet. What is this anarchist approach? Think it through. You have been trying to bring some form of anarchism for over a century now.
As I said, there is more out there than CNN/Fox and Televisa. You are just another "anarchist/socialist/ping-pong" gringo looking for a cause but never thinking things through.
Be concrete. What will that "anarchy" be like?
It will turn out sooner or later to something ugly, much worse than what we have right now.
And you prove my point by sticking fluffy words and not telling us concretely how you envisage that media.
And anyway, we are talking about Venezuela and its Chavista dictatorship. You will bring in anarchism. Que c.. tiene que ver el culo con las cejas, carajo?
Sire, wie sagt man das auf Englisch?
Richard, for once I agree with you.
Only that a frequency cannot be used by two parties without interference, at least not with analog receivers.
"Now, with radio, television and cable dominant, they are much easier to control, just turn the airvwaves and rights of way into a "public" resource, and then auction them off to the highest corporate bidders, which is generally what has been done. "
"and good to see you confirm my implicit point, that the state, through the granting of the licenses, has, in collusion with large corporations, created a permanent property right for media conglomerates that otherwise didn't exist, shouldn't exist, but can rely upon people like you defend it
do you really believe that the only way to regulate media is by granting it to the highest bidders and using the power of the state to fine and incarcerate anyone who challenges it?"
No, there's another way: A private property system for the airwaves. No "licenses". Just a property deed to a frequency, on a given region. That the government cannot take or fiddle with. How is it to be transferred or given? Buy at market price! Somebody will not sell a frequency to you? Buy another one.
A media conglomerate wants your frequency? Pay the asked for price. Or no price, if you don't want to sell.
But then the govt. would be cut off from the deal, and RCTV under such a regime could not be closed down.
Tosh those are all subjective views. Was a given government prepared? Wasn't it? Is the government great or is it horrible?
Those are all opinions and there should always be open and free discourse of those opinions.
And those who constantly lie and exagerate will become known for that. But it is not for anyone from on high to decide that, not me, not you not the VEnezuelan government.
When they acted against RCTV they could say that RCTV actively participated in the coup and assisted it - they allowed their airwaves to be used by coup participants to call on others to surrender. So there the government had a legit reason to act.
But that is not what they are bringing up against Globo and if that is the real issued than bring that up, not non-sense about how you think they are spreading panic or despair.
Richard,
It would be great if there was true popular control over the media. I did a post on a system that the Dutch had that VEnezuela could emulate.
Unfortunately, in Venezuela you have the private media on one side and the government media on the other - neither is controlled by the citizenry and both are heavily propogandistic.
Further, I think the days that the government could claim to be totally out gunned by the private media are long gone. I think at least in broadcast media the government actually gets more exposure for its views these days.
Richard,
You are a disgrace to the USA. You like to write all this crap from the comfort of your US lifestyle. Go and live in the hell that Chavez has turned Venezuela into. Go and try to make a living there. Go and live your Venezuelan dream and then we can have an informed conversation. Until then, you are just another hypocrite.
Hard to imagine a stupider solution than the one Lorenzo supplied.
Chavez declared that the kind of crap media that is Globovision would not be allowed anymore on public airwaves. This is long overdue. The locos can watch it on cable anyway.
Btw, the president of Globovision made a statement today denying that there was a coup in Venezuela in 2002. Thats about all you need to know about them.
Elliv,
You have no clue. Globovision CAN ONLY BE WATCHED BY CABLE TV OUTSIDE CARACAS!
Why don't you stop living in your nice capitalist Sweden and go to Venezuela? You are such a fascist prick pretending to want things for a social revolution, but you keep being a kronabarna all the same who just wants her "team" win, fuck human rights.
Your lot has no future in Sweden, so you have this wet dream about seeing one day a Venezuela where we get what you want.
Your lot do not make up even 1% of the Swedish population, but you are excited they got power in Venezuela.
This same kronachild Elliv said in Ccs that "they also prosecute Chavistas" and as prove of that mentioned "some governor and the like". Fuck off!
That said governor was a guy who had previously walked away from Chavismo. If you keep close enough to Chavismo, no matter what you stole you won't be bothered.
Kronabarna Elliv, can you tell me how come
1) Chavez Senior
2) a current Chavista governor
3) Aristobulo Isturiz
ALL HAD WRONG PAPER TRAILS when they voted? They claimed they voted and got a different vote on their paper?
Can you tell me why Minister Maduro said over 50% of Venezuelans registered to vote abroad had SIGNED FUCKING SIGNED a petition in support of Chavez when nobody we know in any country ever saw such a petition AND 90% of us voted against it? Why even though we voted against it they have never published those results in the CNE site?
(and we all have the actas and we have written to the CNE with registered letters and have got no fucking response)
You really are a prick. You live in a democratic country enjoying capitalism and pluralism and the possibility to see real social democracy compete with conservatives and others and try to talk about a country you have no idea about
Wow
You are still not recognizing that Chavez is elected and still ranting about tampered votes? LOL that is so 2004 Kep.
You know democracy is also about respecting the election results even if your guy lose. Thats the problem with you, Globovision and the rest of the locos.
Hey Kepler why are you still enjoying "capitalism and pluralism" in Europe while Venezuela badly need every "freedom fighter" in the struggle against the rrrrrrregimen? There is still time Kepler!
Que c.. tiene que ver el culo con las cejas, carajo?
Sire, wie sagt man das auf Englisch?
Kepler | Homepage | 05.15.09 - 7:28 pm | #
It's pretty self-explanatory I think . I am not sure whether there is an equivalent English expression for it.
Elliv,
Because two close relatives were seriously shot (both now handicapped for life) and two others, friends of relatives living in slums were shot dead.
Because several others have been robbed.
Because the murder rate has increased in Venezuela from whopping 19 per 100000 to over 75 in the last 10 years. Because I don't want my children to have to learn crap at school about socialism when the president's daughter is in the most expensive school.
Because my sister was forced to march in one "Clase Media en Positivo".
Please, can you explain the very concrete questions I made about results abroad and about the paper trail? You won't.
Do you want the links?
http://venezuela-europa.blogspot...ing-
system.html
I know Chavez is, like Pinochet for a time, like Stalin for longer time, like much bigger and minor crappy people still very popular.
That does not take massive manipulation.
As I said: why has the CNE not published results for votes abroad since 2006? WHY?
Why can such an electronic system fail even so often with the paper trail?
Elliv, when was the last time you created a piece of software?
Wow
You are still not recognizing that Chavez is elected and still ranting about tampered votes? LOL that is so 2004 Kep.
You know democracy is also about respecting the election results even if your guy lose. Thats the problem with you, Globovision and the rest of the locos.
The CNE hasn't released full results for the last few electoral processes. That is a fact, not opinion. It's a violation of electoral law, and any citizen is within his rights to complain about it and demand accountability. To pretend otherwise is to endorse corruption.
THAT's the problem with you and the rest of the pampered PSFs: The rule of law is all well and good for your own civilized homelands, but who needs it in a "revolution"?
Elliv,
I don't make coups like the Chavezes and Carmonas. I say to a governmental body as citizen please explain and give us the results for all the Venezuelans who voted abroad. We made it through established channels. We have received no answer. Don't you have the right to know how many votes were cast in Göteborg after 2 or 3 years? Don't you have the right, specially if the government says that over 50% of those who could vote in Göteborg voted for a Nazi party and you were in one of the places where the vote was cast and saw it with your eyes that almost all voted against and you know people in every sector of Göteborg and they say similar things?
Are you then attempting against democracy if you demand results to be published, whatever they are?
We are talking here about Maduro saying most of those people actually signed for Chavez. Please, answer THIS: DID OVER HALF VENEZUELANS REGISTERED TO VOTE ACTUALLY SIGNED A PROPOSAL SUPPORTING THE REFERENDUM?
WHAT WAS THE FINAL VOTE OF VENEZUELANS IN THE REFERENDUM OF 2007 AND 2008 ABROAD?
I am talking about abroad because the lie there is more easily tracktable. Can you stick to that for a moment? Just let's talk about that.
Here the results:
http://www.cne.gov.ve/divulgacio...p?
cod_estado=99
Nothing.
Why? Because it would revealed Maduro lied.
Again: Maduro said OVER HALF OF US ABROAD SIGNED SUCH A PETITION. I know a lot of Venezuelans in Germany, France, UK, Benelux, a couple even in Norway, lots in Canada and the US, Chile and even Russia. I have got the ACTAS from most countries. We know how many voters are in other countries.
About 90% voted against Chavez abroad. We know it is much higher than in Venezuela, but let's stick for a moment to this problem: we have the actas, we know the vast majority rejected abroad the proposal and yet Maduro claimed over 50% of us signed supporting the proposal and the government hasn't revealed the results for this year or for the one of 2007.
As for the votes in Venezuela: about 10% of the votes are unaccounted for. In the last referendum you even had that the amount of "absentees" (not proportion) went down from the first report to the second, among many other irregularities.
Ow,
I am trying to understand how many deals Venezuela has with China for oil.
Our friend Chris wrote this piece of news two years ago:
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/...s.com/news/
2812
You pointed at this:
http://www.oilandgaseurasia.com/...s/p/0/news/
4604
And there is this:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Chi...s/
KE06Cb01.html
I wonder if the agreements proper can be read by normal citizens.
Has anyone commented on the Cargill takeover yet?
More short term fixes in hopes that oil rebounds.
Ravell and Globo can suck big time. But reporting news and being as critical as you want of the government are pretty widely accepted freedoms.
Well, that's not what you were saying five years ago, OW. In fact, I specifically recall a communication from you in which you said that the Chavez government would have been justified in shutting down the opposition stations. So it seems a bit dubious to me that your newfound concern is actually rooted in some set of principles. I would wager that, if the Chavez government had followed your economic prescriptions more closely, you wouldn't much care about the fate of Globovision.
I suppose I could be wrong, though.
Unfortunately, in Venezuela you have the private media on one side and the government media on the other - neither is controlled by the citizenry and both are heavily propogandistic.
That's mostly true, but you don't propose any alternative. The bottom line is that only states and corporations have the resources to set up major newsgathering operations. This is true the world over.
It makes little sense to criticize the existing media structure if you're not willing to offer suggestions as to how we might begin to move beyond corporate or state control of mass communications.
When they acted against RCTV they could say that RCTV actively participated in the coup and assisted it - they allowed their airwaves to be used by coup participants to call on others to surrender. So there the government had a legit reason to act.
But that is not what they are bringing up against Globo and if that is the real issued than bring that up, not non-sense about how you think they are spreading panic or despair.
ow | Homepage | 05.15.09 - 8:28 pm | #
Funny OW, because this is simply your opinion, and it is a pretty naive one.
Why would they still want to go after Globo because of the coup? That obviously isn't their reason, or they would have done it a long time ago. Their reason now is that they are tired of Globovision manipulating and generating fear among the population.
If you can't see the difference between legitimate criticism of the government, and attempts at generating mass panic, then there's no helping you. The distinction is extremely obvious.
Oh, and I notice you didn't address my comments about your Katrina - Globovision comparison. I take it that means you accept that it was a bad comparison?
What is amazing OW, is that you are now coming to the defense of an oligarchy-controlled, corporate television channel that offers nothing valuable to Venezuelan society, and whose only mission is to topple a democratically-elected government because of their own narrow economic interests.
They are not simply wanting to criticize the government. They are wanting to destabilize and remove that government from power through undemocratic means. (just listen as many of their most frequent guests call on the people to overthrow the government, e.g. Rafael Poleo)
But the larger question is why you would think that shutting down Globovision would have any negative consequences for Venezuela. Do you really think that there will no longer be any freedom of speech once Globovision is gone?? Are you honestly going to make that argument? Do you really think people in Venezuela can't speak their minds, and don't have venues where opposition voices can be heard? Let's not be ridiculous here.
If you want to see what it looks like when a country has no opposition voices, go next door to Colombia.
In Colombia, with all its lousy violations of human rights, there is an independent Judiciary that can throw into prison people who are very close to the government. In Venezuela the Judiciary chants "uh, ah, Chavez does not go away". Since when judges in a democratic country chant that, as if they did not know there is pluralism and anything can happen in the next elections?
In Colombia opposition magazines are not harassed the same way as in Venezuela. The president is not insulting them because they oppose the (stupid) attempt at Chavetizing the terms of president that Uribe is considering.
Justin,
It is better to have a lousy governmental and a lousy extreme oppo channel than only one channel, the governmental one.
It would be much better if Venezuelans had something as the Germans have: two TV channels that are state-owned but complete independent. Pity most remaining PSFs are gringos who don't speak anything but English and a little bit of Spanish. You could watch German ZDF and ARD and realize how they can criticize without mercy both government and opposition. You can also see in those channels how the chancellor, the Liberals, the Social democrats, the Linke and the Green all debate openly in the same room and hard questions fly back and forth for everyone to see.
That makes a huge difference.
Chavismo and people like you promote a conversacion de sordos: you reject any debate with the opposition, sometimes you do say "oh, debates has to be carried out by el pueblo", but by el pueblo you mean the part of the pueblo you select, usually a mob that does not allow the others to talk.
It would be much better if Venezuelans had something as the Germans have: two TV channels that are state-owned but complete independent. Pity most remaining PSFs are gringos who don't speak anything but English and a little bit of Spanish.
I apologize for not speaking German. Lord knows it would really come in handy out here in the western United States.
You could watch German ZDF and ARD and realize how they can criticize without mercy both government and opposition. You can also see in those channels how the chancellor, the Liberals, the Social democrats, the Linke and the Green all debate openly in the same room and hard questions fly back and forth for everyone to see.
Sounds good to me.
Chavismo and people like you promote a conversacion de sordos: you reject any debate with the opposition, sometimes you do say "oh, debates has to be carried out by el pueblo", but by el pueblo you mean the part of the pueblo you select, usually a mob that does not allow the others to talk.
Uh, spare me the nonsense about what you think I think or what you think I say because your strawmen arguments are really quite lame.
First off, I actually don't think that Globovision is going to be shut down, so I'm not going to speculate on the issue until I've seen otherwise.
As for the ideal media system, I completely concur with the notion that more open debating forums would be healthy for any democracy (including the United States), but I rarely see people like you putting forth any concrete proposal to that effect. Instead, you typically employ a double standard. You constantly complain about the Chavez government's control of its media but then you never bother explaining how people like Marcel Granier and Alberto Ravell are any more entitled than the Chavez government to control the public airwaves.
In an ideal world, neither states nor corporations would be able to oligopolize public discussion.
But as long as people like you focus only on the problem of state-sponsored propaganda and ignore corporate domination of major media, it's hard to imagine how you could see yourself as occupying any sort of moral highground on the issue.
Justin, I have no shares in Globovision. I can protest to them and I have actually written a couple of times to them and I have been vocal in oppo blogs, as many other oppo people. You will hardly see that kind of criticism among Chavistas about their proposals.
If you go to Ccs you will see how many criticize Globo, even if they support it. Try to see something like that on the other side.
Globovision sucks big time, I puke when I have tried to watch it, but at least they give the floor sometimes to the Chavistas, including ministers who never go to the interviews. Nothing like that has ever happened with the government...well, there was once one channel that did that for 2 weeks and then the journalists got sacked.
Anyway: if the state introduced decent journalism, Globovision would be forced to improve radically. The thing is right now Globo, in spite of being "in the hands of the corporates and the CIA" offers an atom more of debate than VTV.
Much more so in El Nacional/El Uniuversal: you can read there well-known Chavista writers, even if in minority, and anti-Chavez. You can read comments by Chavistas and non Chavistas. Try to find the same thing among the state-media.
Rosales, as corrupt and stupid and anything he may be, asked several times for debates with Chavez. Nothing. The opposition have asked several times for a live debate on crime to the ministers of 'Justice' to no avail.
As for proposals: many proposals, very concrete ones, have been put forward on this and other issues.
One again very current on education:
http://venezuela-europa.blogspot...cation-
for.html
I hope the government FINALLY pays attention to us AND does not make a farce out of the PISA programme.
Finally: control the airwaves? CONTROL THE AIRWAVES?
Have you been lately to Venezuela? Have you tried to watch TV outside Caracas? Do you know how many people live outside Caracas?
70% of Venezuelans cannot watch Globo or RCTV because they have no cable, no internet and don't live in Caracas. Those satellite dishes in the shanty towns in Caracas are not the norm!
Chavez can force and forces his cadenas several HOURS a week countrywide and VTV can be watched in every tiny town (if people wanted, what counts is whether they can or cannot).
In Germany, in Scandinavia, in the Benelux etc most people don't get their news in the private channels because what the state offers is critical enough about both sides, they can trust those channels relatively well, they know the journalists are completely independent and can grill WITHOUT PITY both the bloody chancellor or prime minister or the opposition.
sorry, not completely, I suppose you will never have "completely", even a blogger is dependent on his education and environment.
Still, it is the best so far. And then there is the Internet (but in Venezuela the internet is still for a minority and those who do have some access still don't know how to look for relevant sources, from there that what we need above all is an education system that teaches people to be very critical.
How different was the information given by Globovision from that reported by the government?
Anon III:
Basically, the temblor happened, Globo called FUNVISIS (govt. agency reprting on seismic activity). THeir website was down, a phone call to them was cut off and they went to the US Geological survey website, extracted the info as to intensity, location etc. and reported on it before the government channel did.
The government called this terrorism.
Thanks, revbob22. So, if the government would have reported the same information first, the citizens would not have been "terrorized'?
Apparently so.
You must realize, that the incident was an excuse to try to continue to build a case against Globovision.
I'm not here to defend Globo, but they are the last major over the air TV outlet left that contradicts the government. Whether they are broadcasting the TRUTH, or broadcasting the TRUTH as they see it is up to the viewer. But at least they did not cave in, like Venevision did.
RCTV got shut down for a number of reasons, some valid in some folks eyes, and some not valid.
My belief is that Mr. Chavez brooks no dissent, so whenever he can, he will harass, fine, and send hoodlums to media outlets that do not toe the line. Some did not have the stomach for that, so they folded. Others have vowed to continue fighting for what they see as an inalienable right to speak and be heard, and let the viewer decide if they agree or not and therefore whether they will tune in, or not.
Having that choice is important. Letting someone decide that for me, is undemocratic.
Justin, I have no shares in Globovision. I can protest to them and I have actually written a couple of times to them and I have been vocal in oppo blogs, as many other oppo people. You will hardly see that kind of criticism among Chavistas about their proposals.
That's bullshit. Within Chavismo, there are a ton of people who aren't enamored with Canal 8's programming and openly express criticisms of it. One even hears such criticisms from within the state apparatus itself.
Much more so in El Nacional/El Uniuversal: you can read there well-known Chavista writers, even if in minority, and anti-Chavez. You can read comments by Chavistas and non Chavistas.
Chavista commentaries in El Universal?? Sure, like, one every six months. El Universal's columnists are almost invariably anti-Chavista hacks. There might be one moderate voice sprinkled in there on occasion (such as Margarita Lopez Maya), but I would wager that something on the order of 95 out of 100 columns in El Universal are rabidly anti-Chavista. It's op-ed page is every bit as absurd as Globovision.
I'm not here to defend Globo, but they are the last major over the air TV outlet left that contradicts the government. Whether they are broadcasting the TRUTH, or broadcasting the TRUTH as they see it is up to the viewer. But at least they did not cave in, like Venevision did.
Venevision "caves in" no more than, say, CNN, ABC and CBS "cave in" to U.S. Administrations. It is a well-established fact that Venevision and Televen air both opposition and Chavista viewpoints fairly equally.
Justice,
List the people who are anti-Chavistas in Ultimas Noticias. Tell us when people who oppose Chavez have been given the floor to talk in VTV. Chavistas can talk in Globovision a lot. In fact, you see them very often threatening the people of Globovision with allowing to do that and talking using the microphone. When do you see that in VTV? When do you see the VTV journalist giving the microphone to angry opposition people?
Please, show us examples of Chavistas doing that not in obscure forums as you see in El Nacional and El Universal.
Ibsen Martinez someone? Brito?
Venevision "caves in" no more than, say, CNN, ABC and CBS "cave in" to U.S. Administrations. It is a well-established fact that Venevision and Televen air both opposition and Chavista viewpoints fairly equally.
Venevision is fairly neutral, and so is TELEVEN.
If you can recall, enither TELEVEN nor Venevision reported on the student protests and ignored the whole RCTV debacle. Their coverage might be "neutral" but they carefully "pick" what not to report, to avoid problems with the government.
When do you see that in VTV? When do you see the VTV journalist giving the microphone to angry opposition people?
Practically every other night on La Hojilla. Ever heard of Jorge Amorin? This is exactly what he is famous for; interviewing angry opposition people.
Basically, the temblor happened, Globo called FUNVISIS (govt. agency reprting on seismic activity). THeir website was down, a phone call to them was cut off and they went to the US Geological survey website, extracted the info as to intensity, location etc. and reported on it before the government channel did.
This is a gross simplification of what happened. As I explained above, Globovision's crime is not that they reported the temblor before the government. Their crime is that they tried to take advantage of the temblor to generate panic among the population by making them believe that the government was not able to respond to a national emergency.
Nobody was trying to create panic. They reported the facts. You fascists aren't going to shut down Globovision without tens of thousands of students on the street and vilification from the international community. It'll be one more nail in the chavista coffin.
Tosh, you are pretending to be stupid or you are really like that? You know those people are in anger, losing their patients (which occurs more often among Chavistas, only that Chavistas then take out their guns and shoot at oppos). I mean people who want to discuss things.
You don't see VTV interviewing people who go and ask in front of VTV to answer/explain/contradict what the government is saying.
You don't see people in debates where both groups have equal time.
Your thug-president rejected time after time open debates with Rosales and others, the same your thug-ministers.
You are payed for writing propaganda for the Venezuelan government. I am payed for developing software in Europe.
The government is indeed incapable of responding to emergencies. Chavez was - just one tiny example - responsible for the deaths of many more people in 1999 than what Catrina caused in New Orleans.
When people asked him to postpone his 99 referendum and declare an emergency, he rejected it. He also rejected US help unless it met his conditions.
Chris, you are a criminal.
Nobody was trying to create panic. They reported the facts.
Yeah, sure, JSB says so. I guess we should just all believe him.
You fascists aren't going to shut down Globovision without tens of thousands of students on the street and vilification from the international community.
Haha, you mean like when they took away RCTV's concession?
It'll be one more nail in the chavista coffin.
Keep dreaming. This reminds me of when all you oppo morons said that Chavez would not be able to win the referendum for term limits.
Should we add this to the list of all the thousands of times you've been wrong?
Tosh, you are pretending to be stupid or you are really like that? You know those people are in anger, losing their patients (which occurs more often among Chavistas, only that Chavistas then take out their guns and shoot at oppos). I mean people who want to discuss things.
Hahaha! No, you said "angry opposition people." That is exactly what Amorin does. He interviews angry opposition people, and many times they discuss things without losing their patience. Apparently you are pretty clueless about what VTV actually broadcast. Not surprising.
Your thug-president rejected time after time open debates with Rosales and others, the same your thug-ministers.
Yes, for the same reason why most people here ignore you. Some people are simply too stupid to debate with. Did you actually want Chavez to explain to everyone why La Negra was a total fraud, and a ridiculously stupid proposal?
You are payed for writing propaganda for the Venezuelan government. I am payed for developing software in Europe.
Am I actually supposed to respond to that?
This is exactly why Chavez chooses not to debate with morons. The discussion immediately degenerates into a childish rant when you have been proven wrong.
The government is indeed incapable of responding to emergencies. Chavez was - just one tiny example - responsible for the deaths of many more people in 1999 than what Catrina caused in New Orleans.
Oh, so now Chavez is also responsible for the deaths in Vargas? Wow, we are just getting dumber and dumber by the second.
You're right Kepler. Thousands of people died from mudslides in Vargas 10 years ago. Chavez should have magically stopped the mudslides with his magical powers. He didn't. So, that gives Globovision the justification to generate panic among the population whenever there is a small tremor.
Wow, your reasoning is incredible.
And you're still wondering why Chavez won't debate with you morons?
Chris, you write for Venezuelanalysis.
You haven't learnt anything in life but a wee bit of history, not less biased than what the red neck creationists learn, just from the other side.
Guardia Civil demanded to stop the referendum and evacuate people before the whole disaster happened. Chavez did not want to. Besides, he was slower to respond than even George W. Bush in New Orleans.
There were plenty of advance warnings that something was going wrong in the cliffs of Vargas. However, someone was asleep at the wheel, same situation as the announcement of the Caracas tremor.
AS another one who was there, that day in 1999, I can state as FACT that Defensa Civil made more than one recommendation to postpone the referendum.
Instead, Chavez sent the trucks to round up the vote, and promptly dropped them back home, where many died.
Had he thought more about what was coming, and wasn't blinded by power, his cal lshould have been to postpone the referendum.
And just so we're clear, I spent the next 10 days ferrying food, water and offering transport to those in need. THe largest response in those early days of the disaster came from ordinary individuals acting on their own. All Chavez could think about was how not to accept US aid (desalinization plants) while accepting the use of Blackhawk helicopters to evacuate people.
According to some accounts, mostly from PDVSA techs using ground radar systems it was estimated that anywhere from 50,000 up to 100,000 people lie buried along the Vargas coast.
That is another "gift" of the Chavez legacy, putting power before the people he was supposed to protect.
And as for creating panic, Tosh, the statement is so absurd as to almost not even deserve comment.
It's time for you to change your tune on that one, since your wacko government has now dropped that idiotic statement.
Keep up with the script, will ya?
Moron.
ow
I came to check to see if the blog was still alive, and to tell you truth it probably would be better off dead.
True, you make a commendable effort to question the coming shut down of Globovision air broadcast, but it is a weak text, hiding behind a critic of Venezuelaanalysis, a now rather discredited source of news, a site that should be read as a leftist blog. I mean, we need to infer that you oppose the closing of Globovision!
And the previous post was dedicated to Weisbrot, which is today an equally useless endeavor.
These posts do not free you from your burden of guilt at having supported for so long, even past the time PODEMOS bailed out, a proposition that had run its course. That was your clue then, but you missed it. Look at how Ismael has been recovering since then!
Now look at the result of your posts: Tosh screaming his same old tired repetitive harangue whose objective is to distract from what is really going on through insults and change of subjects. Just like Chavez by the way. You even get Justin to write things that show how out of phase he is, how ignorant of Venezuela today he has become, relying on V anal for his "facts". Stunning to read how stuck he and Tosh are in a circa 2003 mentality.
Venezuela has changed, dramatic things are happening, order is collapsing as MD at public hospitals fear for their lives. I mean, just this break down of the moral authority that is carried by an emergency room doctor is enough to tell you how fucked up the country is after 10 years of Chavez, how fast the social contract is breaking down as the socialism of XXI century is becoming fast a free for all. Heck, even the Diosdados in power are visibly more concerned at hiding their loot and "raspar la olla" than arranging any of the myriad of problems besotting us.
Far from me to make any suggestions but your time would be better spent condemning outright the present regime and focusing on what should be saved from it. Wasting your time with people like Tosh (Cris Carlson of V anal) is just playing into the hands of the chavista propaganda that has been using you for too long without any real rewards we know of. And certainly not moral or ideological rewards we might have been able to observe. However condemnation of your sift has been swift. Did you not notice?
Anyway, of course you do what you please. I leave you just thanking for the reads of just a couple of entries from Justin and . They are enough to comfort me: they and the people they represent have always been silly communist who now are fast transitioning to fascism. I love it!
PS: Tosh, if you decide to write on this entry, please include the latest updates on me being paid by Obama and as to approximately how long after Globo is shut down you will coming to Yaracuy with your pals to rough me up. At this point I cannot expect nothing less from you.
revbob22, the usual figure mentioned for the Vargas death toll is around 30,000. However, once a better count was made a couple of years later, the count was about 65,000. I got this info directly within the entrails of the beast. It never got published, why bother, life and the revolution must go on. These people were not of any use any more anyway.
Venezuela has changed, dramatic things are happening, order is collapsing as MD at public hospitals fear for their lives.
Funny, isn't it, how the opposition never cared about public hospitals until Chavez came to power, and, even now, they aren't concerned about the quality of care for the people who go there, no, it's the fact that MDs are afraid to go to work.
Yes, the classic Primero Justicia constituency, the public hospitals exist for the doctors, not the patients. It's important to get these sorts of things straight.
Estes,
You don't care for the poor, you only care about your Starbuck "socialism". Don't be a sissy, go to live "real socialism" in Venezuela.
Nowadays the poor are over three times more likely to get a bullet in their brains than in 1998 and it is not due to the CIA.
And next time your body stops functioning, just swallow a Cuban tablet. That will do.
You even get Justin to write things that show how out of phase he is, how ignorant of Venezuela today he has become, relying on V anal for his "facts". Stunning to read how stuck he and Tosh are in a circa 2003 mentality.
Is that all you got, Duquenal? That we're so 2003?
Well, let me tell you something, big fella. The Venezuelan opposition can't simply reinvent its identity in the course of six years. People like you and Leopoldo Lopez want to pretend that the opposition's failures are all just an image problem that can be changed with a simple public relations makeover. Well, I hate to break this to you, big fella, but reinventing your political identity is a lot more complicated than, say, giving a Venezuelan beauty queen some breast implants.
You see, the Venezuelan opposition's problems are much deeper than the image that you and Leopoldo Lopez would like to project of yourselves. Your problem lies with who you are and what interests you represent. No matter how much people like you would like to repackage yourselves as Obama-loving progressives, you're never gonna get away from the fact that you represent the interests of the privileged.
The bottom line is that the Venezuelan opposition is still the same opposition it was six years ago, with the same class base, and the same petty class interests that drive it. Your attempt at a public relations makeover is not going to change this essential fact.
Daniel, looking at Justin's reaction, you hit the bullseye. Congrats.
Thank you Charly!
Hey Duqenal,
I have a challenge for you: Can you make any comments that aren't useless ad hominem attacks?
And as for creating panic, Tosh, the statement is so absurd as to almost not even deserve comment.
Hey, great argument. It is absurd because you say so I guess?
It's time for you to change your tune on that one, since your wacko government has now dropped that idiotic statement.
Oh really? Here's what the Defensora del Pueblo said today:
"Cuando se lanza una información de que en Venezuela no hay Estado, estamos desprotegidos, se pudo haber generado una ola de pánico. żEra ese el propósito de esa información?. Es muy serio lo que hizo, no es ridículo"
Care to change your statement? Or simply admit that you are wrong, and making things up as you go?
Hey, great argument. It is absurd because you say so I guess?
The concensus seems to be that the goverment over reacted to Globo's reporting of the earthquake. I think you are the one who should show something to prove that they "tried to create panic".
So reporters create panic now by doing their job? By criticizing the response (or lack of) from the government?
How is this looking to create panic?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H...h?
v=HJ5wUQJTXtY
should I translate the stuff for you?
should I translate the stuff for you?
Tank | 05.19.09 - 12:25 am | #
Well Tank, that isn't the statement that the government has complained about, so that is pretty irrelevant now isn't it?
You could, however, just watch Ravell's statements yourself, and admit that what Ravell was saying was a blatant lie.
Even his own employee contradicts him by telling him that they DID in fact contact Funvisis, and that they are indeed monitoring the situation.
Ravell wanted to create the impression that the government wasn't even responding to the situation, which was a blatant lie.
Tosh
Show us how it is done.
Daniel,
I am discussing the topic at hand, not making childish ad hominem attacks on people because I don't like what they are saying.
When you are mature enough to actually debate the topic at hand, and not simply make personal attacks that have nothing to do with the topic, then please come back and discuss.
Estes,
You don't care for the poor, you only care about your Starbuck "socialism". Don't be a sissy, go to live "real socialism" in Venezuela.
Nowadays the poor are over three times more likely to get a bullet in their brains than in 1998 and it is not due to the CIA.
And next time your body stops functioning, just swallow a Cuban tablet. That will do.
Kepler | Homepage | 05.18.09 - 9:06 pm | #
Can someone translate this for me? I got lost somewhere after "Starbuck "socialism"".
It is worth noting that people on the left have complained about the murder rate in Venezuela for quite some time. My guess is that they were doing it long before the opposition discovered that they could use it against Chavez.
For the record, I have never advocated that anyone or any country follow the path of the Cuban Revolution, and it is quite telling that Kepler consistently, when confronted with non-Marxist-Leninist leftist perspectives, feels compelled to construe them as such.
My comment about Daniel, MDs and Venezuelan hospitals is, of course, on target. Professionals and middle class people who serve in government funded employment often fall into the trap of believing that the program is for them, and not the people that the program is supposed to assist. It happens in a lot of places.
When I was in Venezuela in 2005, I heard a Primero Justicia representative push the same argument, the public hospitals are unsafe. I'm sure they are. What was her solution? Expansion of volunteer programs among professional medical personnel. I'm not making this up. Yes, Primero Justicia basically wanted to shut the system down.
Of course, there is a perverse logic. Such an approach would naturally make the poor entirely dependent upon upper middle class medical professionals, and hence, reduce the probability that they would risk losing whatever level of care that they would receive by politically challenging them.
Not to mention that it would be looked upon very favorably by Primero Justicia's neoliberal allies in the National Endowment for Democracy. Reducing social expenditures and creating new investment opportunities for privatized services would be at the top of the NED agenda.
Do the oppo folk here posting about fascism actually know anything about how fascism functioned in Europe? Fascists are totalitarians. They don't let thugs run around selling cocaine and lawlessly blowing holes in people's heads. They control things.
Daniel, looking at Justin's reaction, you hit the bullseye. Congrats.
Charly | 05.18.09 - 9:30 pm | #
----------------------
Thank you Charly!
Daniel Duquenal | Homepage | 05.18.09 - 9:35 pm | #
Sorry to interrupt your love session, boys, but I have a question for you.
Can you tell me one substantive thing that is different about the Venezuelan opposition today relative to six years ago?
Justin,
Your question is worthless because you have your idea about what the opposition six years ago was and how it should theoretically "redeem" itself for you to - theoretically - consider it as an alternative to Chavismo.
First of all: the opposition, like opposition in every place around the world, is a word used to reflect on any group that opposes a given government.
In the US part of the opposition are Starbuck sociasts like yourself (who now have as fashion the non-Marxist-Leninist socialism or the Autonomous groups - in shapes and colours depending on your city or country) are part of the opposition as well as white supremacist groups and the Republicans and the Green Party and yet people are not asking you the stupid question "how do you OPPOSITION differ from six years ago"?
Justin, you don't get it: the incredible high levels of crime in Venezuela are due to an increased level of injustice, lack of real social programmes, not "quickly throwing some crumbles to the people at election time", lack of plans for sustainable development, lack of real jobs (not street vendors in a Wild West environment considered "legal workers") and extremely corrupt police plus a failed drug policy that is even worse than the one followed up by the government KKK blokes and you, Green party and socialists oppose in the US.
do you really believe that the only way to regulate media is by granting it to the highest bidders and using the power of the state to fine and incarcerate anyone who challenges it?
apparently so
Richard Estes | Homepage | 05.15.09 - 6:30 pm | #
Actually Richard, it's worse than that. The airwaves (at least in the US ) were given away for a song to the oligarchs not in return for money really but rather in consideration of their formidable clout. They have bid up the prices among themselves buying and selling frequencies but originally the airwaves were little other than gifted to the rich and cloutful.
Richard Estes, last time I talked to a Chavista he said all foreigners should be expelled from Venezuela if they don't believe in the "revolution" (whatever that revolution is). When I asked him what foreigners he was talking about he said it was all those people whose parents and grandparents came from Europe and had "stolen all our money". When I asked him how many they were, how you differentiate them from the "real Venezuelans" etc, he just stopped talking. I have had this kind of conversations with many Chavistas and I have read similar stuff over and over again.
So, am I to assume all Chavistas are like that?
But I do know how their great Führer thinks and what it means when they all say they stand by him.
Passing through,
Have you THOUGHT THROUGH any alternative?
Do you know what the situation in Venezuela is?
Estes,
We discovered the issue of crime when the boyfriend of one of my best friends was shot dead going to work and when another friend was shot and almost died at noon in the middle of Avenida Bolivar and when a cousin almost bled to death because of some other robbers and a nephew was left naked and barefooted in the road after being robbed. My cousin almost died in hospital because another guy came in at the same time and even though the other guy was much better off (also shot) his friends threatened the emergency doctors to give him "VIP treatment".
My cousin was saved because another cousin of mine, who is a surgeon, arrived afterward and fixed the situation.
Probably we were doing those discoveries at the same moment you were finding out where Venezuela was in your globe, after you realised its new leaders were wearing red berets and chanting slogans about helping the poor.
Actually, the murder rate in Venezuela shot through the roof very soon after Chavismo came to power. I was following the statistics on murder because I knew this was already an issue. You can see clearly how the slope in the chart gets a dramatic angle from 99 onwards.
"Socialismo, patria o muerte", you "non-Leninist-non-Marxist (Starbuck), anti-fascist anti-neo-Liberal autonomic|anarchist chaps.
Piss off your half-baked ideologies and half-through wet dreams projected unto other countries. There is more than blue versus red tin soldiers, carajitos.
Your question is worthless because you have your idea about what the opposition six years ago was and how it should theoretically "redeem" itself for you to - theoretically - consider it as an alternative to Chavismo.
Well, now you're contradicting Duquenal. Duquenal laments my "circa 2003 mentality," but the bottom line is that he --and you-- can't tell us one measly difference between the leading sectors of the opposition "circa 2003" and the leading sectors of the opposition today.
In other words, you can't answer the question. You can't tell me one substantive thing that is different about the Venezuelan opposition today relative to six years ago.
First of all: the opposition, like opposition in every place around the world, is a word used to reflect on any group that opposes a given government.
I'm talking about the leading sectors of the opposition. Is there a dime's worth of difference between Accion Democratica "circa 2003" and Nuevo Tiempo today? Is there a dime's worth of difference between Primero Justicia of 2003 and the Primero Justicia of today?
Those are the questions that you have to answer because it's YOUR side that still lacks the confidence of the majority of the Venezuelan people.
Is there a difference between the Chavez who invited Pérez Jiménez back to Venezuela and now? The one who said he would seek dialogue with the opposition the day before the last referendum and the day after said there won't be any dialogue?
Between the one who claimed not to be a socialist and the one who said he is a socialist/Marxist/Leninist/whatever-they shoved in front of his eyes?
Majority? You are talking about the 54% the CNE declared? Is that a permanent majority? Was it not 63% in 2006?
And please, why did Maduro say over half the Venezuelans registered abroad SIGNED (NOT SAID, BUT SIGNED) a petition i n support of Chavez when I know nobody but a handful did that and I know over 90% of Venezuelans abroad actually rejected the referendum? And why the CNE has rejected publishing those results that would contradict very clearly what Maduro said?
What majorities are we talking about? What is your proof? Said CNE? Or the Cartner Center of 2004?
Justin
Considering that my entry did not mention opposition parties I do not see why you wish to discuss this topic with me in particular.
Tosh
Forgive us! Reading your entries one would be fooled in observing that you are not following your announced dictum! But if you say so,we''ll take your word for it.
Anyone notice how neither Tosh nor Justin respond to the Vargas tragedy and its aftermath?
Nor is there a peep about Mr. Peligro's behavior befoer and after?
Are they aware that in the very words of the director in the CIPC, in his estimation over 35% of violent crimes committed in Venezuela are by the police?
So from what script are you reading this week?
Well Tank, that isn't the statement that the government has complained about, so that is pretty irrelevant now isn't it?
You could, however, just watch Ravell's statements yourself, and admit that what Ravell was saying was a blatant lie.
Even his own employee contradicts him by telling him that they DID in fact contact Funvisis, and that they are indeed monitoring the situation.
Ravell wanted to create the impression that the government wasn't even responding to the situation, which was a blatant lie.
So how about you provide a proof of what the government is complaining about?
Because I'm finding it hard to understand how Globovision was looking to create panic by repeating over and over "There are no major damages, no casualties, everyone should stay calm and remain at home"
True they bashed the government's agency for not picking up the phone. But to be fair, they deserved it. Also, calling the government out (even if its a lie) is hardly a reason for the response this has received.
They even mentioned they had spoken to the director of FUNVISIS who was on his way to his office.
Ravell said they could not expect an answer from FUNVISIS since many other government actors were probably trying to get info as well and that communication could be difficult. Which only shows that the government WAS moving to obtain information.
What probably set Mr. Peligro off was that the information Globo had was credited to the US GEOSURVEY and not FUNVISIS. Talk about inferiority complex!
I would not be surprised to see some official actually blame the US for the quake itself!
Probably those DIRECTV boxes had something to do with it.
Anyone notice how neither Tosh nor Justin respond to the Vargas tragedy and its aftermath?
When you start blaming a president for a mudslide that happened in the first year of his presidency, the topic becomes so utterly retarded that one cannot possibly respond. Besides, you guys do just fine discrediting yourselves with these ridiculous claims.
So how about you provide a proof of what the government is complaining about?
Ravell's comment is easy to find on the internet.
True they bashed the government's agency for not picking up the phone. But to be fair, they deserved it.
No, actually Ravell said that the call got dropped, not that they didn't answer the phone. And why would they deserve to be attacked for that? Ravell tried to say that they weren't even monitoring the situation, when that was clearly a lie.
So let me get this straight Tank. Just because Ravell's call got dropped, that means that FUNVISIS deserves to be totally discredited and lied about, saying that they are totally incompetent. Hmmmmm. Once again, Tank is the king of logic.
Also, calling the government out (even if its a lie) is hardly a reason for the response this has received.
Tank | 05.19.09 - 11:30 am | #
I agree. If this were Globovision's only offense, the government would not be justified in responding this way. However, Globovision has been doing this kind of shit for years.
Remember when they tried to say that the Chief of Police had "planted" the molotov cocktails Tank? Remember when they tried to say that the Chavista students were responsible for all the violence at the UCV last year? They never even mentioned that it was the opposition students who were trying to light the Facultad on fire. Remember when they tried to say that the Police had attacked peaceful marchers during the RCTV scandal? Turned out the "peaceful" marchers had broken the barricade and were throwing rocks at the police. And on and on and on.
There are so many instances where they have been caught lying that its not even funny. What IS funny is that you guys keep believing them despite it all.
Forgive us! Reading your entries one would be fooled in observing that you are not following your announced dictum!
Oh really? I am not discussing the topic at hand? Is that the claim you want to make now? Hahahaha! Can someone please hold Daniel's hand and help him find his way back to his own sorry-excuse-for-a-blog? He appears to be lost over here.
There are so many instances where they have been caught lying that its not even funny. What IS funny is that you guys keep believing them despite it all.
Theres also so many instances where they have been the only ones with the balls to REPORT THE NEWS that one could imagine why we don't want globo shut down.
When was the last time someone talked crime or health on VTV? When was the last time there was someone from a non PSUV party discussing on the government channels? When was the lats time someone critiziced the government in VTV, Telesur, ANTV, etC?
Yes. Globo sucks, however they are the best source of news because they don't bow down to Chavez.
This is well-said:
"Yes. Globo sucks, however they are the best source of news because they don't bow down to Chavez."
They aren't the best source of news because they provide good information. Or compelling analysis. Or are prompt with their stories. Or whatever. They're good because "they don't bow down to Chavez."
Nice. Kind of a microcosm of how the opposition thinks of itself, right? Not democratic. Bereft of a social vision. Unorganized. Corrupt. But against Chavez.
Theres also so many instances where they have been the only ones with the balls to REPORT THE NEWS that one could imagine why we don't want globo shut down.
Studies have shown that Globovision is the most biased channel of them all, even more than VTV.
Other private channels report the news too, but they aren't trying to destabilize the government, and using every chance they get to try to generate fear and panic among their viewers. There is an important distinction there.
When was the last time someone talked crime or health on VTV?
I wasn't aware that VTV was the only other channel.
When was the last time there was someone from a non PSUV party discussing on the government channels?
Yes, they are fairly excluded from government channels, but they certainly have a voice on other channels. RCTV, Televen, Venevision all interview opposition voices all the time.
Are you honestly going to make the claim that the Venezuelan opposition is not heard anywhere other than on Globovision?
With crime such a problem I'd guess that what is needed is a strong hand both in the form of the state and armed population. Also panic mongers, subverters of order would be silenced.
Since much of the crime is drug related I'd at least investigate forms of drug legalization or decriminalization. While the world's main source of drug money, guns, chemicals and drug culture urges other nations to sacrifice their people, their police, their soldiers, judges, prosecutors to it's "war on drugs" virtually no law enforcement in the US loses life or limb in this supposed "war." Could it be someone is being played for a sucker?
Excuse me Tosh, but I did not blame Chavez for the mudslides. I blamed him for his response before (ignoring warnings from credible sources and busing people right back into the eventual path of the mudslides).
During(slow response, private citizens practically the only ones ggetting much needed food and water to stranded folks)
After (rejecting no strings attached help, prolonging the suffering).
You can warp your own mind if you want, don't warp my words.
Max, CHavez is more bereft of a social vision than even Bush. Chavez's thugs have stolen more than the worst adecos, Chavez has a series of nice haciendas in Barinas, Chavez has given free social houses (actually very nice ones) to his daughters for free (I put here twice the government URL to the site where you can check out they got the houses for free for good)
You are so thick, someone just needs to wear red clothes and use the word "poor" for you to get your pseudo-socialist orgasm.
Excuse me Tosh, but I did not blame Chavez for the mudslides. I blamed him for his response before (ignoring warnings from credible sources and busing people right back into the eventual path of the mudslides).
During(slow response, private citizens practically the only ones ggetting much needed food and water to stranded folks)
After (rejecting no strings attached help, prolonging the suffering).
Did you hear all that on Globovision?
Do the oppo folk here posting about fascism actually know anything about how fascism functioned in Europe? Fascists are totalitarians. They don't let thugs run around selling cocaine and lawlessly blowing holes in people's heads. They control things.
max | Homepage | 05.19.09 - 2:07 am | #
Of course they don't. But, actually, its more an internal projection of the impugnity that the elite believes that it should be exercise in relation to everyone else onto Chavez.
That, and a belief that someone who doesn't identify with a European background is, by definition, fascist, which is, of course, quite humorous, because, as you know, fascism was brought to life in Europe.
Max, CHavez is more bereft of a social vision than even Bush. Chavez's thugs have stolen more than the worst adecos, Chavez has a series of nice haciendas in Barinas, Chavez has given free social houses (actually very nice ones) to his daughters for free (I put here twice the government URL to the site where you can check out they got the houses for free for good)
You are so thick, someone just needs to wear red clothes and use the word "poor" for you to get your pseudo-socialist orgasm.
Kepler | Homepage | 05.19.09 - 1:27 pm | #
You obviously haven't been following events in the US for quite some time. Bush, and his successor, Obama, have authorized a looting of resources that is literally unprecedented in human history, estimated by one Guardian business writer as approximately 11.6 trillion dollars funneled into the financial sector with nothing in return.
Yes, that's 11.6 trillion, not to mention that it is being put into the financial sector so as to facilitate the oligopolization of the US economy.
This is the terminal weakness of the opposition line on Chavez. They perpetually criticize the Chavistas as corrupt, while remaining dependent upon the most corrupt cabal experienced to date, the transnational elite, centered in the US, which they must steadfastly refuse to criticize. Obviously, it's a hard case to make.
Their "wet dream", to quote Kepler, is to obtain power on a similar scale in Venezuela, so that they can be accepted into the fraternity as junior brothers and sisters.
Max,
Unless they are themselves part of those profiting from the drug sales.
Estes,
You are a US American, so even if fascism was born in America, one can see it can grow strong elsewhere as well.
Tosh,
Do not play dumb. revbob22 already told you HE WAS THERE. Be a man and accept that you are wrong about the events of Vargas.
Richard, you don't care for Venezuela, as others have said here, you get a wet dream out of a guy whose pretends to piss off the enemies you have at home (funny, still you don't have the cojodes to abandon your capitalist privileges and help build the "revolution" in suchc places as Cuba or Venezuela)
That is a Starbuck socialist.
Do not play dumb. revbob22 already told you HE WAS THERE. Be a man and accept that you are wrong about the events of Vargas.
AnonIII | 05.19.09 - 2:11 pm | #
Hahahahahaha!!! Is that really you Anon? Or is this some kind of impostor trying to make you look dumb?
I do not know which Anon you are referring to. I hardly comment on this blog but I had to say something about your childish refusal to admit you were wrong about those events.
I do not know which Anon you are referring to. I hardly comment on this blog but I had to say something about your childish refusal to admit you were wrong about those events.
Wow, it really was you, and you're not even ashamed to admit it!
Anyone who thinks saying "I was there" is good enough back up for all these claims about a massive national emergency is clearly an idiot.
A lot of people were there. And a lot of those people wouldn't agree with what moron said. I can't believe I even have to explain this.
Tosh,
I do not know how old you are but, really, personal attacks make you look very infantile.
Grow up!
I am wondering why people still keep debating Tosh (Gringoinvenezuela?). He just should be admonished like the brat he is. Lots of hot air coming out of that half brain. As long as Venezuelanalysis has contributors of his caliber, we are safe.
OW,
If I may suggest a topic for your next post: 6 Hour Workdays & Prestaciones Sociales.
I am wondering why people still keep debating Tosh
Charly, I'm not sure which comments you are talking about but, except for a few, the oppo morons here DON'T debate me. The only thing they can do is engage in ad hominem attacks because they are completely incapable of even addressing my arguments.
If only you and others would actually contribute something to the debate here other than useless ad hominems (of which you just provided another perfect example), this would be a much more interesting discussion.
As long as Venezuelanalysis has contributors of his caliber, we are safe.
Haha, this comment made me laugh. What exactly would you be safe from Charly? You guys have lost almost every single major election in the last ten years. How much worse could it possibly get?
Oh man, the kid is twitchy.
Poor Charly, that's the best he can come up with. You gotta feel sorry for him.
Tosh, it can get worse. Look at Zimbabwe or Cuba.
Hey, guys, the thugs:
http://www.notitarde.com/pais/pais1.html
tosh
you need to expand your vocabulary. if you keep using ad hominem as much you are going to make it a verb, as in "stop adhominenizing me!"
More evasions from Kepler and Duquenal, I see. Instead of honestly trying to answer the question of whether there's a dime's worth of difference between the Venezuelan opposition today and that of six years ago, Kepler's idea of a response is to ask whether Chavez has changed.
Well, the relevant political fact is that Chavez has had a strong popular mandate to do what he does, so it hasn't been politically incumbent upon him to change. To be sure, Chavez did move further left between 2003 and 2009, but the question of whether or not Chavez has changed is not the most pertinent one because most Venezuelans continue to support Chavez. Even Datanalisis just came out with a poll showing 60% support for Chavez.
Meanwhile, the leading sectors of the opposition have been rejected by the majority of the Venezuelan people.
So, as of this point in Venezuelan history, the relevant political question is not whether Chavez has changed but rather whether the opposition has changed.
I'll be waiting on your answers.
Yeah, Chavismo will reign for a thousand years. Where did I hear that? Berlin 1944?
No, Caracas 2009.
Tssk, tsssk, Justin....
But first we must agree on terms. For example, do an election a regime justify? If I remember well Saddam got a 100% a few days before the invasion which found a lot of people willing to help the invaders. Or your favorite regime in Cuba: are the results there something like a 99%?
But let's not go to such extremes and assume that indeed Chavez elections are legit.
My favorite one is the April 1999 referendum that he won with 90% on the first question. I was in the 10% that voted NO becasue, you see, I have known long ago that constitutions are only as good as the people who apply them. Needless to say that everyday since then I have felt validated of my NO vote which was the correct vote.
In case you still do not get my drift, people have the right to make an ass of themselves at the polling stations and as such even a 90% victory as that April vote do not make the victory right.
So, deal with such basic electoral concepts before you want to discuss opposition politicians. With me or anyone else for that matter.
Hey Tosh, try to spin this one:
http://www.eluniversal.com/2009/
...9A2336293.shtml
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!
let's not go to such extremes and assume that indeed Chavez elections are legit.
Extremes?
Francisco Toro clearly suggests that "Chavez elections" are legit. Are you now implying that your fellow oppositionist is a Chavista extremist?
Justin, Justin....
You will really go to any length to find a topic where you think you can have the upper hand.... Heck, even dragging in here poor Quico as your knight in shinning armor. It is a sad day when PSF need to justify their arguments through some of the rare erratic columns of Quico (columns by the way that they do not understand as his style allows for the bizarre projections of their own phantasms, but I digress).
My point was not election, it is the application of the constitution, it is that an election is not enough to certify a democracy, that people are allowed to vote for the tyrant who will screw them. At this point in Venezuela, nobody cares about legit elections anymore since Chavez will not respect their results, TWICE already.
Justin, you really need to update your argumentation topics to Venezuela today. Heck, you do not seem even to receive the party line correctly!.
Justin, apart from what Daniel said:
we don't follow lines, we all have our own ideas.
I asked very concretely:
Is the paper trail good?
Why did the paper trail of Chavez Senior, Aristóbulo Isturiz and a Chavista governor all became corrupted?
How do you explain Maduro said over 50% of Venezuelans registered abroad SIGNED a petition supporting the referendum and Chavismo (i.e. CNE) has not published the votes abroad but we know the votes show about 90% against Chavez? (abroad things were done manually)
Daniel, what else can you expect from these folks?
Typical of them to change the argument when they realize they have nowhere else to go.
"Justin, you really need to update your argumentation topics to Venezuela today. Heck, you do not seem even to receive the party line correctly!.
Daniel Duquenal | Homepage | 05.20.09 - 9:05 am | #"
Hence why I keep asking them to study the script before they open their mouths.
sorry, "all came as invalid"
Francisco Toro clearly suggests that "Chavez elections" are legit. Are you now implying that your fellow oppositionist is a Chavista extremist?
Francisco Toro's point is that the system is solid. But he also wonders why the governments not released the complete results of the last 2 elections.
Numbers don't add for the last "election", we are missing over 5% of the vote.
The last time the "opposition won", there was an irreversible trend with a margin of 1% with over 10% of votes to be counted, 10% in major Chavista areas.
So:
No final results = No Clean election, regardless of who wins. All votes must be counted, results must be released. That hasn't happened during the last 3 elections... which means, its all a charade... and Francisco Toro acknowledges that.
Looks like that satellite is a bust, or at least it was last weekend.
http://www.americanthinker.com/
2...venezuelan.html
But then we're just oppo morons ad homenizing!
More on the satellite with PICTURES! ...for Tosh/Chris:
http://www.noticierodigital.com/...ic.php?
t=469330
It's the VICTORY OF THE IF!!!
Justin
Daniel might have a point: elections and opposition politicians are not the major worry of Venezuelans today. Here, put some spin on that:
http://www.talcualdigital.com/Av...=20745&
secid=3#
The Chavez government is authorizing the cocaine dealing that is sapping its popularity and led directly to opposition wins in some metropolitan centers in the 2008 regional elections? Interesting theory.
As for being bereft of a social vision: not liking/ someone's social vision is very different from them not having one. The Venezuelan opposition doesn't have one, which is why it can't win elections.
Max,
Please, show me an URL with a plan for sustainable development of the government that has been in power for a decade with the biggest oil boom of our petrostate.
Then read my ideas on my blog and some of the proposals for development.
Also: explain to me why the Chavista education minister is refusing to let Venezuela join the PISA programme for education evaluation?
It is a sad day when PSF need to justify their arguments through some of the rare erratic columns of Quico
So I'll take that as a yes, you're saying that your fellow oppositionist Francisco Toro dabbles in "extremes" when he suggests that Venezuelan elections are legit.
Needless to say, you have a rather strange definition of extremism.
Justin,
I answered ot your comments in regards to Quico's post. So don't take it as a "yes" and read what people write before you reply with more nonsense.
I bet you and Tosh would also justify the cut in the budget for universities. How is it possible that in a country that needs more R&D, more education and frankly has a sub-par educational structure the government cuts corners in educations while it bows to acquire more military planes... IN THE SAME WEEK?
Daniel might have a point: elections and opposition politicians are not the major worry of Venezuelans today.
Notice that all of you skirt the basic question of why the leading sectors of the opposition --Nuevo Tiempo, Primero Justicia, etc.-- have been in the political wilderness for more than 10 years now.
At some point, you're going to have to come to terms with your own side's political failures. You're going to have to come to terms with the fact that a coherent political movement can't define itself merely by what it is against. You're going to have to come to terms with the fact that all politics is relative and that, as long as you insist on defining yourselves merely by what you're against, most of your fellow Venezuelans won't have much reason to believe that you offer anything constructive for your society.
So don't take it as a "yes" and read what people write before you reply with more nonsense.
Oh, I read your contortions about Quico's post. What it all boils down to --as you well know-- is that even Francisco Toro begrudgingly acknowledges that Venezuelan elections are legit.
The bottom line is that your side can't credibly point to a single case in which an electoral victory for Chavez was not legitimate. You can't point to a single case in which any certified observation mission --whether it be from the EU, the Carter Center or the OAS-- found a Chavista victory to be tainted. That's the bottom line.
So I would suggest that you stop trying to blame your own side's political failures on others and start thinking about what your own side has done to embed itself in the political wilderness for so many years now.
Justin: that's not possible
The opposition defines itself quite consciously in terms that distance it from the general population. Look at how they talk about people who vote for Chavez, they use the most offensive language, frequently with obvious racial overtones, associating indigenous and black with ignorance. And, of course, they do the same with poor people generally.
Just as they do with Chavez himself. That's because their identity is dependent upon their manufactured feeling of superior by being whiter, wealthier and more cultured than everyone else. Hard to win elections with that, villifying the much of the populace, although it does give you an advantage with it comes to qualifying for NED and AFL-CIO grants.
Justin, carajo, you don't understand it?
Do we want to go point by point?
OK, European Union "excellent work":
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/
tol...icle3319910.ece
You will simply dismiss it as...as what?
Please, go ahead.
Also: answer what I asked about the elections
abroad. Do you admit Minister Maduro LIED ABOUT MOST OF REGISTERED VOTERS ABROAD
SIGNING SIGNING SIGNING
SIGNING (got it? signing!!)
in support of Chavez's referendum?
90% of Venezuelans abroad voted against the referendum but the CNE has not published our
votes.
About the Carter Center: the guys had no fucking clue about IT, they are people like you, with no fucking knowledge of anything but their political studies.
A binary is a binary. It is a black box. You can test it as many times as you want.
The actas? We did not have the actas but a fraction, the CNE did not counted those they claimed they were going to count and besides
the paper trail is not printing what people vote for. There is PROOF FOR THAT!
Te vas a hacer el loco y no vas a responder a eso?
Geez...there is no honesty in you. You are no better scum than people like the Rumsfeld-Bush supporters.
Ester,
You have really no principles. The racist here is you and all your bourgeois pendejos sin fronteras.
The vast majority of Venezuelans are mixed and that goes for all groups.
There is racism, but I have seen as much racism if not more among the Chavistas.
How many times have I read them talking about "esos extranjeros de mierda" who came to Venezuela generations ago and do not belong in Venezuela? And actually my Chavista relatives are the most racist people I know
(by the way, I am the descendant of black slaves and Europeans)
As for the wealthiest: the wealthiest are right now the Ancien Regime together with the boliburgueses. Chavez clan, the Diosdado Clan, the whole profiteers of the so-called revolution talk all the BS they want about the poor but in reality they steal from them.
The Chavez clan is the largest land owner in Barinas. The Ramirez and Rodriguez follow.
Estes,
Why is Chavez and his ministers opposed to the PISA programme?
WHY? Why does the government want to improve the quality of education for state schools?
Please, explain me what happened with this:
http://www.cne.gov.ve/divulgacio...p?
cod_estado=99
Justin: as I said, the opposition has no program, but to pose the question presumes that it is a political enterprise centered around substantive ideological values that result in coherent policy development
but, as you can see here, it is not
The bottom line is that your side can't credibly point to a single case in which an electoral victory for Chavez was not legitimate. You can't point to a single case in which any certified observation mission --whether it be from the EU, the Carter Center or the OAS-- found a Chavista victory to be tainted. That's the bottom line.
I cant credibly confirm that they were legit either.
We don't have the full results, which btw the constitution states we should have.
Millions of votes have not been counted during the last 2 elections, the final results were never released. And I'm talking about one election in which the opposition won. How can we trust results that are not complete?
Gravatar Justin: as I said, the opposition has no program, but to pose the question presumes that it is a political enterprise centered around substantive ideological values that result in coherent policy development
The opposition has not one program but many because they are not ONE political party. MAS has a proposal, PJ has their own vies, heck the students have their own proposal. So before you speak, you should look them up, listen to interviews, etc..
The government has no proposal. Well they had one a few years ago, and they did the opposite of it.
Ester no te va a prestar atención. Le he pedido varias veces a ese PSF que me muestre dónde está el programa del chavismo. Nada.
Justing, just a few points to clarify things:
- you can interpret my words whichever way you want and I will not correct you. i have long ago learned that it does not matter what i write, PSF like you will only look for the possible tidbit that they will quote out of context and interpret it in the very worst possible way. circa 2003 i might have cared, today i think that i have already spent too much time in this oil wars outing, for a post by the way directed at the host who has remained silent, by the way.
- the best way to discourage debating is to impose your conditions and your subject to the debate/discussion/argument. if nobody wants to debate you on the opposition it is becasue 1) your ideas on that are clearly outdated, 2) you want it on your terms and yours only. you and tosh are one of the same on this, by the way. oh, and i have written enough on the opposition in my blog, more than any other blogger possibly. i hate redundancy. my input in this thread would not be anymore valuable than in my blog, so why do you care so much?
- you are running late in finishing your dissertation on a topic that in a few months, even weeks, might have become totally irrelevant. using us to try to prove you right in front of your committee is probably not going to work out well.
- and of course you could start acting as you preach. for example you did skirt the points raised by berenice or tank, or even myself.
Justin: as I said, the opposition has no program, but to pose the question presumes that it is a political enterprise centered around substantive ideological values that result in coherent policy development
but, as you can see here, it is not
Indeed, there is nothing in the way of a political proposal here. These folks would prefer to wax hysterical about Chavez with a non-Venezuelan audience than to offer one measly point about what proposals they have for Venezuela and its people. It's a sad spectacle.
So how about that $400 million dollar satellite?
Justin, are you pretending you don't understand? I wonder...
1) Daniel meant the opposition has different programs. Look: I suppose you, Justin Starbuck socialist, have a programme for the US. Your programme is different from the one of White Supremacists and the Green party. Am I wrong?
2) What is your plan for the US?
3) As for me, you can see part of mine in my blog, in ideas
Now Justin is going to say something else that does not honestly touch any of the points I just wrote. There is no point in writing to those guys.
Look: I suppose you, Justin Starbuck socialist, have a programme for the US. Your programme is different from the one of White Supremacists and the Green party.
That's a false analogy. There's no comparison between my position towards Obama and yours toward Chavez. I'm not in formal opposition to the Obama Administration. Most people of my political persuasion voted tactically for Obama and will probably have little choice but to do the same in 2012. My position towards Obama is identical to that of the leftist intellectual and union activist Bill Fletcher. Our position is that it is our job --the job of progressive social movements-- to try to push Obama in a progressive direction. When Obama comes under ridiculous attacks from Rush Limbaugh and the like, almost all U.S. leftists will defend him against such attacks. You see, that's what principled people do. We don't align ourselves with any old Obama-basher simply because we don't agree with many of Obama's policies. It is well understood among 95% of American leftists that the people who most vociferously attack Obama are considerably worse than Obama, so we would never align ourselves with such people.
The Venezuelan opposition, on the other hand, has no such principles. You guys will align with any old rich, racist scumbag and his mother because you have no real principles other than your hatred for Chavez. You've all reached such a level of hysteria that you wouldn't bat an eye about marching alongside extremely retrograde elements who happen to share your hatred of Chavez. You've yet to learn the lesson about how you were so easily used and manipulated by real-life, ultra-rightist golpistas such as Pedro Carmona and Isaac Perez Recao.
And for all the reasons listed above, you remain in the political wilderness.
As I was saying, circa 2003....
As I was saying, circa 2003....
Once again, Duquenal, you refuse to even discuss whether your side has changed since 2003. Your refusal to even discuss the question suggests to me that you know that the Venezuelan opposition has not really evolved since the days of the coup.
Kepler
As far as the airwaves go, radio and television frequencies should not be private property. Technically they are not, they belong in almost every nation to the state. They can be shared out among labor, community, po;itical party, student,civic and religious groups and also state broadcasting. Their use can be rotated to allow fair access.
Justin, you are no intellectual.
I asked to reply to the questions 1 and 2.
Now, tell me (please, refer to the number of questions)
q3) how I aligned with Carmona
q4) how I am a racist
q5) please, tell me the percentage of poor people in Venezuela
Geez...I really wonder if they are so thick or pretend to be thick.
Justin, you can only see the US system and think on those terms. There are only two parties with a chance there. It should not be that. There is more than two possibilities but you never had the balls to go effectively for other chances. In many other countries there are more than 2 parties that shape the scene.
Let's do it simpler for you.
You, like me, disliked and rejected Bush.
In the period of Bush there were marches against him. There were many people who marched against him in the US.
I can pick up any group of those and say: "hey, Justice is a supporter without principles of one of those groups".
And you call yourself an intellectual.
You are not and besides, you are the racists who has no knowledge about Venezuela and who is trying to teach us something.
As for retrogrades: you are the one who would march next to Chavez. That guy is the new Gomez of Venezuela. He is
- still a clear admirer of Perez Jimenez,
-he has a clear hatred towards the "Europeans", which is not better than the hatred of "Europeans" against blacks, Indians, etc
(the funny thing is he has probably more European blood than I do)
-he, as refusing to call off the 1999 referendum in spite of repeated warnings about Vargas THROUGH DAYS, is responsible for more deaths than Bush for N.O.
- he is responsible for the murder of hundreds of people in 1992 (he also was connected with the second coup) in a bloody coup that had no reason as 1) CAP was going out anyway two years later and 2) Chavez did not prosecute the many high level military involved anyway and 3) Chavez could have done something after CAP was gone if he had proofs
- he is responsible for a failed economy
- he has given social villas for free to his daughters
- his family is the main landowner of Barinas
etc, etc.
I did not have to do anything with Carmona. The 1 million people who marched on April 2002 did not have a clue.
Please, read the Silence and the Scorpion.
By the way: you are in for the killing of 1000 Palestinian women and children in Gaza.
You voted for Obama and he could have stopped it.
You are in for the killing of several hundred Afghani lately.
What a Starbuck socialist you are!
Oh, Justin! But almost everyone has evolved since 2003, the opposition, me, and even Chavez in a way.
The ones that have not evolved are people like you, still stuck on the 24 hours Carmonazo when what Chavez has done since is much worse than what Carmona threatened to do.
This is why it is pointless to discuss with you: you are stuck on a single item to justify any other atrocity, to disqualify any one that crosses your path.
But if you want to prove me wrong, why don't you start by discussing in earnest with Kepler. Or am I the only interesting target? For that you should talk to Tosh: he is preparing a gang to come to San Felipe and beat me up. You might enjoy the trip, the rains have started, it is all green again
As far as the airwaves go, radio and television frequencies should not be private property. Technically they are not, they belong in almost every nation to the state. They can be shared out among labor, community, po;itical party, student,civic and religious groups and also state broadcasting. Their use can be rotated to allow fair access.
They should not.
They also shouldn't be used to strengthen the power of the governing power, advertise one political agenda and ignore the problems of society such as crime, education, etc.
Today any government related media outlet is nothing more than an outlet for government related propaganda that serves no purpose to society. If the opposition had access to VTV, Telesur, ANTV, Avila TV, Radio Mundial, etc... Globovision would not have the power it has... it would not even be a factor in day to day politics.
This is why it is pointless to discuss with you: you are stuck on a single item to justify any other atrocity, to disqualify any one that crosses your path.
You mean by calling everyone here who supports Chavez a "PSF"???
Yes, I think I understand Daniel. It certainly is pointless to discuss anything with someone who is more interested in attacking the PERSON, and not even addressing their argument.
Tosh, it does not help even if we put numbers on the very concrete questions we ask you, you will beat around the bush.
Adiós.
The 1 million people who marched on April 2002 did not have a clue.
And that's precisely the problem. Much of the Venezuelan opposition doesn't even understand the logical consequences of its actions, much less the deeply retrograde forces that lead it around by the nose.
And once again, I've yet to see one constructive proposal from you folks as to what kind of political project you advocate for Venezuela and its people.
And once again, I've yet to see one constructive proposal from you folks as to what kind of political project you advocate for Venezuela and its people.
And we have yet to see one from you.
All you and Tosh do is find ways to justify the actions of the government regardless of whether they make sense or not.
There are a lot of proposals on Quico's blog as well as in Kepler's blog. If you haven't read the its because you don't want to.
Justin, I put them in my blog under "Ideas". I told you to go there.
It is mostly not about ideologies, it is about basic ethics. You fundamentalists don't get it. I am for pluralism, for the permanent competition between different political ideas in a democratic environment as we see in Europe.
The system is far from perfect in Germany or the Benelux or Scandinavia but it would be a huge evolution.
Something I don't discuss in those ideas is I would rather have a parliamentarian system where everyone can discuss openly and not have the constant monologues Chavez is forcing Venezuelans to listen.
Well, I think those who went and marched were still more responsible than the ones who still this year supported Perez Jimenez supporter and chief Barinas thief Hugo Chavez.
Adiós. I asked the questions, I see I lose my time with you.
q3) how I aligned with Carmona
You support a political movement, and many of its leaders, who were cheering as Carmona installed himself as a dictator, and began a witch hunt against Chavista officials. They also ordered the Metropolitan Police to fire on Chavistas in the streets, killing 50 - 60 people on April 13th.
The people who you continue to support today Kepler, including Globovision, RCTV, Ledezma, Leopoldo Lopez, etc. etc., were ALL cheering as all of this happened. So, yes, you are aligned with Carmona.
-he, as refusing to call off the 1999 referendum in spite of repeated warnings about Vargas THROUGH DAYS, is responsible for more deaths than Bush for N.O.
How would calling off a national vote have saved people from a mudslide that destroyed their homes?
- he is responsible for the murder of hundreds of people in 1992
False. There are 13 reported deaths from the 1992 coup.
- he is responsible for a failed economy
Oh really??? Last time I checked he governed during the largest economic expansion in Venezuelan history.
Even now, as countries like Mexico watch their GDP fall 8.2%, Venezuela could very well show growth this year.
- he has given social villas for free to his daughters
If there were any truth to this the media would be all over it.
But even if it were true, I don't see how it is relevant to the overall picture of the Chavista political program. Rosales, meanwhile, supposedly has something like 8 homes.
- his family is the main landowner of Barinas
Total nonsense. I have asked you guys a million times to give evidence of this. You have never given me anything more than repeated allegations from different sources, zero hard evidence.
Please, read the Silence and the Scorpion.
Hahahahaha!!! That book is the biggest joke in the world. It doesn't even mention the Neustadl testimony, or the role of the media. It doesn't mention how the coup plotters openly admitted to their "plan" on national television. It makes the totally unsubstantiated claim that Chavistas were responsible for the shootings, with ZERO evidence to back that up. It doesn't even mention the recordings of the Metropolitan Police as they said they were "neutralizando los talibanes" from atop La Nacional.
Kepler, admit it, you love that book because it tells you what you LIKE to hear. Not because it describes the reality.
By the way: you are in for the killing of 1000 Palestinian women and children in Gaza.
You voted for Obama and he could have stopped it.
You are in for the killing of several hundred Afghani lately.
What a Starbuck socialist you are!
Actually, many of those who voted for Obama did so because they thought he would be NOT AS BAD as Bush, not because they support his politics.
But I know, that is too complex for Kepler to understand.
There are a lot of proposals on Quico's blog as well as in Kepler's blog. If you haven't read the its because you don't want to.
Tank | 05.21.09 - 1:02 pm | #
Like what? You can't even name one?
"ninguna constituyente ha dado como resultado un sistema autoritario".
Roberto Viciano jurista espańol
" No volveran más nunca " !!!!!!
Tosh, just use the link. Learn to use the Internet.
Even people like you can learn.
End of conversation. Nobody answer my questions. I put my ideas in Ideas (just go to the right part and click there), apart from that I do have ideas about a specific parliamentarian system similar to the German one, but that or any other are not enough if the other issues are not tackled.
ADIÓS.
I wasted hours here.
In fact, Tank, why don't we do a little exercise here. Why don't you just tell me where you stand on the following issues where we have made our positions clear:
Free trade
Land Reform
Privatization
Export-oriented development vs. Regional integration
Foreign Investment
The short-comings of Liberal Democracy
Free-market capitalism and its contradictions
What proposals do you offer regarding the above issues? In all these years I haven't heard any proposals from the opposition regarding these (and many other) important topics.
End of conversation. Nobody answer my questions.
I just answered your questions above.
Even people like you can learn.
But apparently people like you can't even read?
Karl, los burguesitos estos parecen recién salidos de un curso del Opus dei. Es tan previsible:
Chris Junior explains things as if they were axioms:
"explain why your system does not work and why ours does, if you don't, you lose the debate, hahahahah"
And the other Starbuck socialist:
"hahaha, you really beat the hell out of those white racist rich neoliberals, hahahahaha"
Funny Kepler. You want answers to your questions, but once you get them this is all you can come up with? I can see how really interested you are in debating. Hahaha!
And we have yet to see one from you.
Indeed, you're not gonna see prescriptions from me as to how your country should be governed because I don't feel it's my place to micro-manage the politics of your country. Devising policy prescriptions for Venezuela --and developing a coherent political program for you and your fellow Venezuelans to discuss and debate-- is your job. But, unfortunately, none of you seem to be up to the task, as all I ever see from you is one hysterical tirade after another about the guy that you're against.
Indeed, you're not gonna see prescriptions from me as to how your country should be governed because I don't feel it's my place to micro-manage the politics of your country.
Well, I disagree with you on this Justin. I do think we can advocate for policies that we think are beneficial for a country, even if it isn't ours.
But Tanks assertion is pure nonsense. We have given solid positions on all the most important issues, just as I listed above.
They, on the other hand, don't even understand what the major issues are in the first place. Hence Kepler's constant focus on totally irrelevant tidbits like Chavez's daughter getting a house from the government, or Venezuela's participation in PISA.
I mean, they actually think these are pressing issues!!! That's the funniest part of it all.
all I ever see from you is one hysterical tirade after another about the guy that you're against.
Not only that, but they also hysterically attack anyone who supports Chavismo with all kinds of insults, but with absolutely ZERO real argumentation.
I don't know how many times I have to repeat this, but attacking the messenger DOES NOT prove wrong their message. It is very simple logic.
Well, I disagree with you on this Justin. I do think we can advocate for policies that we think are beneficial for a country, even if it isn't ours.
Well, if you were in my line of business (U.S. academia), I think you would recognize that the inclination of American technocrats to try to micro-manage the politics of societies that they don't really understand is part of the problem.
It's one thing if you live in the country and immerse yourself in its life and culture. It's quite another matter if you live in the ivory tower.
Justin,
Some of my ideas are in http://venezuela-europa.blogspot.com, go to the right part and click on Ideas.
Or are you pretend you did not read this comment? I suppose so.
Like what? You can't even name one?
We have discussed proposals on education, oil wealth redistribution, education, the judicial system and even election processes. You can feel free to go trough the archives of CaracasChronicles. (sadly it doesn't have a good search engine, but its there.)
You can also check Kepler's views on his own blog, which is pretty good. In fact, you can even look at the party project or "manifesto" that Katy(JC) put together over at CCS Chronicles.
I don't have the time or the drive to post my views on Free trade, Land Reform, Privatization
, Export-oriented development vs. Regional integration, etc because I am not the one on the driving seat of Venezuelan economic development. I am not the president.
However, I do criticize and point out what I clearly don't agree with such as political prosecution, the lack of checks and balances, the unnecessary military spending, the cut in the budget for the schools, the lack of transparency in the country's finances and even the lack of transparency when it comes to the elections.
It saddens me that someone can support a government that is not only corrupt (because most governments are) but that has little respect for due process, closes down on dissidence and has no checks and balances. Maybe it makes you feel all iffy inside when the AN or the judges chant Pro-Chavez slogans, to me its sad.
I don't know how many times I have to repeat this, but attacking the messenger DOES NOT prove wrong their message. It is very simple logic.
Sometimes you should read your own writing you are the one who ends up his arguments by saying nobody else (besides you) has a brain and calling people morons.
By the way, those are rather hands-on ideas, I decided on purpose to leave the ideological stuff aside because I believe it is not that the issue, but what real humans do with things and what formal mechanisms they establish to make law be accomplished.
I will go into the points Chris Junior wrote minus the "they failed" as that is HIS assumption, but I will put that in my blog in Spanish: agrarian reform (I am totally for it, with 200% transparency, taxes and clear ideas on taxation levels in each state and use of those taxes etc), electoral system (random selection as we do in Germany and Belgium and Netherlands) , very good education for ALL (which is not a trivial issue but the main one, something you do not recognize),
and so on.
Ah, free trade, just this: there has never been real bilateral free trade. I am for going step by step, protecting the local industries as Germany and the US did before and promoting regional integration not on a day but via decade-long work. Among other things.
Chavez is destroying local industries, he is just changing from importing some from the US to China and Iran.
He hasn't brought deals for Venezuelan producers vis-a-vis Argentine or Brazil, but only for Argentinians and Brazilians. The only thing he got was their silence while he gets more power and destroys democracy.
That is not promoting integration.
We have discussed proposals on education, oil wealth redistribution, education, the judicial system and even election processes.
Let's see, you listed education twice, but not what you propose.
As for oil wealth, the only thing I've seen is La Negra, which was so ridiculous is was funny.
The only thing you've said about the judicial system is that you DON'T agree with it under Chavez. You haven't said how you would reform the system.
And, as for election processes, you've given numerous excuses for why you can't win, but nothing concrete on how to make it better.
Again, list your proposals, not just a list of topics.
I don't have the time or the drive to post my views on Free trade, Land Reform, Privatization
, Export-oriented development vs. Regional integration, etc because I am not the one on the driving seat of Venezuelan economic development. I am not the president.
In other words, you don't have any proposals. I mean, seriously, how hard is it to simply give your position on Free Trade or Land Reform? Does it really take that much time? You've wasted far more time here slinging insults.
The reason is clearly because you don't know what your position is, which is EXACTLY JUSTIN'S POINT!!!!!
You can also check Kepler's views on his own blog, which is pretty good.
If I wanted to discuss Kepler's blog, I would go discuss it over there.
But I'm not going to do that because there isn't anyone who is even interested enough to comment there. In other words, it is such a joke that no one even takes it seriously.
You can feel free to go trough the archives of CaracasChronicles.
I have tried to discuss these issues at CC, but they either ignore you, or flat out erase comments they don't like.
In other words, it is not possible to discuss proposals there. Many of their posts are completely ridiculous and demonstrably false, but they won't allow anyone to say that there. They simply delete the comments.
Why is it that when we ask you to give concrete proposal you simply point us in the other direction? Is it that hard to say where you stand on these issues?
Sometimes you should read your own writing you are the one who ends up his arguments by saying nobody else (besides you) has a brain and calling people morons.
Yes, but I don't do that INSTEAD of addressing your argument.
I address your argument, AND THEN I call you a moron. That is much different than simply ignoring the argument, and trying to attack the messenger.
And, I never bring up your personal life. You guys regularly bring up people's personal lives, where they work, where they live, what kind of lifestyle they live, who their parents are, etc. etc. etc.
You do all of this in an attempt to discredit the person, INSTEAD of simply addressing the point they are making.
THIS IS THE DEFINITION OF AN AD HOMINEM ATTACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ah, free trade, just this: there has never been real bilateral free trade. I am for going step by step, protecting the local industries as Germany and the US did before and promoting regional integration not on a day but via decade-long work.
Ah Kepler, so naive...
The problem is this Kepler, the industrialized nations have put together this little thing called the WTO (maybe you've heard of it?) which requires nations to eliminate protectionist policies, or else they get punitive trade restrictions. Not to mention the veto power of large multinations who often times not invest in a country that places restrictions on investment.
So how exactly do you intend to protect domestic industries in light of these challenges?
You see Kepler, Germany and the US developed at a time when international competition was not so intense, when the technological gap between developed and underdeveloped was not nearly as great, and when multinational corporations did not control the majority of the world's trade and technology.
And you didn't address even half of the topics listed above. Care to take a stab at any others?
MET, going to bed, was eating
You know Tosh, the person that does the most talking is usually the one that is wrong.
Your personal live is this, you work for Venezuelan Analysis.
In regards to my views.. am I supposed to spend hours typing it all here for your amusement? Some of us do work and cant afford to spend more than 10 minutes typing comments in a blog.
See Toshy, one thing you don't understand is that its not only that the government has in some cases followed policies a lot of us consider mistaken, its their lack of efficiency even when the policies they follow are good.
So even if their ideology was the right one, even if all their proposals were incredibly good and would lead Venezuela to a golden age, they are just so inept at following trough with their promises, at holding individuals or institutions accountable for their results that it makes all the "intellectual" debate nothing more than useless mambo-jambo.
Its been 10 years and not only do we have the same president, we still have the same idiots he surrounded himself with, people who have proven to be unable to do their jobs. But it doesn't matter how much they screw up.. they will be rotated to another ministry or institution soon enough. Because in the revolution, its not about performance, its about loyalty...
Warned you guys, Keplar, Tank, Daniel, etc., you are wasting time and energy trying to get this Tosh (Chris?) character to be serious. He just keeps a big board to keep track of the points he thinks he scores.
In regards to my views.. am I supposed to spend hours typing it all here for your amusement? Some of us do work and cant afford to spend more than 10 minutes typing comments in a blog.
The most obvious question comes to mind: If you aren't here to debate these issues, why the hell are you here?
So even if their ideology was the right one, even if all their proposals were incredibly good and would lead Venezuela to a golden age, they are just so inept at following trough with their promises, at holding individuals or institutions accountable for their results that it makes all the "intellectual" debate nothing more than useless mambo-jambo.
That's all fine and dandy. The point here, however, is that the opposition doesn't have any counter arguments, or any concrete proposals of their own, yet you guys lend your strong support to them.
So, even if they could somehow be more efficient than the Chavez government, they'd be more efficient at doing what exactly? You don't know. And you apparently don't care. That is exactly Justin's point. You guys don't have a political project, other than being AGAINST something.
That is, quite frankly, retarded.
Warned you guys, Keplar, Tank, Daniel, etc., you are wasting time and energy trying to get this Tosh (Chris?) character to be serious. He just keeps a big board to keep track of the points he thinks he scores.
Yes, it is such a "waste of time" to debate with me that people like Charly, Impartial, JSB, and other morons find it necessary to come in here and make comments like these about 3 times per thread.
You guys are so transparent its not even funny.
tosh
what do you mean we do not want to debate, we have no issues we can defend?
i did ask you for a very simple question: when were you going to come to beat me up in yaracuy as you promised last year? can't you even reply to a simple question?
justin
you are ignoring me and yet you claim that nobody wants to engage you. what gives?
after all the only thing that's stopping me to debate you is to establish first ground rules and clear definitions of what we would agree to discuss. after all that should not be too difficult for you to establish, you are allegedly an academic objectively trained in political sciences. are you not?
is it my escualido sweet rich bourgeois food breath?
ow
thanks for the hosting and sorry you did not reply.
i hung around waiting, forced to once again easily puncture the usual suspects' hot air, but that is as much time as i can give to your blog. it was fun this time around though, i might not wait that long to come back for a visit.
think of my suggestion for your blog, discussing what is worth saving from chavismo in a post chaevz era (even if he starts an open dictatorship for the next 20 years, it will still be a "post chavez" era, one where a few nincompoops thought that a golpista could turn into a democrat).
justin and tosh
same old same old. if one day you get serious and responsible about arguing. let me know. you know where to find me. now go ahead, trash me at will, you got the last word comment. mighty nice of me, no?
what do you mean we do not want to debate, we have no issues we can defend?
Uh... exactly. Thanks for admitting it.
i did ask you for a very simple question: when were you going to come to beat me up in yaracuy as you promised last year? can't you even reply to a simple question?
Because I never said anything of the sort.
But when you are mature enough to actually debate issues, instead of coming here to simply make childish insults, do let me know. I'd have fun showing you how utterly ignorant you are.
after all the only thing that's stopping me to debate you is to establish first ground rules and clear definitions of what we would agree to discuss.
Hahahaha!! Yeah Justin, he's willing to debate, but first he needs to establish "ground rules" (rule #1: we can't discuss things that make Daniel look stupid) and "clear definitions."
What's the problem Daniel? Can't handle a simple debate? My lord, these guys sure do us a favor in making themselves look pathetic.
The most obvious question comes to mind: If you aren't here to debate these issues, why the hell are you here?
I'm here to comment in a post that talks about the sad way the goverment closed Globovision. What are you here for? How is this post about economic development, import susbtitution and my views on capitalist and socialism?
That's all fine and dandy. The point here, however, is that the opposition doesn't have any counter arguments, or any concrete proposals of their own, yet you guys lend your strong support to them.
Support them?
I support their criticism of the government because I agree with it. Im tired of the inefficiency and the corruption of the current government. That doesn't mean I necessarily support UNT, AD or COPEI. Do I have my preferences? Of course I do, but Chavez is at the wheel, so hes decisions are the ones that affect the country and its citizens, hes the one that is held accountable for the problems under his government just like Caldera was before and CAP before him.
You on the other hand stick to the same subjects over and over and apologize for every mistake the goverment makes. For you every decision they make is ok, you support 90% of them and whatever you don't support or cant justify you ignore and derail onto another moot conversation about "development". Listen kiddo, this country is not going to develop without capable people who are held accountable for their actions lead it. Chavez and his ministers can do whatever they want, and nobody holds them accountable.
We have discussed proposals on education, oil wealth redistribution, education, the judicial system and even election processes. You can feel free to go trough the archives of CaracasChronicles. (sadly it doesn't have a good search engine, but its there.)
But the point is that folks shouldn't have to refer to the Caracas Chronicles to understand what you think about the issues. The issues --not the personage of Chavez-- should be central to the entire discussion. Folks shouldn't have to spend hours on end trying to pry one measly statement from you about the issues. You don't seem to contemplate how boring this gets when you, Kepler and Duquenal completely sideline the issues and instead launch one hysterical tirade after another against Chavez.
Glad to see that some of you are finally trying to talk about what you're actually for, but you're going to have to spend a lot more time wrapping your heads around the issues if you want to be taken seriously by your own populous.
Justin misspelled "populace."
I will go into the points Chris Junior wrote minus the "they failed" as that is HIS assumption, but I will put that in my blog in Spanish: agrarian reform (I am totally for it, with 200% transparency, taxes and clear ideas on taxation levels in each state and use of those taxes etc), electoral system (random selection as we do in Germany and Belgium and Netherlands) , very good education for ALL (which is not a trivial issue but the main one, something you do not recognize),
and so on.
Ah, free trade, just this: there has never been real bilateral free trade. I am for going step by step, protecting the local industries as Germany and the US did before and promoting regional integration not on a day but via decade-long work. Among other things.
Well, that sounds just fine, but you're missing what's crucial. How exactly do any of your prescriptions cohere with what the leading sectors of the opposition actually plan to do? It's all fine and dandy to tell us your pie-in-the-sky ideas, but the relevant question is this: What is the likelihood that a real-life opposition government would carry out land reform, expand education, and build up domestic industry through developmentalist policies? What is the likelihood that a real-life opposition government would assure the poor continued access to basic health care and cheap food?
If you can't answer these questions satisfactorily, you have no basis for arguing that the leading sectors of the opposition are prepared to govern in a manner that satisfies popular demands to the degree that the Chavez government has satisfied such demands.
Justin misspelled "populace."
I stand corrected on the spelling of the noun.
Actually, many of those who voted for Obama did so because they thought he would be NOT AS BAD as Bush, not because they support his politics.
But I know, that is too complex for Kepler to understand.
Indeed, the point is so elementary that we shouldn't have to explain it to anyone here, much less to a guy who actually thinks he's well-educated.
But the point is that folks shouldn't have to refer to the Caracas Chronicles to understand what you think about the issues. The issues --not the personage of Chavez-- should be central to the entire discussion. Folks shouldn't have to spend hours on end trying to pry one measly statement from you about the issues. You don't seem to contemplate how boring this gets when you, Kepler and Duquenal completely sideline the issues and instead launch one hysterical tirade after another against Chavez.
This post is about Oil Wars views, not mine.
Also the only reason I mentioned those links its as an answer to the claim that "you guys" or "the opposition" has no proposals. There are thousands on the web, just look for them.
Actually, many of those who voted for Obama did so because they thought he would be NOT AS BAD as Bush, not because they support his politics.
And a lot of the opposition would just vote for anyone, like Alicia Machado because they think she could be better than Chavez.
Oh look Chavez wants to "create" a big corporation. So what does he do, he takes a bunch of already created and well run business and expropiates them:
http://www.noticias24.com/actual...tor-briquetero/
Yeah.. we are so going to develop.
Ceramic is for oligarcs. From now on every new house will have dirt floors.
Justin/Tosh, how is Chavez going to pay for all these nationalizations? Does he have the money?
Justin,
Chavez has not satisfied such demands. He woke up hopes once again and he could use the biggest oil boom Venezuela had for several decades in a row to keep popularity up. Now that is collapsing and the many gullible who voted for him (the same who once voted twice for CAP and Caldera) are now mostly tired or very afraid. That is your 60% popularity.
In a couple of months you will see that popularity will keep increasing and repression too.
the oil bubble lasted for about two years. chavez was elected for his first term in 1998 and survived his biggest political challenges - the coup and oil strike- when oil prices were relatively low. as of now oil prices are back at about 60$. this 'the apocalypse is right around the corner' talk is what has been said year after year about chavez. it didn't happen before, it wont happen now.
Chavez has not satisfied such demands.
By what standard? What are you measurements, Kepler?
Between 2003 and 2007, Venezuela's poverty rate was cut in half. Moreover, the CEPAL data indicates that Venezuela has overtaken Costa Rica to become the least inequitable country in Latin America (among the countries for which there is data on inequality).
Year after year, Latinobarometro's polling indicates that Venezuelans are more inclined than most other Latin Americans to view their country as democratic.
So the data just doesn't corroborate your argument, Kepler.
Sooner or later, you're going to have to come to terms with the fact that, regardless of what you or I think of Hugo Chavez, the man has achieved enormous political success. Meanwhile, the leading sectors of the Venezuelan opposition have been a political failure for more than a decade now. That's the incontrovertible fact.
Any political opposition that's been in the political wilderness for a decade has two choices. It can either (1) rectify its ways so as to improve its political prospects or (2) bury its head in the sand and stay in the political wilderness indefinitely.
The choice is up to you.
Justin, betwen 2003 and 2007 the oil price went up from 30 to 70 dollars a barrel. That is more than double.
That is the Alpha and the Omega of Venezuela, very unfortunately.
So it does not have anything to do with Chavez.
Venezuelans will anyway just notice it when they get their hands into their pocket and find no money. Northern Europeans feel a crisis when they see they cannot save as they were planning to.
"the oil bubble lasted for about two years. chavez was elected for his first term in 1998 and survived his biggest political challenges - the coup and oil strike- when oil prices were relatively low. as of now oil prices are back at about 60$. this 'the apocalypse is right around the corner' talk is what has been said year after year about chavez. it didn't happen before, it wont happen now.
Anonymous | 05.22.09 - 1:32 am | # "
Is that Criss again?
I will have to copy paste here as the bloke does not know how to use a browser.
Oil price:
1998 12.28 Chavez is elected
1999 17.48 Chavez comes to power
2000 27.6 price is higher than year beore
2001 23.12 price is higher than year before
2002 24.36 price is higher than year before
2003 28.1 price is higher than year before
2004 36.05 price is higher than year before
2005 50.64 price is higher than year before
2006 61.08 price is higher than year before
2007 69.08 price is higher than year before
2008 94.45 price is higher than year before
2009 46.18 > this will go up again, but already there is less money. Still, Chavez will try to steal from oppos (not from the rich, just from the rich who are not pro-him) to keep it up while there is this decrease
Anonymous, oil prices are still much higher than they were in the 10 years before Chavez was elected.
Justin,
Whatever all opposition groups may do things won't be easy.
I can give you a thousand proofs of this, but just answer about this one: Maduro said over 50% of REGISTERED VOTERS abroad signed (wrote down their signature) supporting Chavez this year. That is false. Over 90% of people who voted (50% didn't) voted against him. We have the actas abroad because it is easy, here we don't have Chavez thugs pointing at us with guns, here they cannot count things just electronically. All is manual. We saw the votes, one by one. We communicated with all other Venezuelans in other countries. 90% of us voted against Chavez.
Why is Minister Maduro saying over half of us SIGNED a paper in support of Chavez?
Several institutions have ASKED the government several times to publish the results abroad. It hasn't.
How come if we have the most modern system in the world even 10% of votes are still missing and the government refuses to publish results for them?
Chavez is still popular, but less than those numbers say and Chavez knows he cannot allow those numbers to drop, whatever people may think.
As for the opposition leaders: I can only do so much.
Justin,
you say,
"regardless of what you or I think of Hugo Chavez, the man has achieved enormous political success."
I will remind you that so did Hitler.So did Bush for many years.
But I will remind you that when " success" is based on unfair controls, the success cannot be used with any meaning.
Chavez has 'Success' at what?
The answer is coercion.Success at coercion.
Justin,
Let's discuss a bit your homepage profile and your choice of words.
First of all, being a doctoral candidate in any area means nothing nowadays with politically correct education taking away the requirement of intelligence.I just recently wrote a dissertation for my daughter in law and it took me all of 2 weeks( except for the research part)- I wrote the paper without research and then she found the data to back up my ideas- and I am far from genius levels.However a minimum level of Intelligence is more important than education for which you are a living proof.
Secondly I must say you are not old enough to have the experience it takes to understand that arrogance shows an inexperienced brain.
Thirdly, your astrological sign of Taurus is more suited to the simple and practical understanding of physical reality than to complicated mental endeavors, which are far more suited to the air signs, of Libra,and Aquarius and secondly to fire signs like Leo or Sagittarius, or Pisces with mercury in Aquarius .Many Taureans however make excellent cooks and/ or musicians.
Emotionally Taurus is stubborn, and more sensual than sensitive.....it takes sensitivity to understand subtle situations.
For those who think Astrology is a bunch of bull, ask Justin why he chose to describe himself this way.
ps,
the sign of Taurus is represented by the BULL
pun intended
Ah, that explains the whole enchilada Firepigette.
He's missing four letters from his sign.
I'll give you a hint, the first one's an S
rev,jaja
Support them?
I support their criticism of the government because I agree with it.
This is exactly our point Tank. You support anything that is CRITICAL of the government, without actually understanding what their position is. You support Globovision for one simple reason: they oppose Chavez. You don't understand what Globovision's political positions or interests are. That is the point.
That doesn't mean I necessarily support UNT, AD or COPEI. Do I have my preferences? Of course I do, but Chavez is at the wheel, so hes decisions are the ones that affect the country and its citizens, hes the one that is held accountable for the problems under his government
Yes, but in the real world we cannot simply oppose a government because there are certain problems or things we don't like about that government.
In the REAL world of politics, there are certain choices we have to make. One of those is if the political opposition would be better than the current government, or if there is a viable alternative to the current government.
But, in order to do that, we have to ACTUALLY KNOW WHAT THE OPPOSITION STANDS FOR!!! We have to actually know what the opposition would be likely to do if they got in power, and how that would be better than the current government.
The thing about you Tank, is that you hate this government, so you just lend your support to anyone who is against it, without actually understanding what their interests are, what policies they support, and what they would likely do once in power.
If you can't even state your position on major issues like Free Trade and Land Reform, then how could you possibly know which political movement you support, and why you support it?
And a lot of the opposition would just vote for anyone, like Alicia Machado because they think she could be better than Chavez.
Except the obvious difference is that you don't even know where Alicia Machado stands on the major issues. (If you do, please list her positions)
Leftists who voted for Obama in the US know exactly where he stands, and they don't agree with him, but they see him as a better option than the Republicans.
There is a significant difference between the two Tank that you don't want to recognize.
Justin,
Let's discuss a bit your homepage profile and your choice of words.
First of all, being a doctoral candidate in any area means nothing nowadays with politically correct education taking away the requirement of intelligence.I just recently wrote a dissertation for my daughter in law and it took me all of 2 weeks( except for the research part)- I wrote the paper without research and then she found the data to back up my ideas- and I am far from genius levels.However a minimum level of Intelligence is more important than education for which you are a living proof.
Firepig,
Allow me to rephrase your argument:
"Justin,
I can't refute your arguments, so instead I'm going to attack you for things that are totally unrelated to the topic at hand.
First of all, I'll start out by trying to question your intelligence. Of course, whether or not you are intelligent has no bearing whatsoever on the truthfulness of your argument, but it makes me feel good to insult your intelligence, and it is a desperate attempt to discredit you.
Secondly, I am going to try to discredit you by questioning your age and experience. Again, this is a simply another ad hominem attack, which has nothing to do with your argument, but it is another pathetic attempt to discredit you.
Thirdly, I am going to attack your personality, and try to pretend that somehow your personality does not allow you to understand things.
Making these desperate attempts to discredit you is the best way for me to counter you since I cannot possibly give a reasonable answer to your arguments."
Oh look Chavez wants to "create" a big corporation. So what does he do, he takes a bunch of already created and well run business and expropiates them:
http://www.noticias24.com/actual...tor-briquetero/
Yeah.. we are so going to develop.
Tank | 05.21.09 - 10:45 pm | #
Why would this impede development Tank?
Why would expropriation of firms mean Venezuela is not going to develop?
Most of the Newly Industrialized Countries, like South Korea, Taiwan, China, etc. had very large state-controlled sectors during their most rapid development years.
If anything, a large state-controlled sector is positively correlated with development in the third world, and certainly in the NIC's.
1998 12.28 Chavez is elected
1999 17.48 Chavez comes to power
2000 27.6 price is higher than year beore
2001 23.12 price is higher than year before
2002 24.36 price is higher than year before
Hahaha, two things are really funny about this Kepler.
First, since you're so smart, can you please tell me which number is bigger: 27.6 or 23.12 . You seem to be a bit confused about that.
Secondly, you fail to recognize WHY oil prices began to increase so rapidly as soon as Chavez came to power. This was BEFORE 9/11, BEFORE the wars in the Middle East.
Oil prices tripled in Chavez's first two years in power because of his efforts with OPEC to protect the price. And, for the same reason, oil prices did not fall as far this year, and we are seeing them now begin to go up again. This is all because of a refortified OPEC that protects world prices. THIS IS A SIGNIFICANT POLICY DIFFERENCE FROM THE OPPOSITION!!!!
In other words, your reasoning doesn't make any sense. You try to claim that Chavez is not responsible for the economic expansion and decreased poverty because that is all due to oil prices. However, since higher oil prices are due to Chavista policies, your reasoning doesn't make any sense!!!
Justin,
I attack you directly like you have also done to others.Please see above.Must I quote?This blog has a big problem with people speaking past each other.
Calling a spade a spade is not necessarily an ad hominem attack..
If at this point we say that Chavez behaves in an ignorant way for such and such reasons, is that an invalid argument?Or an ad hominem attack No, I think not.Experience shows us his lack of credibility.
However if we were to accuse the Dalai Lama of self centered intentions we might need more proof.
You have proven here that you do not listen and answer.You ignore facts, and talk around people.
This is enough to question your credibility.
the last anonymous was me firepigette
Justin, betwen 2003 and 2007 the oil price went up from 30 to 70 dollars a barrel. That is more than double.
That is the Alpha and the Omega of Venezuela, very unfortunately.
So it does not have anything to do with Chavez.
Kepler, since you didn't even address Justin's statement, a few questions:
1. How does the oil price doubling have anything to do with the decreased inequality that has taken place under Chavez?
2. How does the oil price doubling have anything to do with Venezuelans in general viewing their society as more democratic?
3. Does a stronger, more unified OPEC keep oil prices higher? Could that have anything to do with why Chavez has enjoyed higher oil prices, and why oil prices have not collapsed to their pre-Chavez levels?
Thanks.
If at this point we say that Chavez behaves in an ignorant way for such and such reasons, is that an invalid argument?Or an ad hominem attack No, I think not.Experience shows us his lack of credibility.
Thank you for demonstrating that you have no clue what an ad hominem attack is.
Tosh,
To have a plan is less intelligent than to have a vision.Many people with a plan will soon find that plan B or plan C, becomes more viable.
I have a vision that I want to improve my mother's health, and I can make a tentative plan, but more important is the vision, because as everyday unfolds and life changes I need to be able to see clearly in the moment..
Also at this point in time the simple need to get Chavez out has to be the most important vision, that requires a flexible plan.First we have to see what the circumstances are after Chavez leaves to be able to determine the proper and exact initial plans....
When we are faced with a deepening dictatorship , the main plan and focus is to restore democracy.
Most opposition will agree with capitalism with important and well organized social benefits.That is enough for now.
So stop repeating, what is not true.
This is enough to question your credibility.
Anonymous | 05.22.09 - 1:08 pm | #
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!!!
Oh Firepig, I swear, you must be trying to look stupid.
You see, the whole POINT is that you cannot prove someone wrong by questioning their credibility. That is the whole point of what an ad hominem attack is!!!
It is a logical fallacy!
Also at this point in time the simple need to get Chavez out has to be the most important vision, that requires a flexible plan.First we have to see what the circumstances are after Chavez leaves to be able to determine the proper and exact initial plans....
Thank you for conceding our point. This is EXACTLY what Justin and I have been saying. You don't have a political project. You just want to get rid of Chavez.
At least you are honest about it. The rest of these oppo morons try to pretend they have a project, and they tell us to go look at other websites to find it.
I have to admit, at least you are honest Firepig.
Saying what is true is not an ad hominem attack.
example : a 2 year old is inexperienced.
Your age, your words, and your lack of follow up is documented on this blog.Most of what I clarify have just been the words on your own personal profile.
Lately there are more and more Chavistas who call Nelson Boccaranda who call him under the table to complain about Chavez.This is one of the reasons that Chavez is cracking down on the remaining free press because it is an outlet for the discontent of his own followers who don't dare to denounce wrong doings openly.
When people begin to call anything 'against' or anything that clarifies a lie, an ad hominem attack, then freedom of denouncement is lost.
Not exposing any plans and not having them are different ball games .
And obviously you did not get my use of proper definitions.
Exposing plans to Chavistas would be useless.Do you need to be presenting better plans than Chavez to justify stopping his dictatorship?
Saying what is true is not an ad hominem attack.
example : a 2 year old is inexperienced.
Again, you don't understand what an ad hominem attack is.
Just to use your example, the fact that a 2 year old is inexperienced does NOT mean that everything a two-year-old says is false. That is a logical fallacy. That is exactly what ad hominem is.
You see, regardless of how stupid, or inexperienced, or lacking of credibility a person is, you still have to actually prove that what they are saying is false. Simply pointing out that they are stupid or inexperienced DOES NOT prove them wrong.
This is not a difficult concept. I think Firepig might actually be dumber than Kepler. Amazing!
Chavez has 'Success' at what?
Chavez has been in power for over 10 years and still has a public approval rating of 60 percent (according to an opposition pollster, no less). That's what we call political success.
Not exposing any plans and not having them are different ball games .
Exposing plans to Chavistas would be useless.
Wait, so you do have a political project, but you have to keep it a secret???
Wow, that sounds like a good way to get people to vote for you!!!
Tosh,
I never said that everything a 2 year old said is false either.I speak of inexperience.
It is hard to prove anything with you when you distort what others say.
I won't bother with your points( lies)...I will however expose -time and time again -your lack of ability to discern the truth
getting people to vote for the opposition, is the point man, however not exposing plans to criminals is survival.
Justin,
Then Bush was a success for many years as well
Some people care more about integrity than success; perhaps you are not one of us.
Ow: GDP figures for the first quarter were released a couple of days ago: with US annualized decline of 6.3%, Mexico over 21%, Japan 15.2%, China somewhere similar . . . the reason I post this is I am wondering where Venezuela fits in all this, and, as I have said before, what numbers came out in relation to other countries in South America
maybe, if I can find the time, I look it up myself
Yes, Firepig has Kepler beat. No doubt about that. Kepler is a genius next to this guy.
Tosh,
guy ? since when has "ette" been anything other than a female ending?
education education education
getting people to vote for the opposition, is the point man, however not exposing plans to criminals is survival.
Uh, "not exposing" your plans for governance is simply anti-democratic. The whole reason for party platforms, public debates, etc. etc. is that they provide the public some means of holding political actors accountable. If you don't believe in "exposing" your plans for governance, you don't believe in democracy.
1 I did not say that plans were not exposed
2.I said exposing them to Chavistas could be counterproductive or useless
3, if we have a real democratic election THEN we can compare plans and programs so that the electorate can make a choice based on those.
If you have a emergency situation, where day by day, more freedoms are taken away, the priority is different :It becomes one of survival and Restoration of democracy.
It is absurd to say that one should only support the opposition if their plans are programs are convincing enough, otherwise we can just abstain and let Chavez complete his permanent take -over of the country.
typo , sorry
It is absurd to say that one should only support the opposition if their plans or programs are convincing enough
Opposition includes left wing, moderate and right wings.
Before making ONE plan for government , we need to establish democracy first.
Then we present our various plans, and subsequently carry out honest elections with the different parties represented in the CNE, instead of just Chavistas.
It is absurd to say that one should only support the opposition if their plans or programs are convincing enough
No, my dear, it's not absurd. You see, the whole purpose of participating in a democratic system is to convince others that your plans for governance will better serve your country's interests than your opponents' plans. If you refuse to engage in such a debate, you have no business claiming that you are a genuine proponent of democracy.
Some people care more about integrity than success; perhaps you are not one of us.
Well, unfortunately for you, most Venezuelans don't see the opposition's leaders as having a great deal of integrity. For the opposition to change that state of affairs would require that it rectify its ways.
"1. How does the oil price doubling have anything to do with the decreased inequality that has taken place under Chavez?"
Increased oil prices increase governtment revenues allowing Chavez to spend more on social programs and the poor.
"2. How does the oil price doubling have anything to do with Venezuelans in general viewing their society as more democratic?"
Oil income boosted GDP growth (mostly through increased spending). Happier people tend to be more positive. Otherwise not much.
Chavez made the poor feel more included - and the poor are the majority. I give Chavez credit for this. He made it feel like he was governing for them, that democracy was working cuz the poor put him in power.
"3. Does a stronger, more unified OPEC keep oil prices higher? Could that have anything to do with why Chavez has enjoyed higher oil prices, and why oil prices have not collapsed to their pre-Chavez levels?"
Probably. To some extent I agree, but there are lots of factors outside Chavez's control here. SA controls OPEC not Chavez. The shock to oil prices now is exogenous. Chavez helped boost oil prices in late 90s, but lately Chavez has been a bit too hawkish. They should have settled for a lower price band instead of driving prices up too high. They got greedy.
Does OPEC promote price stability? Nope. Higher prices? Sure. Lower production? Sure. Higher profits for Venezuela? Hard to say.
I think Chavez will start cheating with OPEC if prices fall too much and the political fallout starts.
Justin,
You are forgetting about the most important part of events:
sequence:
Opposition includes left wing, moderate and right wings.
Before making ONE plan for government , we need to establish democracy first.
Then we present our various plans, and subsequently carry out honest elections with the different parties represented in the CNE, instead of just Chavistas
Justin,
Spelled out even more simply:
You cannot debate plans without having a democracy first.
We have a situation now where Chavistas say they are here to stay by whatever means necessary AND against everyone else .
When and only when we have a democracy( I repeat) parties will have the freedom and safety to present viable plans and options.
The opposition is NOT a monolithic organization.They consist of different parties, ngo's and other groups who don't have A plan in common, but rather a goal: to stop Chavez from eliminating their very existence.
For Chavistas to demand that the opp have a unified plan of government is a way of disqualifying any opposition so that they stay in power permanently.
note: Colombian GDP has been contracting for the last two quarters (-0.7% and -0.3%) while Venezuela has been slightly above 0.0 for the last two quarters
is Venezuela struggling through ahead of the curve, or is the financial hurricane about to make landfall there?
"Yes, but in the real world we cannot simply oppose a government because there are certain problems or things we don't like about that government.
In the REAL world of politics, there are certain choices we have to make. One of those is if the political opposition would be better than the current government, or if there is a viable alternative to the current government."
Outstanding comment Tosh!!! So in Cuba you would say that nobody has the right to talk about the government since there is no organized opposition. If Chavez gets his way, Venezuela is heading in the same direction.
Question: would you like Venezuela to end up like Cuba? By this I mean politically and economically. Please elaborate. Thank you.
You cannot debate plans without having a democracy first.
I'm sorry, dear, but Venezuela is a democracy. If Venezuelan elections weren't free and fair, the opposition wouldn't have been able to defeat the first constitutional referendum. Neither would the opposition have been able to pick up some major states in the last gubernatorial elections. Nobody with eyes that see can maintain that Venezuela lacks free and fair elections.
So the bottom line is that you live in a democracy. It is therefore time for you to start acting like democrats. You can start by doing what democrats in every other part of the world do: offer concrete policy proposals so that your fellow citizens can make up their own minds about what they think you have to offer.
That's how democracy works, my dear.
"I'm sorry, dear, but Venezuela is a democracy". As if the test for a democracy was elections. In such case Saddam Hussein was the greatest democrat. Way above election, what differentiate a democracy from a totalitarian state is the respect for the Rule of Law. In Venezuela its foundation is the constitution over which Chavez pukes and shits day in day out not to forget a judiciary that is licking his ass for privileges. So much for your democracy. Answer this one: is Castro a democrat? After all he is the intellectual father of His Nibs.
Justin, you have to go back to kindergarten.
Democracy is much more than that. First of all: we won because we actually got many votes than that. The was massive cheating, that is the reason they have not released the 10% of the votes
even if the official difference is 1% (that simply is worse than what happened in Bush's first term, which is to say a lot)
Secondly: there is no point in winning several states to them have Chavez take away illegally most of the powers of said states.
Venezuela was a democracy, even if dysfunctional, before Chavez came to power.
Stalin won many elections. So does Lukashenko. In both cases I am completely sure they were more popular than Chavez.
Justin,
I would call your denomination of Venezuela as a democracy , a double standard.
No, maybe I would more accurately describe it as a lie.
Now I have to determine (or at least have a good idea) of WHY you choose to lie, because otherwise our conversation will turn into a boring." yes it is and no it isn't, and we will get nowhere.
Justin , First of all I notice that you do not describe yourself accurately on your homepage profile.An accurate description would be less commercial and include more aspects of yourself like feelings, and or defects of character.You seem to have bought into the internet narcissistic illness of painting yourself only in a good light.
I think that is a start.We need to determine just what your reason for this is.
.
Lukachenko is a good example of a dictator who runs elections which of course are only to appear democratic ,yet they are not.
Lukachenko puts any important opposition in jail or they are run out of the country.Do not attempt to argue with me here. as I i know Belarus- NOT from some stupid PC college courses but from REAL life.
One thesis that I wrote for my daughter in law compared Lukachenko to Chavez.
The appearance of something and its reality are unfortunately not the same always.
Just look again at your personal profile page.
Justin,
Venezuelan democracy?
A new form of false democracy where the leader does not allow for a change of plan or a change of mind?Over and over again Chavez states that he will remain...
"Caracas, Feb 5 (IANS) Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who completed 10 years in office two days ago, has said his Bolivarian Revolution has entered a new phase and will continue to remain forever, EFE news agency reported Thursday. The Bolivarian Revolution is here to stay, Chavez said while inaugurating a military parade here to commemorate the failed coup he headed on Feb 4, 1992."
Now we can look into WHY you bullishly call a dictator a democrat.We will look into why you yourself do not believe in honesty, at least when it comes to your politics.
As if the test for a democracy was elections.
Well, the general consensus among political scientists is that the existence of free and fair elections is the linchpin of procedural democracy. According to the most conventional of standards, competitive elections themselves are the most fundamental institution of a democracy.
In such case Saddam Hussein was the greatest democrat.
That is the most absurd comparison I've heard here yet. The hyperbole and ignorance of you folks are quite astounding. Venezuela has free and fair elections (i.e. competitive elections). There is absolutely no comparison between Venezuelan elections and Iraqi "elections" under Saddam. In Iraq, an opposition couldn't defeat a constitutional referendum backed by the president. In Iraq, the opposition couldn't have newspapers, radio stations, and television channels with which they could attack the government. In Iraq, you would never see the opposition win governorships in major states, much less take 40% of the vote in regional elections nationwide.
Don't waste my time with nonsense, people.
The bottom line is this: Venezuela is a democracy. So I will repeat: The opposition should start acting like democrats by doing what democrats in every other part of the world do: offer concrete policy proposals so that your fellow citizens can make up their own minds about what they think you have to offer.
Justin, I asked you very specifically why Minister Maduro said over half the registered voters of Venezuela abroad signed a petition in support of Chavez's referendum of 2009 even though that is a lie (he would be sued in democratic countries), 90% of us actually voted against it. Also explain why the CNE has not published those results (actually, not since 2006).
Explain also how a referendum is clean if as in 2007, 10% of the votes were not counted in spite of the announce difference being 1% (it does not matter who won).
Why did the government say the paper trail is proof things work and yet the paper trail of a governor of Chavismo, of Chavez's daddy and of Aristóbulo Isturiz did not function?
Why did the governor did not go to jail for tearing to pieces that paper trail, like people from the opposition who did the same?
And then: don't tell us what so-called political scientists know. Besides, you are neither a scientist nor an intellectual.
"Man", I wouldn't leave my wallet or anything unattended next to you.
http://venezuela-europa.blogspot...ing-
system.html
there is no point in winning several states to them have Chavez take away illegally most of the powers of said states.
To take control of the ports is not to take away "most of the powers of said states." There is nothing even remotely out of the ordinary for the central government to have control of the ports. Moreover, the central government's takeover of the ports is a national policy, not a discriminatory policy against the opposition. Just as the central government has taken control of the ports in the five opposition-governed states, it has done the same in the 17 Chavista-governed states.
Of course Justin,
You cannot and will not explain what Kepler asked you to explain.As you yourself admit TO BEING " Taurus" , the bull.A bull will keep charging till his death with all the thickheaded lack of understanding that comes with the territory.
You think you can repeat a lie over and over for others to be deceived.However, There were NO fair and honest elections .Lying has become a common problem among US academics , in order to survive.Many of us would rather be poor and have a bad job than succumb to such lies.We have the peace of mind that comes with integrity as well.
http://www.mindingthecampus.com/
...i_its_hard.html
As Justin will not even acknowledge that respect for the Rule of Law is fundamental to a functioning democracy, this discussion will just go round and round. Got better things to do so chao and good luck Kepler Firepig and Tank with those characters.
http://www.mindingthecampus.com/
...i_its_hard.html
Charly, you are right, complete waste of time.
Justin, I got tired. I stop bothering with you. Go finish your PhD. Yeah, "political scientists"...en mi jardín hay mejores especialistas en ciencias políticas.
Se llaman lechugas.
You're grasping at straws, folks. You can't argue that Venezuela is not a democracy on account of the fact that Chavez and his ministers sometimes make erroneous or unpleasant statements. Democracy is not defined according to the words that emanate from the mouths of statesmen. Democracy is defined according to whether there are institutions in place for political actors to compete freely and fairly. Those institutions exist within Venezuela, so it is time for the opposition to start acting like democrats and offering concrete policy proposals so that your fellow citizens can make up their own minds about what they think you have to offer. Period.
Now, as for the final vote tally for the defeated 2007 referendum, Kepler is once again grasping at straws. Even Primero Justicia has stated that they found no inconsistencies with CNE results. You're obviously in desperation mode if your so-called example of an unclean election is the one that the opposition won! Give it up, fella.
The bottom line is that all your ranting and raving about Chavismo deflects attention from the fact that the opposition has no concrete political proposals for the country.
OK, I do this last time: I wrote in Ccs about that error by PJ. I tell you an inside story (not that I belong to PJ, but I know a lot of people who took part in the election checking). I know it is an anecdote.
PJ and the rest only had a fraction of the actas.
They were enough to show a lot was going wrong, but also that they did not have them all.
Why?
1- no resources
2- very bad organization (which is the oppo's fault)
3- it is extremely dangerous in a country with so many guns around (murder rate of 75 per 100000 makes bloody Mexico "secure") and Chavista thugs.
The oppo left people including relatives of mine, defending votes in the most dangerous places and did not go to pick them up or the actas ever. Most of those people simply left when the schols closed and took the actas home.
Now, I once also was defending votes in Tocuyito, one of the most densily populated areas of Carabobo. That was for the Firmazo. It was scary. We had in front of us motorizados showing their guns and threatening us. When the actas were ready, we took them in one car, two Chavista cars going after us. We gave the actas and fake actas to 4 other cars waiting for us somewhere we had agreed earlier and so the Chavistas had no clue which car to follow and attack. It was a dangerous moment.
This has got much worse since 2003.
We simply have hardly witnesses in those places. I talked to several people in PJ in 2007. They told me they felt the best was to accept the results "because we won and if we went for it we would get a dangerous situation and
anyway, it would show we were missing a lot of actas (from the places we could not cover for security reasons, resources or lack of organization)
I told them the results were going to haunt us and they did.
Anyway, you did not explain how a country can have 1% of difference only and 10% of missing votes in areas that are the most Chavistas of all and yet the counting is stopped.
You did not tell me what worth is a paper trail in Venezuela.
Just this:
Justin,
I know "movements" are composed of people and there is no such thing as a saintly "process".
Institutions are made up of people and those in Venezuela are absolutely filthy, completely filthy. They were very dirty before, but they are more rotten than ever.
In general I distrust any political party. I know most politicians are profiteers. Now, I would never ever defend any political group and count only a fraction of the skeletons they have in their drawers just because I am closer to their belief. There is something which is is called ethics and that something forces me to say something is a murder when it is a murder and something is fraud if it is fraud.
You are behaving like those from the Opus dei who still say the Catholic church is never in fault, it is only "some people in that church", never the institution
Once again, the bottom line is that people like Kepler keep up the fiction that Venezuela lacks free elections because they want to deflect attention from the fact that they have no concrete political proposals for the country.
Why can't you evolve, folks?
In the wake of Chavez's presidential victory in 2006, Teodoro Petkoff was mature enough to admit the legitimacy of Chavez's victory. Why can't you just take a hint from Petkoff and move forward, folks? It is time for you to accept the will of the Venezuelan people and to play by the basic rules of democracy.
If you want to develop a viable opposition, you're gonna have to start engaging in debate about the issues rather than screaming "fraud" for time immemorial.
Justin, the supposed "45%" of the population count as well.
I expressed very clearly about the paper trail, which did not function even to Chavez Senior.
A Chavez governor tore his to pieces and nothing happened to him, several oppos did the same and went to prison.
You claim "fiction", but you do not address the very concrete data I have given you and also about Maduro. When a head of an institution lies through the teeth you say that is just a detail and institutions are fine in Venezuela.
I understand you are bad in maths, but anyone knowing a little bit of statistics knows what it means to declare 1% difference fine if 10% of the votes are unaccounted and they are from vastly-pro CHavez areas.
Once more the bottom line is you are living in a fantasy world like the people before you who thought Stalin and Hitler, Pinochet and many others were fine.
End of conversation.
I agree not to argue facts with Justin: a waste of time.
I am preparing a rather long comment that will analyze his behavior , to be posted in another moment.
What a drag, discussing with this guy.What scares me though is that there are quite a few like him here in USA;They are a dime a dozen.
"Once again, the bottom line is that people like Kepler keep up the fiction that Venezuela lacks free elections "
I'd say elections are free, but not as fair as they could be. Chavez blatantly uses state resources to his advantage. Chavez is clearly still very popular so he may have won anyway. Heck, he even won the 'term limit' referendum despite that being an unpopular idea. Why? He made it a plebiscite on his rule and harnessed his popularity to it.
That being said, Justin do you support Chavez's moves since the referendum?
...and yes, the fraud decisions is pretty stale and the evidence largely unconvincing. Moving on is a good hat tip...
That being said, Justin do you support Chavez's moves since the referendum?
My philosophy is that it's not my place to pass judgement about every move the Chavez government makes. The notion that those of us in Europe or the United States are somehow in a position to micro-manage the politics of Venezuela is a vestige of the imperial mindset. These are questions for Venezuelans --not Americans and Europeans-- to settle.
I'm interested in the bigger picture of the process by which Venezuelans settle their political differences. What the Venezuelans on this blog need to realize is that they're never going to make for a healthy Venezuelan politics by running to the outside world every time they don't get their way. If these folks want to effect policy in their country, they need to act in the manner of real democrats who engage their own populace about what kind of a future they would like to see for their country.
Justin: Amen!
Tor, answer to the concrete statements I pointing at in this thread (1%, 10%, false statements, refusal to publish votes of Venezuelans abroad, paper trail not working, oppo not having the actas)
Justin,
With Americans I suppose you mean "US Americans", right?
Justin, no wonder you have problem..you wrote:
"My philosophy is that it's not my place to pass judgement about every move the Chavez government makes. The notion that those of us in Europe or the United States are somehow in a position to micro-manage the politics of Venezuela is a vestige of the imperial mindset."
Placing a judgment is not automatically followed by micro managing, yet putting the 2 together in this sequence, gives an impression that you have a valid reason not to answer because by answering you would be micro managing which you claim you do not do.
This sort of error in logic or manipulation does not allow for a true dialogue.
One might speculate if you do this on purpose or if you do it unconsciously...my guess is that it is a combination of both.
Charly, Justin is manipulating again. Observe:
"they need to act in the manner of real democrats who engage their own populace about what kind of a future they would like to see for their country"
While this is true, we are not able to do that properly at this moment due to fear,oppression, depression, surviving daily with high crime levels, and the fact that the opposition is not united into one single party.When Justin ignores the sequence of events in their proper place he manipulates data and image.
Everyday it is getting harder and harder for the opposition to concentrate on anything but getting rid of a dictatorship and mere survival.
The other fallacy is the belief that a plan will convince the popular classes, who according to Chavistas, more represent Chavez.
This shows a total lack of knowledge of how Venezuelans think and feel- especially those in the barrios.Barrio folk are more swayed by primal emotions.Just look at the fact that a golpista won their hearts before there was even any mention of a so called plan.There was only a goal.
Charly do not let yourself be manipulated by the likes of Justin.Think first. He places true statements in the middle of a mind game...... and he will never talk straight to any of us.
It is a shame that more people interested in politics do not know more about human behavior, after all human behavior is behind everything that politics represent.Why do people think and act as they do?
One of the most important phenomena in behavioral politics is the psychological defense mechanism of identifying with the enemy.This is seen in a greater or lesser degree where FEAR becomes the single most driving force in a given time frame.
Take US politics for example.I mention this because Justin is from USA.Being a citizen of USA in the context of world politics definitely has its difficulties.As we have engaged in unpopular wars, and especially after 9/11,many citizens have become fearful of our enemies, which has only increased with time due to hate rhetoric.
Not everyone reacts in the same way to fear.Some retaliate, some deny, some make a self centered plan to capitalize on fear, others support retaliation, some involve themselves in recreation fantasy,some isolate themselves, and some become depressed.However the most dangerous defense is the one of identifying with the enemy ( hiding from self and others) to avoid retaliation.
I will explain more later... but we all have a defense.It is my definite impression however that Justin and others like him are attempting to eliminate fear through hiding true motives.How do I see this? It is simple: by observing his patterns of thought and reaction.
More later.
"The notion that those of us in Europe or the United States are somehow in a position to micro-manage the politics of Venezuela is a vestige of the imperial mindset."
Just asking for an opinion as the basis for an healthy debate on the issues. Nothing imperialist about that. Even if we want to, we're not micro-managing anything from this blog :p
"Tor, answer to the concrete statements I pointing at in this thread (1%, 10%, false statements, refusal to publish votes of Venezuelans abroad, paper trail not working, oppo not having the actas)"
Do you think this made a material difference in the vote? What you point to is not ideal, but hardly enough to make the election be considered 'not free'. Fair? Well, that is a different story.
While this is true, we are not able to do that properly at this moment due to fear,oppression, depression, surviving daily with high crime levels, and the fact that the opposition is not united into one single party.
If you're depressed about the poor state of the opposition's leadership and the lack of political unity in your ranks, try doing something about it, my dear. Don't come running to the United States --in the manner of a traditional comprador class-- because you folks can't get your political act together. You'll never see me run to another country for help because the U.S. Left is small and disorganized and has very little influence on the political process here. For U.S. leftists like myself, our marginalization is a problem that we have to take responsibility for and work to change through painstaking political work among our fellow citizens. The same holds true for the Venezuelan opposition. Don't come running to the United States to bail you out of a political mess that you made for yourselves. It's time for you to take some responsibility for the situation in which you find yourselves.
And I'm sorry, dear, but Venezuela's crime rate is not holding you back from engaging in politics. On that score, I invite you to take another cue from Teodoro Petkoff.
The other fallacy is the belief that a plan will convince the popular classes, who according to Chavistas, more represent Chavez.
Barrio folk are more swayed by primal emotions. Just look at the fact that a golpista won their hearts before there was even any mention of a so called plan.There was only a goal.
Such sterotypes and defeatism are emblematic of the deap-seated classism that has been so damaging to the Venezuelan opposition.
Firstly, these "barrio folk" constitute a very large percentage of Venezuela's population. To abandon the barrios would be to abandon democracy altogether. Democracy involves majority-rule, my dear. To build a political majority, you have to make inroads into the barrios.
Welcome to the politics of 21st Century Venezuela.
Moreover, it is a fallacy that the opposition can't make inroads into the barrios. One need look no further than Petare to see that, when Chavistas fail to combat crime or collect garbage, the opposition can make inroads into the barrios. The opposition is never going to have majority support in the barrios, but it will have to make some inroads into them if it ever seeks to win.
Just asking for an opinion as the basis for an healthy debate on the issues.
The notion of a "healthy debate" presupposes that we sitting here in the United States and Europe have sufficient information to reach well-informed opinions about every move the Chavez government makes. Having studied U.S. press coverage of Latin America, I've come to the realization that there is so much selection bias with regard to which facts and interpretations are presented to us (and which are not) that the very notion that U.S. citizens can engage in a "heathy debate" about a country like Venezuela is rather questionable.
I doubt very seriously that Europe is all that different.
Tor,
Definitely I think Chavez won the last referendum.
He also won in 2004 and 2006. Still, Chavez has tampered with results a lot, enough to influence future votes. And that is for me enough.
Lukashenko could win without twisting results but if suddenly he would get "just 60", a snowball would start to roll. Same thing in Venezuela with results that go below 52%.
Luka needs at least 80%, Chavez at least 60%, even if they get more than 50%.
Is that free? Well, be it, it is far from kosher and this tinkering has consequences for the next elections.
Lukashenko could win without twisting results but if suddenly he would get "just 60", a snowball would start to roll. Same thing in Venezuela with results that go below 52%.
Luka needs at least 80%, Chavez at least 60%, even if they get more than 50%.
First of all, Kepler has zero evidence to back up his claims of vote-tampering in Venezuela. Secondly, the notion that voters are Pavlovian dogs who go whichever way the wind blows is really quite silly. There is no evidence to indicate that a closer vote will affect future votes. Kepler's poorly substantiated argument is based upon the belief that there is such a thing as a "bandwagon effect," whereby the perception of political movement in one direction or another will cause more and more people to move in that direction. This belief stretches into both the Chavista and opposition camps and causes both sides' pollsters to tilt their polls in favor of their respective sides in hopes that they can generate a bandwagon effect. However, more recent studies suggest that the "bandwagon effect" may actually be a myth; there is no conclusive evidence that the perception of movement in one political direction causes voters to move in that direction.
"has zero evidence to back up his claims of vote-tampering in Venezuela."
What is for you "non-zero evidence"?
That you personally plus Noam Chomsky and the Carter Centre go to Venezuela and find a group of Chavistas you personally know forcing people to vote for Chavez by pointing at the with a Kalashnikov?
Or that the Carter Center now declares so?
I particularly would like to know what proofs beyond the Carter Centre there could be.
As for the EU, you can see in the link I gave you 'the truth about EU observers" the kind of "observation work" they carried out.
"that the very notion that U.S. citizens can engage in a "heathy debate" about a country like Venezuela is rather questionable."
there are lots of local sources available online; both government and anti-government. As long as you can read spanish we can access almost everything that locals can.
Justin,
"Such sterotypes and defeatism are emblematic of the deap-seated classism that has been so damaging to the Venezuelan opposition."
Reality is never defeatism.Only reality can help us go forward into a goal.
Calling a truth a stereotype is not true because we say so.
It is a truism that most people in general react more to primal emotions than to ideas.Emotions are the rogue elephants of a 3 brained being .
While it is true that the intellectual center can control an emotion with great difficulty, and it is the only center that can control emotions,it is however far more difficult when people are not well educated.Even most well educated people , though they think they are being rational, are swayed more by primal emotion.
Many people think they vote more with their heads, but in reality it is feeling that predominates.
It shows me that you do not live in Venezuela.Venezuelans are even more prone to vote with their emotions than some other folks of some other countries....but all in all, it is a human condition to do so.
There are many reasons for this.One good book( and easy to read) on this subject is:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Politica...g/dp/
1586484257
I will explain later, how many who think they are ruled by ideas are only identifying with the enemy through fear, though it is likely unconscious.
If we convince the enemy that we think like him, then maybe, just maybe we won't be attacked.Those who reason this way of course do not do it consciously.
It is interesting to ponder on how this is influencing many US Americans prone to support Chavez who just happens to hate our country.It is not normal or healthy to support someone who hates one's own country, yet some do.
This coupled with the emotional pressure of being in the IN group that considers itself progressive or something of this nature, makes powerful self destructive politics in the name of 'only trying to improve us'.
I wonder how many people would be truly progressive if the name were changed to "Safe Choices".Even if the ideas were progressive, the name alone would deter most from identifying.It would take a very independent person to go for that one.
Unfortunately those whose tendencies run in the above way are very far from independent.
Justin and Richard have been spot on in this debate. Why do the super-rich deserve a louder voice than anyone else in society? Why do they deserve to undemocratically sway the opinions of the population?
The undemocratically inclined revert to form in this debate, and it is no surprise that they bow down to US imperial terrorism and its pathological economic program.
In the end analysis it is about power and social class--and the perks that some enjoy. Real democracy puts the fear of dog into them--and they simply can't debate these issues with a level of integrity to where the debate actually moves us all along.
Of course, these same folk won't waste much time bemoaning the millions
murdered as a function of the corporate/state nexus and its warped, necrophilic and racist ambitions.
s
Justin, I wish you would pay a bit more attention to Haiti, and Obama's pathetic, anti-democratic program toward that island nation. The Huffington 'left' in this country certainly shows its limits with respect to this issue.
Hi, Slave was just a couple of months ago an Obama lover, he has fallen out of love rather fast.
Justin says:
"Kepler has zero evidence to back up his claims of vote-tampering in Venezuela."
I would like to point out to the audience( if there is one) that when Chavez supporters demand proof they often ask for the kind of definitive paper proof that Chavez continually suppresses and eliminates.Even when there is some documented proof,or circumstantial evidence, Chavistas will call them all lies despite strong evidence.....
Perhaps if Justin lived in Venezuela he would see the proof with his only living eyes, which is far better than his deluded belief system .
This is a tactic being used all over the world by the unscrupulous .
Two things:
1) Justin, would you refer to a male debater as "my dear" in an attempt to condescend to them, or are you really that sexist?
2) Slave said "Why do the super-rich deserve a louder voice than anyone else in society? Why do they deserve to undemocratically sway the opinions of the population?"
I agree. So why do those who have become very rich off of following Chavez deserve to undemocratically sway the opinions of the population (through massive propagandistic television media, using public funds to paper Caracas with advertisements about how great Chavez is, etc.)?
Look, I think the opposition is as pathetic as Justin does. And I fully agree with him when he states that the opposition needs to focus its energies on connecting with the poor masses, as opposed to just railing against Chavez all day. But there are two things I can't wrap my head around:
1) How people Justin and Slave Revolt fail to see the obvious authoritarian tendencies and policies of the Chavez administraiton.
2) How vociferously they support Chavez, as if he is some important historical actor for the left.
He is an signifi ant historical figure.
Indeed, brave enough to call out the US on it's terrorism.
Eric, you through out nebulous terms, but what really matters is what the Venezuelan people think. Your program of imperialism, Eric, is being rejected.
It is not Chavez that is your problem--it's the popular classes that have your panties twisted.
Slave,
How did US imperialism exploit the Venezuelan masses before Chavez, and how is Chavez correcting that?
Eric,
They know that Chavez is authoritarian yet they lie about it....isn't that obvious ? The facts are as plain as day but they insist they are not true.The problem is they do not care if he is authoritarian because they identify with him emotionally.
Engaging the barrios is a must, but manipulating them like Chavez does is one of the cruelest manifestations of political power I have yet seen.
Engaging the barrios is to empower people not to create more dependence.Cleaning up the crime would be a good start.
I used to live in Los Frailes de Catia back in the 70's when there was much less crime and many people back then had hopes and means.When the illegal Colombians starting moving in, and crime escalated during the 80's people started losing their energy.My Aunt lost her house because she was too afraid to stay and even afraid to go back to claim the house.Now with Chavez crime is off the charts.Few people can live like that and improve their situation.
It is silly and deceptive to talk about the barrios without totally understanding this.
Right firepigette, "manipulating" the barrios, partly through social programs, is so much worse than just ignoring them entirely like the final 4th Republic governments did.
And give me a break, that's one of the cruelest manifestations of power you have seen? Are you blind? Genocide in Sudan, a war of aggression in Iraq, starving the entire population of North Korea, etc. etc. etc.
I don't agree with the propaganda of Chavismo, but your characterization of it is far from reasonable.
1) Justin, would you refer to a male debater as "my dear" in an attempt to condescend to them, or are you really that sexist?
Might I remind you, Eric, that you've yet to actually contest one substantive point I've made in this discussion. If I've offended you by calling a woman with very child-like arguments "dear," I apologize to you, but I must say that the weakness of your approach becomes very transparent when the best that you can do is nitpick over trivial matters that have nothing to do with the crux of my arguments.
there are two things I can't wrap my head around:
1) How people Justin and Slave Revolt fail to see the obvious authoritarian tendencies and policies of the Chavez administraiton.
The problem with a sweeping statement to the effect that the Chavez government has "obvious authoritarian tendencies" is that your argument lacks specifics. I don't like dealing in generalities. I like dealing in specifics. If you consider some set of policies to be "authoritarian," I expect you to specify which policies you consider to fit that label. Then, and only then, can we begin to discuss your points by contextualizing them and putting them into comparative perspective.
2) How vociferously they support Chavez, as if he is some important historical actor for the left.
Once again, I like dealing in specifics, not generalities. Naturally, I have my own opinions about Venezuelan politics (and most certainly consider Chavez an important historical actor for the left), but if you actually read this thread carefully, you'll see that I haven't made one statement of advocacy for the Chavez government within the thread. That's just not what the discussion has been about. So for you to pass my points off as "vociferous" support for the Chavez government suggests to me that you're not reading very carefully.
Justin, I have been so specific here.
Let's turn it around: have you seen any authoritarian policy by Chavez or any unfair way of manipulating elections apart from excessive use of government resources for propaganda?
Please explain.
No, forget it, Justin. You have no decency whatsoever. I have asked you very specifically about irregularities that are serious and you said nothing.
Chavez ministers declaring live any state employee would be sacked? Nothing. PDVSA's president declaring what he said? Nothing. Police protecting marches of Chavistas to the very centre of Caracas but that area forbidden for even a dozen anti-Chavistas, nothing (if you say "what is the evidence, FUCK OFFFFFF, learn Spanish and look for it yourself or have a thousand relatives live in Venezuela)
Es realmente un sujeto abyecto.
All those fucking laws passed through the Assembly are a violation of people's rights.
Nothing.
I don't waste my time anymore with that silly bourgeois eternal student of "political science". Intellectual, yeah...intellectual Bush, intellectual my cactus.
there are lots of local sources available online; both government and anti-government. As long as you can read spanish we can access almost everything that locals can.
But you can never understand Venezuelan politics in the same way that Venezuelans do without spending some time there. That became immediately obvious to me when I spent some time there in 2004 and 2005. Only by spending time in Venezuela does it become completely obvious that the notion that Venezuelans can't freely debate the issues is completely ludicrous. I can walk up to any kiosk in Caracas and have my pick of a wide spectrum of newspapers, most of which are rabidly anti-Chavista. That's more than I can say about the United States, where there is nothing in the way of ideological variety on your average newspaper stand. (In fact, there is hardly such a thing as a newspaper stand here nowadays).
Nevertheless, one could hardly glean this basic observation from what we read about Venezuela (in either Spanish or English). The level of hysteria in both U.S. and Venezuelan papers would lead one to believe that anti-Chavista journalism is some sort of quasi-clandestine activity that Big Bad Hugo is progressively stamping out with each passing year. It is precisely because of such a level of misinformation that people outside Venezuela will tend to have little to contribute to the discussion about the country's politics.
I have asked you very specifically about irregularities that are serious and you said nothing.
Actually, Kepler, your so-called examples are usually so incoherent that they don't merit discussion.
Chavez ministers declaring live any state employee would be sacked?
Well, this is the first time I've seen you bring up such a case. I would agree that, when PDVSA's president threatened to fire people who didn't vote for Chavez, he engaged in an authoritarian act. But what I also recall was that he came under criticism from certain sectors of Chavismo for making the threat. The bottom line is that the ballot is still secret, so it was really an idle threat. I certainly don't agree with the threat, but one can't extrapolate from an isolated authoritarian act that the government has generally "authoritarian tendencies." To establish that the government has generally "authoritarian tendencies" would require the demonstration of a much more widespread pattern of behavior.
Police protecting marches of Chavistas to the very centre of Caracas but that area forbidden for even a dozen anti-Chavistas
Well, I don't know the specifics of the case, but what I do know is that the Venezuelan opposition has very little problem organizing marches provided that it gets a permit beforehand. In fact, I would go so far as to say that the Venezuelan opposition has more freedom than the U.S. anti-war movement in how it goes about its marches. In the United States, the cops corral protesters into areas where they can't disturb traffic. Do we call the U.S. government "authoritarian" on account of that fact? No. Thus, if we put the matter into comparative perspective, I very seriously doubt we could justify calling the Chavez government "authoritarian" on account of how it deals with protests.
All those fucking laws passed through the Assembly are a violation of people's rights.
Well, you're gonna have to be a little more specific, Kepler.
Ow,
Oil production and export discussed for the nth time:
http://www.eluniversal.com/2009/
...m_1403039.shtml
the comment section of this blog is completly decoupled from ow or Flanker posting new entries.
If there is nothing new elsewhere on the internet, one can allways be sure that there is a bunch of new comment postings on oilwars.
Justin, "I can walk up to any kiosk in Caracas and have my pick of a wide spectrum of newspapers, most of which are rabidly anti-Chavista"
What difference does it make if we have Some freedom to rant and rave, when Chavez has the power and uses it to do whatever?When I lived in the barrios the only newspaper people would read( out of lack of education and habit) was "Ultimas Noticias"Most of it was sensational.Not much real news.You could put a million normal newspapers for free at their doorsteps and they would go unread, and Chavez knows that very very well.
Freedom of speech is not freedom of ranting and raving, it is the freedom that your speech can make a difference.
Chavez is the cruelest I have seen- I did not compare him to any other country: I speak of Venezuela only.
As for proof, you need to live in Venezuela to really have it.You cannot have it coming from your gringo mindset and living only a short time in a country so different from your mindset that there is no hope for you to understand.There are even many gringos who live their forever but remain only gringos because it takes a special desire and love to adapt to others.
Most of my proof consists of knowing thousands of people intimately , having myself lived there the first years of his regime, and experiencing how it controls the situation.The proofs are too numerous to document on a blog.They are also too intimate to give names for police perusal.This is how Chavez gets away with his psychological murder and mayhem...he has woven a web of lies like an invisible net creating a canopy over our beloved country, and those idiotic US Americans and Europeans who find themselves looking for the wrong kind of attention, put their noses where they have no business, in order to look for Kudos by joining the bandwagons of the far and extreme left who wish to impose an ideology and not a well workable system.
What difference does it make if we have Some freedom to rant and rave, when Chavez has the power and uses it to do whatever?
Actually, you have total freedom to rant and rave, and it makes a huge difference. It means that you have the means to participate in civic life and proselytize on behalf of an alternative political project. If you instead decide to abandon any kind of constructive dialogue and scream hysterically into your microphones that you have no freedom of speech (a contradiction in terms), don't be surprised when most Venezuelans turn their back on you.
When I lived in the barrios the only newspaper people would read( out of lack of education and habit) was "Ultimas Noticias"Most of it was sensational.Not much real news.You could put a million normal newspapers for free at their doorsteps and they would go unread, and Chavez knows that very very well.
First off, Ultimas Noticias is actually owned by anti-Chavistas. The paper runs both pro-Chavista and anti-Chavista commenaries in its op-ed page, so you can't tell me that people who read Ultimas Noticias don't have access to anti-Chavista perspectives. They do. (In fact, I've picked up editions of Ultimas Noticias in which most of the commentaries in the op-ed page were anti-Chavista.) Of course, the paper's news pages are more sympathetic to the government, but that's because the market to which Ultimas Noticias caters is more sympathetic to Chavismo. Almost all the rest of the country's newspapers cater to a non-poor, anti-Chavista market.
The bottom line is that the opposition has ample means to get out its message. To the extent that people decide that the opposition's message doesn't resonate with them, that's called freedom of choice. In a democracy, you have the freedom to proselytize on behalf of this or that political project and to decide which political messages make sense to you and which do not.
I think it is you who displays a genuinely authoritarian temperment, firepigette. Your strange view of "democracy" is that the people must concur with everything you say in order for the society to qualify as a "democracy." If they don't concur with your viewpoints, the people are brainwashed and "democracy" is no more. No doubt Pinochet would have agreed with your rather odd conception of "democracy."
Justine,
In a slum you are beaten up if you express your ideas opposing Chavez. I have relatives living in slums. Actually, the thugs of each slum - the ones with the guns and the ones who have killed one or more - are mostly very much Chavez supporters (as well as honest but gullible people) and they have all under their control.
If you go there as a gringo who is with the robolucion you will be welcome by those thugs and they will protect you.
Go otherwise, even as a typical Venezuelan.
You really need to improve your Spanish. The vast majority of comments in Ultimas Noticias in the printed version is very pro-Chavez. You assume every slum family has Internet access.
Also: try to be frank for once in your life. In what cities and towns did you "live in the slums"? List them all unless they are so many.
Chavismo lost in very poor Petare and then they started to "redefine" Petare and put it outside the very municipio, Petarenos turned out to be "bourgeois".
In Miguel Pena, a huge and much poorer slum in
Valencia (half a million people) you don't have any Globovision (but for a couple with cable, but really less than 1%) and yet 41% voted now against the reform (it was actually near 50% in 2007 and in 2007 there were less strangely unreported centres, see esdata for exquisite details on where the centres were that were not counted for)
Hey guys, don't you have anything better to do than go back and forth knowing full well that the other party is not listening and will not change?
"and those idiotic US Americans and Europeans who find themselves looking for the wrong kind of attention, put their noses where they have no business"
Tell that to FOX news, El Pais, Washington Post, EU parlament etc etc.
The oppos cheer when Chavez is bashed by foreigners.
Chavismo lost in very poor Petare
False. Chavismo lost in the broader Municipio of Sucre, of which Petare is a part. If you actually look at the votes from Petare itself, I guarantee you that you will find that the Chavista candidate won Petare. I've examined a Datanalisis poll from the eve of the election. Chavismo lost Sucre because something on the order of 85 percent of the middle and upper strata (strata A, B and C) supported the opposition candidate. Conversely, about 65 percent of the poorer strata (D and E) in Sucre supported the Chavista candidate. If you do the math, you'll see that it's pretty much impossible that the opposition candidate could have won Petare.
In what cities and towns did you "live in the slums"?
You're obviously confusing me with somebody else. I never said I lived in the slums. I've visited Petare, Santa Cruz del Este and La Vega, but I've certainly never lived in the slums of Caracas. What I can tell you is that, on the day of the 2005 municipal elections in Santa Cruz del Este, I saw the Tupamaros and the minority opposition folks conversing and going about their business in peace. I don't claim to speak for other barrios, but that's what I saw there on election day.
"and those idiotic US Americans and Europeans who find themselves looking for the wrong kind of attention, put their noses where they have no business"
Tell that to FOX news, El Pais, Washington Post, EU parlament etc etc.
The oppos cheer when Chavez is bashed by foreigners.
Indeed, their argument is completely incoherent. Whenever gringos parrot the opposition's talking points, these folks are lovin' it.
Eliv, One thing is to opine and report honest news and another is to stick your nose where it doesn't belong, especially to lie which is what Justine is doing.
On one hand it is a matter of degree, and on the other a matter of how one does it.
To sit here and lie through the teeth about our country is a heinous crime in my book.
The lack of humility in pretending to know what you do not know is in a class a apart.We see with our own eyes.His eyes are gringo eyes.
My mother was recently in a hospital where most of the nurses were Jamaican.Often I thought they were angry when they supposedly were not. It takes years and years to know and become part of a culture in order to really understand events, feelings, needs, and goals.
Eric,
Handouts are not jobs.They are manipulations.Handouts are great in an emergency, but not as a life plan.
Not controlling the crime is the biggest manipulation.
The level of education has been reduced to almost nothing.Another manipulation
Justine, and by the way Justine, if a news source lies, I also blame them.I hate the news sources.
Parroquia: PETARE
PETAR, NO SUCRE:
Alcaldesa o Alcalde de Municipio
CARLOS OCARIZ Adjudicado
103.402 Votos 55,80 %
JESSE CHACON
80.871 Votos 43,64 %
http://www.cne.gov.ve/divulgacio...t=00&ca=00&
v=02
Justine thinks I am like Pinochet because I said the following:
"Opposition includes left wing, moderate and right wings.
Before making ONE plan for government , we need to establish democracy first.
Then we present our various plans, and subsequently carry out honest elections with the different parties represented in the CNE, instead of just Chavistas"
Gee, I wonder if he has now lost his mind, or if he is merely lying again?
Elections have nothing to do with Pinochet who was a dictator quite similar to Chavez in his basic attitude but without the ability to project himself as an authentic so called " democrat"....
Then of course he gets a lot of help from his psf friends as well..
oh and Justin,
Classicism does not describe someone like me who married into a humble family , lives the life,becomes one with it and loves it.
Classicism describes a University Yuppy who while living in cushy lala land pretends to speak for those who don't.
Classicism describes a University Yuppy who while living in cushy lala land pretends to speak for those who don't.
And where exactly do you live, dear?
Justin,
You say you don't like to generalize.I say this to you:
Specifics exist because generalities do.So one should not be proud of using only one of these realities.We need to recognize and use both realities.
It is quite humorous to me and I rotfl, that someone could make the statement that they do not like to use generalities, because anyone saying so is making a general statement instantaneously.
There is a time and place for both and an understanding that comes with each
Justin,
I lived in Venezuela most of my life, in many different circumstances( sometime in barrios, other times not) but always among my humble family, and to me they are far happier, nicer, and more magical than anyone else.When I speak for them, I speak for myself.We are one family.
I wonder why you speak for those you do not know well, understand or are not a part of you?
It shows a superior attitude when psf's begin to preach what is best for a people they are not a part of.
Parroquia: PETARE
PETAR, NO SUCRE:
Alcaldesa o Alcalde de Municipio
CARLOS OCARIZ Adjudicado
103.402 Votos 55,80 %
JESSE CHACON
80.871 Votos 43,64 %
I'm talking about the barrios of Petare, not the middle-class residencias that are included in the Parroquia. Datanalisis already divulged the data indicating that the barrios of Petare are still predominantly Chavista. (Look at the data on stratum E).
To be sure, Chavismo is not as strong in Petare as it would like to be, and the fact that the opposition has made some inroads into the barrios speaks to some of Chavismo's weaknesses. But it is completely misleading to assert that the poor of Petare are now in the opposition camp when the votes to which you point include those of many non-poor people.
Justin,
Even if it were true that most Chavistas are among the so called poor, that does not justify Chavez becoming a dictator.
The excuse that Chavez wants to help the poor was also used in its time to justify Stalin and Mao as if that gives you a free pass to start by cutting corners , increasing authoritarianism and even after reaching a full blown dictatorship,t
they cling to the argument: " oh But he's helping the poor "
My God, how the unscrupulous and superior acting use the poor instead of really helping.
Specifics exist because generalities do.
Actually, it's the other way around, firepigette. One's generalizations are justified only to the extent that he or she can point to a pattern of specific behaviors consistent with the generalization.
Justine thinks I am like Pinochet because I said the following:
"Opposition includes left wing, moderate and right wings. Before making ONE plan for government , we need to establish democracy first.
No, actually, I think you're like Pinochet because you don't respect the outcomes of democratic elections. The Venezuelan people have spoken, and your side has lost repeatedly. It's time for you to come to terms with your own side's political failures and to engage in a constructive form of politics.
Justin,
We have lost what has been stolen.
"Actually, it's the other way around, firepigette. One's generalizations are justified only to the extent that he or she can point to a pattern of specific behaviors consistent with the generalization. "
This is correct just as it is correct the other way around.They both exist relative to each other.So I repeat, if you don't use one then you actually negate the other.There is no white without black, no hot without cold.
When you use the word" poor" you generalize quite a bit.Not only do you generalize but you do so without a clear definition.You also assume that the barrios are full of the " poor in need"
Little do you know.Some are poor in need economically,others psychologically,but some are not.I would bet my life that given a test of barrio knowledge, you would surely fail.
"Actually, it's the other way around, firepigette. One's generalizations are justified only to the extent that he or she can point to a pattern of specific behaviors consistent with the generalization. "
This is correct just as it is correct the other way around.
No, firepigette. Facts alway precede generalities. Facts can confirm generalities, but generalities cannot confirm facts. This is Social Science 101.
Gee,That may be so, but still generalities exist.
if social science 101 says so, it must be true, right?
I rest my case, on this last telltale gaff of yours.
You are a university yuppy waanabe revolutionist, who can't think outside 101.
First of all we were not arguing which comes first we were basically arguing the existence of both specifics and generalities.They mutually depend on each other.
Perhaps Einstein would not have written the GENERAL theory of relativity if he had limited himself to specifics first.
He had a general idea and then researched the specific components to confirm it.
In holistic thinking one often grasps the entirety before one looks at the specifics.The 2 are intertwining, simultaneous levels of reality.
oh and Justin,
So think twice before you say :
" Once again, I like dealing in specifics, not generalities. "
This basically means you like to ignore half of what is real.
First of all we were not arguing which comes first we were basically arguing the existence of both specifics and generalities. They mutually depend on each other.
No, they do not mutually depend on each other. A generality depends upon a specific set of facts. Facts do not depend upon the hypothesis of a generality.
They do not exist without each other, therefore they are simultaneous.
Oh and forgot to say,.I was being kind when I said you ignored 1/2 of reality.
The truth is, that since both generality and specificality exist simultaneously,otherwise the specifics could not be generalized nor could the general be broken down into specifics:
So when you ignore one, you actually ignore the truth of the other, meaning that you are 100 % out of reality.
Justin....get out of your 101's...live in the real world.Spend some time living in Venezuelan barrios.....maybe it will knock some sensE into your head.
Let me help you clarify: I know it's hard for you:
What comes first is a function of sequence.
Multiple Actions are in sequence, concepts are not.
Unfortunately, firepigette, you lack not only basic reading comprehension but also a basic understanding of the scientific method.
One need look no further than the example you give of Einstein to demonstrate that you're contradicting yourself.
You write:
He (Einstein) had a general idea and then researched the specific components to confirm it.
Notice that Einstein does not look to his general idea to confirm the specific components. No, he looks to the specific components to confirm his general idea. Get it? The general idea and specific components do not "mutually depend" upon one another. Generalities depend upon specifics, not the other way around.
The point is they are simultaneous, whether or not something is discovered first or not,and depending on the way one's thinking processes work, they might be discovered first or not.But discovery and existence are not the same.
Most visionaries look first to the large picture and then work their way backwards.
Others might attempt to find the large picture through analyzing or accumulating data from the specifics....but any one who cannot see that the 2 are mutually dependent,and have to exist simultaneously cannot grasp the fundamental nature of reality.
When Einstein said:
"Imagination is more important than knowledge.
he said it all: That for him the vision comes first.The method second.
The point is they are simultaneous, whether or not something is discovered first or not,and depending on the way one's thinking processes work, they might be discovered first or not.
To say that generalities and specifics are simultaneous is to say nothing at all. The whole point here is that a generality can be mistaken or misleading. The only way we can seek to determine if a generality does or does not distort or oversimplify an issue is by looking at the relevant facts.
Of course a generality can be mistaken or misleading, and so can a specific.
As we see here on this blog, people are not agreeing on the specific facts.
But I suspect that social science 101 , asks people to refrain from generalizations so they can keep us politically correct.I mean if a large percentage of whites are committing crimes , we wouldn't want to offend them would we.
And if we stick to specifics, then what meaning does just one white have in the scheme of things
Now if ANYONE SAYS that a large percentage of barrio people are not educated enough to understand the underpinnings of the Chavez government, it would be considered by a US AMERICAN social scientist, an over generalization....yet how many are willing or capable to prove this by studying each and every case?And how can you know that the subjects of the study are telling the truth and not just saying what they consider most convenient.
Yet, when it comes to knowing what the barrio people need in general, there are a thousand so called expert voices generalizing.
Now if ANYONE SAYS that a large percentage of barrio people are not educated enough to understand the underpinnings of the Chavez government, it would be considered by a US AMERICAN social scientist, an over generalization....yet how many are willing or capable to prove this by studying each and every case?
My own sense is that relatively few Venezuelans --whether formally educated or not-- form their opinions of the Chavez government on the basis of some theoretical abstraction about whether the Chavez government is "authoritarian" or not. Rather, the real motives behind most Venezuelans' political inclinations have to do with their perceptions about how Chavismo affects their social position within Venezuelan society.
The lower-class base of Chavismo supports the government because the base perceives that the government improves their social position within Venezuelan society.
Conversely, the middle and upper-class base of the opposition tends to use the charge of "authoritarianism" against Chavez as a form of subterfuge that disguises the opposition's primary motives. The primary motive of the middle and upper-class base of the opposition is to extricate a perceived threat to their own social position within Venezuelan society. This has nothing to do with democracy.
If it was really "authoritarianism" that the opposition was so concerned about, how exactly do you explain why so many of the readers of the Caracas Chronicles adore a truly authoritarian figure, Alvaro Uribe? The threats that Alvaro Uribe poses to Colombian journalists, human rights activists and trade unionists make Hugo Chavez look like a choir boy by comparison. So how exactly can you folks explain the fact that, as of less than a year ago, Alvaro Uribe was the favorite foreign leader of the supposedly "anti-authoritarian" readers of the Caracas Chronicles (most of whom are obviously middle to upper-class Venezuelans)?
What a Starbuck socialist you are!
Actually, many of those who voted for Obama did so because they thought he would be NOT AS BAD as Bush, not because they support his politics.
But I know, that is too complex for Kepler to understand.
Tosh | 05.21.09 - 1:08 pm | #
US progressives should take up Kepler's challenge to oppose Obama's retrograde policies, his war in "Afpak" built around lies regarding 9/11, his false dichotomy between "combat" and "non combat" troops in Iraq, (A US soldier by definition is a "combat troop") and Obama's talking about leaving 55,000 of them after the "combat troops" depart from what he once called an illegal intervention.
The power of the Israel Lobby has to be taken on too. Obama hints he'd like to loosen their grip. If that's true he needs all the help he can get. It was B. Obama who warned his following that he needed them to hold his feet to the fire. Why? Regardless of whatever his true intentions might be the system, the lobbies, the permanent government, the old boys, the media and the 45% ragingingly ignorant US public are a lot to go up against.
Why on earth those /$ kids allways try to sell a discussion package Venezuela/Colombia?
why so many of the readers of the Caracas Chronicles adore a truly authoritarian figure, Alvaro Uribe?
Why not discuss Venezuela in context with Brazil or Chile, which also have left leaning Governments that are moderate, though?
In Colombia there is a civil war raging for 50 years or so. You simply can't compare the 2 countries. Uribes popularity inside and outside of Colombia is only understandable before that background.
What a Starbuck socialist you are!
Actually, many of those who voted for Obama did so because they thought he would be NOT AS BAD as Bush, not because they support his politics.
But I know, that is too complex for Kepler to understand.
Tosh | 05.21.09 - 1:08 pm | #
US progressives should take up Kepler's challenge to oppose Obama's retrograde policies, his war in "Afpak" built around lies regarding 9/11, his false dichotomy between "combat" and "non combat" troops in Iraq, (A US soldier by definition is a "combat troop") and Obama's talking about leaving 55,000 of them after the "combat troops" depart from what he once called an illegal intervention.
The power of the Israel Lobby has to be taken on too. Obama hints he'd like to loosen their grip. If that's true he needs all the help he can get. It was B. Obama who warned his following that he needed them to hold his feet to the fire. Why? Regardless of whatever his true intentions might be the system, the lobbies, the permanent government, the old boys, the media and the 45% ragingingly ignorant US public are a lot to go up against.
In Colombia there is a civil war raging for 50 years or so. You simply can't compare the 2 countries. Uribes popularity inside and outside of Colombia is only understandable before that background.
Prior to Alvaro Uribe, Colombian presidents did not use their bully pulpit to explicitly attack (and thereby endanger) journalists, human rights activists and trade unionists. The zealousness with which Alvaro Uribe attacks his critics goes far far beyond what the exigencies of civil conflict demand.
So if the Venezuelan opposition was really so concerned about "authoritarianism," it certainly wouldn't cozy up to a guy like Alvaro Uribe.
US progressives should take up Kepler's challenge to oppose Obama's retrograde policies, his war in "Afpak" built around lies regarding 9/11, his false dichotomy between "combat" and "non combat" troops in Iraq, (A US soldier by definition is a "combat troop") and Obama's talking about leaving 55,000 of them after the "combat troops" depart from what he once called an illegal intervention.
I don't think Kepler could give a rat's ass about what horrors the United States is responsible for in the Middle East. Kepler is too busy aligning himself with the most retrograde of U.S.-backed elites in his own country to take his own rhetoric seriously about Obama.
Justin,
" The lower-class base of Chavismo supports the government because the base perceives that the government improves their social position within Venezuelan society."
There is some truth to that one.It is called envy, and feeding the devils- ( the devils being the negative emotions of course) and envy can be increased by hate rhetoric and lies which is what Chavez does for his own benefit.
He tells people lies to foment their hatred.That is one of the cheap shots he uses to obtain votes, besides the fear card of course
Basing a platform on envy and hatred-He should be jailed for life.
I remember, sitting on a bus a few years after Chavez and some cackling old ladies looked at me with hatred because I am white,and screamed and laughed
" we've got the power now"
Before Chavez we would have exchange stories, and share some laughs.
Justine, you are the caricature of a PSF, not more nuanced than a creationist don't touch my gun" bloke.
I know very little of the Middle East, but I probably know more about it than you about the University of New Mexico or its campus or your thesis and I have stated my opinions very clearly when I saw that relevant.
I have to go on working.
Parroquia: PETARE
PETARE, NO SUCRE:
Alcaldesa o Alcalde de Municipio
CARLOS OCARIZ Adjudicado
103.402 Votos 55,80 %
JESSE CHACON
80.871 Votos 43,64 %
And the last eferendum, in PETARE not SUCRE:
Porcentaje
SI 91864 43,52%
NO 119197 56,47%
Of course, Chavismo started to define Petare suddenly in the strangest way.
No wonder Chigüire wrote this:
http://www.elchiguirebipolar.com...ills-
90210.html
Son puros catires ricos.
I don't think Kepler could give a rat's ass about what horrors the United States is responsible for in the Middle East. Kepler is too busy aligning himself with the most retrograde of U.S.-backed elites in his own country to take his own rhetoric seriously about Obama.
Justin | Homepage | 05.26.09 - 6:58 am | #
It' s not about Kepler. It's about what our country is in the world.
So how exactly can you folks explain the fact that, as of less than a year ago, Alvaro Uribe was the favorite foreign leader of the supposedly "anti-authoritarian" readers of the Caracas Chronicles (most of whom are obviously middle to upper-class Venezuelans)?
Justin | Homepage | 05.26.09 - 2:13 am | #
oh, you mean the guy that is trying to amend the constitution so that he can run for a 3rd term?
Justin says:
"Well, I don't know the specifics of the case, but what I do know is that the Venezuelan opposition has very little problem organizing marches provided that it gets a permit beforehand."
So here is a case where he himself admits he doesn't knows specifics, yet he generalizes quite nicely"
Man this guy is confused 
Justin says:
"The problem with a sweeping statement to the effect that the Chavez government has "obvious authoritarian tendencies" is that your argument lacks specifics. I don't like dealing in generalities. I like dealing in specifics"
jajaja
Justin said:
"More evasions from Kepler and Duquenal, I see. Instead of honestly trying to answer the question of whether there's a dime's worth of difference between the Venezuelan opposition today and that of six years ago"
I will give you the difference Justin:
The Opposition is more threatened, more oppressed, and more terrified.Maybe oppression and fear mongering is not worth a dime to you, but then again you are not a democratic.
Easy folks. We are talking about an investigation and possible fine or 1-3 day suspension, based on laws already on the books. The car deal (the reason for the office raid) is far more serious but completely seperate. The capitalist media though seems intent on conflating the two issues.
Which brings us to the second and more profound issue of the relationship between an elite-owned media versus democracy. This issue deserves serious thought and deep reflection, not reliance on pithy platitudes. When you are dealing with a redistributive socialist project, and a press owned by the richest people in society, the results are as we have seen - predictably nasty. That is where ethics and responsibility would theoretically come in under neoliberal thought. But we know that in Venezuela, these niceties have come to mean absolutely nothing. When you abdicate ethics and responsibility (as Globovision clearly has) you should not be surprised that people are going to wonder why they are effectively subsidizing the broadcast of that crap to the entire country.
Neoliberal captialist doctrine says the richest and most powerful people have a right to control the information in a society. They can totally ignore all the good news and focus incessantly on the bad. That is freedom they tell us. There must be a better way. Venezuela and others are trying to find it - not by following Cuba or anyone else. There will be missteps. But for believers of social justice to defend the "rights" and "freedom" of the powerful to do whatever they would like to distort the reality to the Venezuelan people is very disturbing to me. Particularly, when that is combined with a criticism of attempts by the Chavez Government to level the playing field a tiny bit.
Man this guy is confused
Uh, if I were you, firepigette, I'd quit while you're behind.
You are literally so confused that you make assinine statements like this one:
Specifics exist because generalities do.
Given that your understanding of causality is literally backwards, you might want to consider brushing up on elementary logic before attempting to debate the issues.
For anyone who is interested, you might want to check my post today over at American Leftist about Israel, Venezuela, Bolivia and purported uranium sales to Iran
Justin, Specifics exist because generalities do, and generalities exist because specifics do.
All things are double, one against another. This means that to everything there is an opposite which makes it exist and also opposes it.
In the same way existence has to be infinite and finite at once
If you cannot see that they ARE because of a relationship, then all I can say is please remember, Taurus is an Earth sign, which means mind is practical and not theoretical,or epistemological, so don't sweat the big stuff.Over and out.
Firepigget,
они никогда не изменяют.
Kepler,
A change would be a many splendered thing and so miraculous , as now I begin to see why many would say,
" leave it up to God."
Firepig,
They are not Venezuelans, they don't vote in Venezuela, they have no influence and they are completely dishonest, as blind as the most pathetic KKK/Black Panther/Chinese nationalist/Pinochet loving/white supremacist/Stalin admiring bloke.
Kepler,
the 2 extremes form a Union in the end,
I worry about the future of our world.
thank you richard, justin and tosh. your comments are refreshing. the crew you correct needs it desparately.
Hammer,
You are so incredibly delusional, like the people who supported major thugs such as Hitler and Stalin and "minor ones" like Chavez and Mugabe.
Read the two latest posts here:
http://devilsexcrement.com/
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the new independent report that PDVSA commissioned to put to bed all the crap about 2.3 BPD production levels. They retained a British consultant called Inspectorate to crunch the numbers. The figure is 3.1, just as has been said all along. I guess the IAEA, the US Energy Department and a whole lot of media owe a big apology. I'm not holding my breath though.
Hammer,
You are so incredibly delusional, like the people who supported major thugs such as Hitler and Stalin and "minor ones" like Chavez and Mugabe.
Read the two latest posts here:
http://devilsexcrement.com/
Kepler | Homepage | 05.27.09 - 1:22 pm | #
Ludicrous that Chavez is mentioned here, but what about some other real ones like Bush, Sharon and Blair???
Guess the cat has got his tongue. Can't be a card carrying member of the "Opposition" and acknowledge their true crimes.
Ester,
Because that is why we have you here.
I have criticized them a lot in other blogs and from time to time here as well A LOT.
But as you and the other Starbuck socialists are here, I just need to focus on those you never, neither here nor anywhere else would criticize because they are part of the "good ones" in your stupidly simplistic world
Oil closed at over $63 a barrel today, and even accounting for the fact that much of Venezuela's crude is heavier, and therefore, less expensive, it continues to raise the question that I have suggested here periodically: would you rather be selling cars, PCs, flat panel televisions and other manufactured goods on the international market instead of oil?
indeed, would have you wanted to have allowed your populace to consume over the last 4-5 years, or would you have wanted to invest the funds in manufacturing that has now been rendered redundant by the global recession?
the point here is that short term and long term economic policies should not always be congruent, look at the recent GDP declines in manufacturing centers like China, Japan, Mexico and South Korea, annualized over 15% in Japan, over 20% to Mexico
long term, the ideal is a diversified economy of services, manufacturing and resources, but that doesn't mean that pouring investment into redundant facilities is a good idea, anyone who suggests that Venezuela should have been investing in manufacturing in the last 4-5 years has to answer the question: and to whom would the country be selling these goods today?
Justin: Uh, "not exposing" your plans for governance is simply anti-democratic. The whole reason for party platforms, public debates, etc. etc. is that they provide the public some means of holding political actors accountable. If you don't believe in "exposing" your plans for governance, you don't believe in democracy.
So tell me, Mini-tosh, are you calling you new messiah "anti-democratic"?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k...h?
v=kq_NjLc1s2M
Need to change the script, man or you'll lose your minion privileges.
please. miguel octavio's latest post over at the devil's excrement is sophistical trash. i dismantled it about an hour ago:
http://www.maxajl.com/?p=1262
Max, you should change the picture of the plant on your blog. It should be a poppy. You are under drug influence. Take care and grow up.
Ow, did you see now Chavez is looking for more money in Japan...again?
It is incredible, we still have oil revenues that are over 300% what we had in 1998 and Chavez has had to get into loans for so many billions!
And unlike other countries we don't export anything but oil.
Qué imbéciles estos tipos!
http://www.eluniversal.com/2009/
...a_1407047.shtml
Samán dice que Pfizer prefiere ahora importar porque es mejor negocio...pero no se pregunta porqué es mejor negocio. Realmente este tipo de parásitos cree en el culto cargo
Kepler:
that doesn't qualify as a response.
please. miguel octavio's latest post over at the devil's excrement is sophistical trash. i dismantled it about an hour ago:
I don't really see much dismantling going on.
Where are the results of the Venezuelan-Brazil cooperation? all we have so far is a bunch of stalled projects.
We would not need Brazilian money if we had saved when we had excess money.
Why are we expropriating ceramic factories and rice factories?
Why not just use that money and build more? Compete with the private sector?
Now the government"owns and runs it" but it really doesn't change much, but efficiency.. and we know the track record of the government on efficiency.
Except, when the government owns it, it doesn't have to distribute profits nor pay CEO salaries. Depending on the terms of the nationalization, the government either has an additional revenue stream or has decommodified a part of the Venezuelan economy.
As for the rice factories: when Cargill is adding flavoring and food color to get around price controls, because said controls don't allow for sufficient profits, and the government nationalizes, its going to be able to produce more rice and sell it at controlled prices.
As for Octavio's post, if you have any specific comments, let me know. The rhetorical flick of the wrist, "I don't really see much dismantling going on," isn't something I can respond to.
Justine,
In a slum you are beaten up if you express your ideas opposing Chavez.
Kepler, this is nonsense. Can you provide any backup for that statement?
I used to go around taking photos of Rosales posters in barrios all over Venezuela. There are actually many barrios that are opposition strong-holds, and even those that are very pro-Chavez are actually amazingly respectful of opponents to Chavez.
I once witnessed (and filmed) a very civil debate in 23 de Enero between pro-Chavez and anti-Chavez people. I was impressed how respectful they were of each other, and how they allowed each other to express their ideas, even though they disagreed.
Tor:
"1. How does the oil price doubling have anything to do with the decreased inequality that has taken place under Chavez?"
Increased oil prices increase governtment revenues allowing Chavez to spend more on social programs and the poor.
Indeed Tor, but the phenomenon of decreased inequality cannot be explained simply by citing increased oil prices.
With that logic you could simply explain away anything and everything the government does by saying "well, oil prices increased."
Yes, oil prices incresed, but the Chavez government made the concious decision to put more revenues into programs that would decrease inequality in society. This is something that the neoliberal free-market, free trade policies of the right have proven to NOT do. In fact, they do the opposite. Inequality usually increases with these policies.
Outstanding comment Tosh!!! So in Cuba you would say that nobody has the right to talk about the government since there is no organized opposition. If Chavez gets his way, Venezuela is heading in the same direction.
Question: would you like Venezuela to end up like Cuba? By this I mean politically and economically. Please elaborate. Thank you.
Impartial, the concept works in exactly the same way in Cuba. If you think that the government that would likely come to power if the current regime was deposed would be more beneficial to the Cuban people, then they are worth supporting. My opinion is that the kinds of policies that an anti-Castro government would put in place would actually be much worse than Castro's current regime. Again, it is the same decision. You can't just throw around your political support behind the opposition to a regime without considering what the likely impact of their policies would be.
As for Venezuela being like Cuba, not only is that a ridiculous notion, but I think Venezuela has done a great job of adopting certain things from Cuba, (such as their healthcare system, literacy programs, more participatory style democracy) while rejecting other more negative things (controlled press, limited elections, restrictions on travel, etc.)
Firepig,
They are not Venezuelans, they don't vote in Venezuela, they have no influence and they are completely dishonest, as blind as the most pathetic KKK/Black Panther/Chinese nationalist/Pinochet loving/white supremacist/Stalin admiring bloke.
That a boy Kepler! When you just can't refute their argument, just resort to a good ol' ad hominem attack like this one!
Never fails!
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the new independent report that PDVSA commissioned to put to bed all the crap about 2.3 BPD production levels. They retained a British consultant called Inspectorate to crunch the numbers. The figure is 3.1, just as has been said all along.
Ah, once again the oppo-morons are proven wrong.
I wonder if they are trying to go for a record or something?
indeed, would have you wanted to have allowed your populace to consume over the last 4-5 years, or would you have wanted to invest the funds in manufacturing that has now been rendered redundant by the global recession?
...
long term, the ideal is a diversified economy of services, manufacturing and resources, but that doesn't mean that pouring investment into redundant facilities is a good idea, anyone who suggests that Venezuela should have been investing in manufacturing in the last 4-5 years has to answer the question: and to whom would the country be selling these goods today?
Richard Estes | Homepage | 05.27.09 - 7:21 pm | #
These are interesting questions Richard. And I think OW has been totally off-base by obsessing so much about investment in manufacturing. Although it certainly is important, it is not the only intelligent use of resources.
I have tried to explain to OW that the problem with his analysis, as you also point out here, is that the MARKET where Venezuelan goods will be sold is much more important than anything else. What good does investment in manufacturing do when you don't have a feasible market in which to sell manufactured goods? I think one of the major things that OW does not understand about development is the role of markets, and world terms of trade.
However, to answer your final question, where they would sell their goods, I think Chavez has had an answer to that for a long time. However, it is not something that can happen overnight. The market is created through a process of integration and South-South cooperation, to create a bloc of nations that have control of a large enough internal market to fuel development of major industries, and to also carry weight in world negotiations to aquire better terms of trade on an international scale.
Except, when the government owns it, it doesn't have to distribute profits nor pay CEO salaries.
True, but most nationalizations have been paid at a premium and government employees assigned to run the ship still make as much as a CEO (think Rafael Ramirez.)
Also the nationalization will bring a decay in production, even if at least temporal. The track record of the efficiency of nationalizations is weak... to say the least.
Depending on the terms of the nationalization, the government either has an additional revenue stream or has decommodified a part of the Venezuelan economy.
At what cost?
The opportunity cost is extremely high, billions could have been used to develop our already lacking infrastructure if not to develop new industries.
As for the rice factories: when Cargill is adding flavoring and food color to get around price controls, because said controls don't allow for sufficient profits, and the government nationalizes, its going to be able to produce more rice and sell it at controlled prices.
Once again true, but only to an extent.
If Cargill is violating the law they should be punished, fine them.. but it doesn't justify a nationalization.
Also, price caps create deadweight loss in the economy. Private investors should be rewarded for their willingness to take risks. The government arbitrarily set up price controls that private companies cant meet in several cases. Producers are not willing to take losses on products and between CADIVI, the price controls and the inflexible labor laws the overhead costs in Venezuela are extremely high right now.
So yes, the government will take over. Produce the same amount of rice or maybe a little more by investing a lot of money that could have been invested in a project that would bring higher revenues to society.... but somehow this makes sense to you.
oh and lets not forget that the governments is financing this "acquisitions" with debt. So the opportunity cost is even higher.
Tosh the illiteracy free myth was dismantled a while ago, just like the "this government spends more on social programs than the previous ones" propaganda. In terms of GDP percentage this government spends just a little more than Caldera's government did.
On Illiteracy:
http://
frrodriguez.web.wesleyan...._Illiteracy.pdf
http://
frrodriguez.web.wesleyan....ponse_to_RW.pdf
On the social spending:
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/
20...revolution.html
http://
frrodriguez.web.wesleyan....t_to_Defend.pdf
http://www.apiur.org/inmuebles/
h...construido.html
"I'm surprised no one has mentioned the new independent report that PDVSA commissioned to put to bed all the crap about 2.3 BPD production levels. They retained a British consultant called Inspectorate to crunch the numbers. The figure is 3.1, just as has been said all along."
Link? I'm curious. We all know it is easy to get close to the 3.1 number from 2.3 by adding stuff OPEC does not count as crude that PDVSA does produce.
"Indeed Tor, but the phenomenon of decreased inequality cannot be explained simply by citing increased oil prices."
Fair. It also reflects government priorities i.e. spending more on social spending, Mercal, Missions etc. However, increased oil prices made also this extra spending possible. Oil prices gave Chavez a windfall and he spent it by distributing more to the poor.
"This is something that the neoliberal free-market, free trade policies of the right have proven to NOT do. In fact, they do the opposite."
It doesn't have much to do with this at all. The government simply spent a windfall. It could have spent it by investing in the future i.e. education, infrastructure, diversifying the economy, trying to make the economy more competitive, beefing up institutions etc. It has done some in some of these areas, but could have done more. Most importantly it should have saved more.
Moreover, the current economic problems can quickly erase any improvement in inequality as government programs are cut and inflation eats into increased wages.
"Jeff",
You are citing Francisco Rodriguez, an opposition economist dedicated to attacking the Chavez government.
The research you cite above was all completely dismantled right here:
http://www.cepr.net/index.php/pu...usehold-survey/
and here:
http://www.cepr.net/index.php/pu...-numbers-right/
I find it very funny that all you oppo morons love to cite this Rodriguez character simply because he says what you WANT to hear (amazing that you actually want to hear that poverty hasn't been lowered in Venezuela), without actually taking a close look at the evidence he provides.
There is not a serious analyst on the planet that would try to make the claim that poverty has not decreased significantly under Chavez. Rodriguez tries to make that claim.
"It is precisely because of such a level of misinformation that people outside Venezuela will tend to have little to contribute to the discussion about the country's politics."
there are lots of government sources especially now. TV-channels, radio stations, newpapers and official sources are all available to any listener, viewer or reader. There are also lots of blogs.
Granted living in Venezuela helps you see some things for yourself (as you correctly pointed out; and as personal experience has shown me), but living there can also subject you to 'seeing only the trees but not the forrest problem' as you become to immersed in the details of everything bickering, sensationalism and polarization that is Venezuela reporting.
However, increased oil prices made also this extra spending possible. Oil prices gave Chavez a windfall and he spent it by distributing more to the poor.
Yes, but he also played a major role in tripling oil prices during his first 2 years as president, worked to increase tax revenue, and stopped loopholes that send PDVSA funds overseas, giving his government more money to spend on social programs.
You can try all you want to take all the credit away from the Chavez government, but it is just not the reality.
It doesn't have much to do with this at all. The government simply spent a windfall. It could have spent it by investing in the future i.e. education, infrastructure, diversifying the economy, trying to make the economy more competitive, beefing up institutions etc. It has done some in some of these areas, but could have done more. Most importantly it should have saved more.
It does indeed have a lot to do with this, because free-market, free trade policies were the likely alternative to Chavez's policies. Had the right wing opposition been in power, this is undoubtedly the kinds of policies they would have pursued, which would have resulted in an INCREASE in inequality, as they do in most cases.
If you can show me that other oil booms in Venezuela, or anywhere, have resulted in DECREASED inequality, then I will concede that Chavez deserves no credit for the decreased inequality, that it had nothing to do with his policies, and that it was simply a result of the oil price. Good luck trying to prove that.
It could have spent it by investing in the future i.e. education, infrastructure, diversifying the economy, trying to make the economy more competitive, beefing up institutions etc. It has done some in some of these areas, but could have done more. Most importantly it should have saved more.
Well, it is a no-brainer to say that the government could have "done better" or could have "done more". That will be true in almost any case at any time.
But that debate really isn't as important as the debate about what would have likely happened in the event that THE ALTERNATIVE (which you and Kepler support) were in power.
If the opposition parties were in power, they likely would have adopted the kinds of neoliberal policies that the right wing all over Latin America supports, which would have resulted in increased inequality. (not to mention the fact that neoliberals support a small state, decreased social programs, etc. which means most of the social programs probably would not have ever been implemented under a right wing government)
Moreover, the current economic problems can quickly erase any improvement in inequality as government programs are cut and inflation eats into increased wages.
Tor | 05.28.09 - 4:29 pm | #
Yes, no government could continue to improve social conditions in a dooms day scenario like this. But, in the real world, this does not appear even remotely likely. Inflation is decreasing, and the government easily has enough money to continue the social programs for years to come. Not to mention the fact that oil prices are likely to increase over the next few years.
Inflation is decreasing
wtf...
Inflation is decreasing
wtf...
Tank | 05.28.09 - 5:04 pm | #
Tank, inflation is almost 3 points lower so far this year than it was for the same period last year.
If that is not a decrease in inflation, I'm not sure what is.
But, hey, believe what you want to believe man. Facts don't seem to matter much to you anyway.
This video is unreal!
http://devilsexcrement.com/2009/...la/#comment-
646
True, but most nationalizations have been paid at a premium and government employees assigned to run the ship still make as much as a CEO (think Rafael Ramirez.)
Also the nationalization will bring a decay in production, even if at least temporal. The track record of the efficiency of nationalizations is weak... to say the least.
Look, a corporation owned by the government is running on a different logic than one running in the marketplace. In general, nationalizations are good. They can obviously be handled badly. But the removal of the need for profit (and concomitant extraction of surplus from society/diversion to privileged sectors) is a good thing.
At what cost?
The opportunity cost is extremely high, billions could have been used to develop our already lacking infrastructure if not to develop new industries.
As we've seen, new industries wouldn't exactly be doing too well if they'd been developed in the last couple years. Where would you prefer they divert the money?
Once again true, but only to an extent.
If Cargill is violating the law they should be punished, fine them.. but it doesn't justify a nationalization.
Nationalizations are their own justification. You must be making the bizarre error of assuming corporations have property rights. They don't, period.
Also, price caps create deadweight loss in the economy. Private investors should be rewarded for their willingness to take risks. The government arbitrarily set up price controls that private companies cant meet in several cases. Producers are not willing to take losses on products and between CADIVI, the price controls and the inflexible labor laws the overhead costs in Venezuela are extremely high right now.
This is standard capitalist ideology. Price caps if properly designed reduce profit margins. You're assuming "the market" should determine the "reward" for private investors risks. But why shouldn't that reward be socially determined? And if not acceptable/below the cost of production, then nationalize the company. Capital has no rights and no privileges.
So yes, the government will take over. Produce the same amount of rice or maybe a little more by investing a lot of money that could have been invested in a project that would bring higher revenues to society.... but somehow this makes sense to you.
We will see. The food shortages that've plagued Venezuela certainly will be gone, that's for sure. But presumably there's some higher revenue that will accrue to "society" that I'm missing.
Look, a corporation owned by the government is running on a different logic than one running in the marketplace. In general, nationalizations are good. They can obviously be handled badly. But the removal of the need for profit (and concomitant extraction of surplus from society/diversion to privileged sectors) is a good thing.
To an extend, they do run on a different logic. However they still need to make enough money to cover their costs. Also, by paying a premium to nationalize a company, increasing its overheads and paying the same salaries (or more) will not make it any more efficient. BIC has been bankrupt twice in the last 10 years, now the goverment will also run the Banco de Venezuela. How can we assume that this nationalization is "for the better" with their track record of managing banks?
The BCV is poorly managed, BIC is poorly managed, Banco del Tesoro is poorly managed (compared to their peers on the private sector). Why take over ANOTHER bank?
Nationalizations are their own justification. You must be making the bizarre error of assuming corporations have property rights. They don't, period.
First of all, Corporations do have property rights as per the Venezuelan Constitution.
On another note..I think you are making the mistake of assuming any nationalization is good.
Nationalizations should be a carefully thought out process, not a spur of the moment thing or a reaction to breaking price controls.
This is standard capitalist ideology. Price caps if properly designed reduce profit margins. You're assuming "the market" should determine the "reward" for private investors risks. But why shouldn't that reward be socially determined? And if not acceptable/below the cost of production, then nationalize the company. Capital has no rights and no privileges.
Even if "socially determined" there needs to be a method to the madness. You cant simply put a price cap above the costs of producing the goods unless you subsidize the goods. As of today, in Venezuela corporations do have rights and privileges. The Constitution, even if those that wrote it don't respect it, exists.... which you seem to ignore.
We will see. The food shortages that've plagued Venezuela certainly will be gone, that's for sure. But presumably there's some higher revenue that will accrue to "society" that I'm missing.
Even if you justify the nationalization of Cargill because of the scarcity of products (which is a result of price controls, CADIVI and labor laws.. but lets follow your logic) you cant apply the same logic to the ceramic companies, cement companies and Banco de Venezuela.
As we've seen, new industries wouldn't exactly be doing too well if they'd been developed in the last couple years. Where would you prefer they divert the money?
Each one of this nationalizations will cost billions!!
Billions that could have been spent on housing, on recycling (even Chavez
(continuation...)
Billions that could have been spent on housing, on recycling (even Chavez acknowledged the trash problem tonight), education (not "misiones", no more band-aid fixes... but infrastructure in every town), Healthcare (Barrio Adentro isn't what it was a few years ago) or even fixing our highways which are a disaster.
We are not even satisfying local demand, we import EVERYTHING.
Tank - for many of the nationalizations the government will pay with bonos del estado. Smart, huh?
OT - I remember the Duquenal wrote here that he would never comment on OIl Warts again. Well, you can see what a liar he is and still is on his own blog.
Tank - since you don't live in Venezuela you cannot possibly know what is the state of the roads or anything.
How do you know that Barrio Adentro is not what it was? There's ONLT 535 CDI's functioning now.
OW - your sentence at the end referring to Cuba just proves how far to the argumentation lines of the opposition you have moved.
BTW oil is recovering quite nicely all thanks to Chávez and his policies
BTW oil is recovering quite nicely all thanks to Chávez and his policies
Anonymous | 05.29.09 - 4:48 pm | #
LMAO
LMAO
Sire | 05.29.09 - 5:34 pm | #
Sire is going to try to deny that oil prices are recovering? And he's going to try to deny that it OPEC production cuts have anything to do with it?
I think these oppo morons really are trying to break a record here!