TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Hugo...doing it again.
Pages (21): « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 »

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt It just never fails to amaze me how lefties will praise and defend the most tyrannical people on earth as long as they utter the words "for socialism comrades!" every now and then. Its pointless to seriously debate these people because they obviously couldn't care less about the evil they are supporting. The religion of the left is THE STATE, and any politician who believes in expanding it "for socialism!" gets guaranteed support, regardless of their behavior or methods.

Actually, please provide me with information why you don't like Chavez - economical reasons will not be accepted

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Actually, please provide me with information why you don't like Chavez - economical reasons will not be accepted

Outlawing opposing viewpoints...Jailing and possibly killing political opponents for starters..

a few more tidbits of sunshine about your man Chavez...

Venezuela's military is considering the possibility of selling its fleet of U.S.-made F-16 fighter jets to another country, perhaps Iran, a Venezuelan military official said Tuesday.

In response to a U.S. ban on arms sales to President Hugo Chavez's government, Gen. Alberto Muller, a senior adviser to Chavez, told The Associated Press he had recommended to the defense minister that Venezuela consider selling the 21 jets to another country.

Muller said he thought it was worthwhile to consider "the feasibility of a negotiation with Iran for the sale of those planes."

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/a...s.ap/index.html

Venezuela's Chavez planning arms-for-oil trip to N. Korea

North Korea and Venezuela are discussing a strategic alliance motivated by a common goal — expanding anti-American forces.

During Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong-Il in late July, the two countries are also expected to craft an oil-for-arms deal. Venezuela's leader is most likely to fly to Pyongyang at the end of July on the occasion of his planned trip to Russia on July 25. Chavez told reporters that he plans to discuss science and technology cooperation with the North.

Analysts in Seoul say Kim and Chavez would mainly discuss forming a "strategic alliance" against the United States.

Ties between the two nations have been warming. Last September, Yang Hyoung-Sup, deputy head of the Presidium of the Supreme People's Assembly, traveled to Venezuela, followed by an economic delegation's visit in November led by Trade Minister Rim Kyong-Man.

Venezuela set up its first-ever permanent ambassadorial post in Pyongyang in April, 32 years after bilateral ties were forged in 1974.
"North Korea is expected to establish its embassy in Venezuela in the near future," a diplomatic source said.



Aside from becoming friends with two murderous regimes bent on developing nuclear weapons, there is plenty reason to dislike Chavez for his domestic policies alone...

One of the most negative points about Chávez, if not the worst, is the blatant disrespect he has shown towards democracy, institutions, and the Constitution he himself got drafted in 1999. He has concentrated a great deal of power on himself, and separation of powers, though protected by the Constitution, is a thing of the past. He dissolved the old Supreme Court and appointed an all-new Court completely favorable to him. The lower Courts are, as well, full of opportunistic Chávez cronies. The Attorney General, the Comptroller General, and the People's Defender (an all-new figure in the 99 Constitution) are basically employees to Chávez. He controls the chair of the National Electoral Council, and it needs not be said that he enjoys a comfortable majority in the National Assembly. Chávez and his cronies basically have the power to enact ANY law, decree, reform and judicial sentence they can think of. A fair trial? Pfft. No more.

With that great deal of power along with the polarization of the country comes, of course, a great deal of abuse. Particularly human rights and freedom of press abuses. The number of cases of human rights abuse have skyrocketed, specially since the April 11 coup, but most, if not all, are ignored by the judicial system because they are unfavorable to the regime. Hell, no serious investigation has ever been launched on the deaths of April 11. Most likely the United States was involved in the coup, but I'm sure that the United States did not shoot 19 people in the April 11 opposition march, or shut down the open-air TV signals when the channels showed images of the march next to Chávez's national broadcast. Thousands of people were threatened and/or fired from their jobs because they signed the referendum petition or participated in opposition rallies and protests.

Check for yourself some of the human rights abuses: Documents on Venezuela from Amnesty International and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. I am not making things up.

Chávez has consistently and systematically bullied the media. Yes, a media that was for the most part, very biased. That is however, no excuse for the curtailing of civil liberties. Several journalists have been persecuted, imprisoned, and even tortured. News media outlets have been attacked by government supporters. Many international organizations have denounced the deterioration of the freedom of press, among them Reporters without Borders, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, the Interamerican Press Society (in Spanish) and the International Association of Broadcasting (in Spanish). Again, I invite you to read for yourself.

The media censorship and human rights abuses are only expected to increase after the recent passing of several laws by decree (and some that are still being drafted).

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt Outlawing opposing viewpoints...Jailing and possibly killing political opponents for starters..

No that's your word. Give me information (and RCTV doesn't count as they were involved in the coup)

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt Outlawing opposing viewpoints...Jailing and possibly killing political opponents for starters..

I think that this is either intentional or just a result of more CIA "blowback" but I believe in the former more than the latter.

I know it sounds impossible but according to my friend's father (Capt. E.S. Geary - the only man in history to simultaneously hold a Captain's position in both the US and Venezuelan Coast Guards), Chavez is probably just another pawn for the world's financial elite. The CIA were the ones who worked to install him as President, back in the 1990's.

http://www.eworldwire.com/pressreleases/15330

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt It just never fails to amaze me how lefties will praise and defend the most tyrannical people on earth as long as they utter the words "for socialism comrades!" every now and then. Its pointless to seriously debate these people because they obviously couldn't care less about the evil they are supporting. The religion of the left is THE STATE, and any politician who believes in expanding it "for socialism!" gets guaranteed support, regardless of their behavior or methods.

I haven't praised anything friend, I am simply remarking on your one liners.

quote:

Originally posted by venomX I haven't praised anything friend, I am simply remarking on your one liners.

sorry, got you confused with smiley

But what's the point debating with you when you automatically decide something is bad because it mentions the word 'socialism'. You have a switch in your head, programmed by Cold War propaganda which has no relevance to today's world, that breeds pure hatred when you hear 'socialism'. Yet you have no understanding of what socialism is. You couldn't describe it to me if your life depended on it, other than to give me the silly slur put about by the neocons (the sworn enemies of the USSR) that Firestarter repeated earlier in the thread.

Chavez says socialism so you automatically equate that with distatorship because of your culture - yet how do you explain that 60% of the country voted for him? And as for the media, 80% is controlled by the opposition and when the slate the government they don't hold back like our media do it's vicious! Add to that their involvement in the failed CIA backed coup and you have to ask yourself whether they are perhaps breaking laws we would have in our own countries, such as treason and at the least libel laws!

But democracy is not something you believe in is it Capitalizt? You don't believe that a nation state should be governed by the people do you? Otherwise you would have to acknowledge that the Venezuelan people chose Chavez to govern them by a huge majority and if that is how they want to be ruled then who are we to decide otherwise?

But not you eh? You believe in the right of the richest 5% of a population to rule without law the rest of the population. You support your CIA in the overthrowing of democratically elected governments and I can guarantee you will have supported the overthrowing of Allande in Chile in 1973 and can probably defend Pinochet? Is this how they teach it in American schools these days?

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley But what's the point debating with you when you automatically decide something is bad because it mentions the word 'socialism'. You have a switch in your head, programmed by Cold War propaganda which has no relevance to today's world, that breeds pure hatred when you hear 'socialism'. Yet you have no understanding of what socialism is. You couldn't describe it to me if your life depended on it, other than to give me the silly slur put about by the neocons (the sworn enemies of the USSR) that Firestarter repeated earlier in the thread. Chavez says socialism so you automatically equate that with distatorship because of your culture - yet how do you explain that 60% of the country voted for him? And as for the media, 80% is controlled by the opposition and when the slate the government they don't hold back like our media do it's vicious! Add to that their involvement in the failed CIA backed coup and you have to ask yourself whether they are perhaps breaking laws we would have in our own countries, such as treason and at the least libel laws! But democracy is not something you believe in is it Capitalizt? You don't believe that a nation state should be governed by the people do you? Otherwise you would have to acknowledge that the Venezuelan people chose Chavez to govern them by a huge majority and if that is how they want to be ruled then who are we to decide otherwise? But not you eh? You believe in the right of the richest 5% of a population to rule without law the rest of the population. You support your CIA in the overthrowing of democratically elected governments and I can guarantee you will have supported the overthrowing of Allande in Chile in 1973 and can probably defend Pinochet? Is this how they teach it in American schools these days?

Bottom line buddy...Chavez has allied himself with an Islamofascist state (Iran) and a murderous semi-psychotic dictatorship (North Korea). He has stolen property from his own people at the point of the gun. He has outlawed all dissent in his own country...forcibly closing down all outlets for opposing viewpoints. Anyone who publicly disagrees with Chavez is jailed (or worse). The man now rules completely by decree...enacting laws and confiscating land on a whim with ZERO checks and balances.

He is a proven tyrant, and you are doing the socialist/marxist cause a great disservice by supporting him.

Read the links above before you try responding again.

I dont understand why people have so much faith in their governments to run their lives. The idea of Nationalising private property.. now there's a surefast way of impoverishing your people.

Here in Australia we have a government which is one of the best run in the world (apparently), yet they still wouldnt be able to tie their own shoelaces. Imagine letting some power hungry sociopath do the job. Scary stuff..

quote:

Originally posted by Dupz I dont understand why people have so much faith in their governments to run their lives.

lol, I agree...and I found this quote by smiley very telling..

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Yes lets instead champion the cause of the corporations to control our lives instead of the people we elect to do it!

Here is the huge difference between people who prefer socialism over those who prefer liberty. People on the left want politicians to relieve them of the responsibilities of life...to care for them..nuture them..to make important decisions for them (on school, housing, healthcare, income, etc), and basically ensure as pain-free an existence as possible. They don't mind giving up their freedoms if this is the outcome.

Those with a more libertarian mindset vote for the opposite kind of politician...the one who promises to LEAVE THEM ALONE...free to make own decisions in life (right or wrong), and to live with the consequences of those decisions. Libertarians believe a little pain can be a good thing, because painful mistakes (financial or otherwise) are always a learning experience. They build character and bring wisdom...and ultimately lead to true progress in a society.

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt Bottom line buddy...Chavez has allied himself with an Islamofascist state (Iran) and a murderous semi-psychotic dictatorship (North Korea). He has stolen property from his own people at the point of the gun. He has outlawed all dissent in his own country...forcibly closing down all outlets for opposing viewpoints. Anyone who publicly disagrees with Chavez is jailed (or worse). The man now rules completely by decree...enacting laws and confiscating land on a whim with ZERO checks and balances. He is a proven tyrant, and you are doing the socialist/marxist cause a great disservice by supporting him. Read the links above before you try responding again.

I hate to say it, but a lot of this may just be media representations filtered through various agencies with agendas. I do not know this for sure, and won't say it as fact.

I think the underlying issue is that every society has its own terms and situational acceptances, and we are all told the same things by our governments, while somehow believing others are not. Every government tells its people they are superior and free.

I mean, in America can you really protest?

You don't think the American government takes away property, lives, and wealth at gunpoint? They do.

You don't think the American government tries to stifle enemies to its own agenda? It has and does.

It's really a matter of how much it intrudes on the peoples' *sense* of sovereignty, I suppose.

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt lol, I agree...and I found this quote by smiley very telling.. Here is the huge difference between people who prefer socialism over those who prefer liberty. People on the left want politicians to relieve them of the responsibilities of life...to care for them..nuture them..to make important decisions for them (on school, housing, healthcare, income, etc), and basically ensure as pain-free an existence as possible. They don't mind giving up their freedoms if this is the outcome. Those with a more libertarian mindset vote for the opposite kind of politician...the one who promises to LEAVE THEM ALONE...free to make own decisions in life (right or wrong), and to live with the consequences of those decisions. Libertarians believe a little pain can be a good thing, because painful mistakes (financial or otherwise) are always a learning experience. They build character and bring wisdom...and ultimately lead to true progress in a society.

What a load of romantic crock. Come and tell me that when you're down in the slums, broke, with 2 children and low income job. Come tell me that when you're living in a crowded neighbourhood, can't sleep because of the noise, and can't step outside without worrying about getting robbed or shot. You come tell me that when you can't feed your children, when you can't afford their education, when you're stress levels are giving you chronic diseases or pushing you towards addiction. You come tell me that when you aren't born into a comfortable life or a privileged group. The whole point of socialism is to improve the lowest common denominator. Some people don't have the information, the resources, the education to be able to afford making mistakes and learning from them. When a 14 year old girl from a poor neighbourhood with little education gets pregnant, you tell me, who is she going to learn from this mistake? When all her energy, if she survives the birth, will have to be dedicated to tending to a child and finding some low income job to pay for rent, electricity and food. That is, if she can find a job. Not many companies hire people without a highschool education. You tell me, how is she supposed to find even a decent low paying job, when she has to worry about who is going to care for her kid. There's another cost if she wants to work, daycare. You tell me how she can go back to school, if she can barely afford a place to live, food to eat, and someone to watch over her child when she is trying to earn a living. How can she advance in life, when she can barely make it through a whole day. And thats for the mother only. That child will get a horrible education, will be undernourished and poorly cared for, even if she can get a daycare to take the child to. All things that affect a child's mental and physical development. Now you tell me how all the people like this lady, who are the ones that benefit from socialist policies, could live when the government "leaves them alone". Libertarianism is as romantic as communism and only slightly less than anarchy. It is the ideology of those who have the education and resources to make it by themselves. Newsflash buddy, most of the people in the world are broke, hungry, stressed and poorly educated. They can't afford to be so gungho about freedom as you can.

quote:

Originally posted by venomX What a load of romantic crock. Come and tell me that when you're down in the slums, broke, with 2 children and low income job. Come tell me that when you're living in a crowded neighbourhood, can't sleep because of the noise, and can't step outside without worrying about getting robbed or shot. You come tell me that when you can't feed your children, when you can't afford their education, when you're stress levels are giving you chronic diseases or pushing you towards addiction. You come tell me that when you aren't born into a comfortable life or a privileged group. The whole point of socialism is to improve the lowest common denominator. Some people don't have the information, the resources, the education to be able to afford making mistakes and learning from them. When a 14 year old girl from a poor neighbourhood with little education gets pregnant, you tell me, who is she going to learn from this mistake? When all her energy, if she survives the birth, will have to be dedicated to tending to a child and finding some low income job to pay for rent, electricity and food. That is, if she can find a job. Not many companies hire people without a highschool education. You tell me, how is she supposed to find even a decent low paying job, when she has to worry about who is going to care for her kid. There's another cost if she wants to work, daycare. You tell me how she can go back to school, if she can barely afford a place to live, food to eat, and someone to watch over her child when she is trying to earn a living. How can she advance in life, when she can barely make it through a whole day. And thats for the mother only. That child will get a horrible education, will be undernourished and poorly cared for, even if she can get a daycare to take the child to. All things that affect a child's mental and physical development. Now you tell me how all the people like this lady, who are the ones that benefit from socialist policies, could leave when the government "leaves them alone". Libertarianism is as romantic as communism and only slightly less than anarchy. It is the ideology of those who have the education and resources to make it by themselves. Newsflash buddy, most of the people in the world are broke, hungry, stressed and poorly educated. They can't afford to be so gungho about freedom as you can.

Nicely said.

We really fail to notice just how many socialized factors there are in every American's life which make a massive difference on our quality of living.

quote:

Originally posted by Dupz I dont understand why people have so much faith in their governments to run their lives. The idea of Nationalising private property.. now there's a surefast way of impoverishing your people. Here in Australia we have a government which is one of the best run in the world (apparently), yet they still wouldnt be able to tie their own shoelaces. Imagine letting some power hungry sociopath do the job. Scary stuff..

Some people like governments running their lives.
Sad really.

DJ Shibby - No government is perfect, but the fact is that America is the closest to perfection. Capitalism has worked in the U.S. The great thing about capitalism is that, anyone can become wealthy, and I mean anyone. It's not easy, but nothing in life is easy. The reality is that capitalism is not made for everyone, and some people will always bitch and moan like venom x is doing. People like venom expect the government to solve all their problems. The government did not get the girl pregnant, why should the government help the girl?

Ronald Reagan said it best: The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'

quote:

Originally posted by Kapedan DJ Shibby - No government is perfect, but the fact is that America is the closest to perfection. Capitalism has worked in the U.S. The great thing about capitalism is that, anyone can become wealthy, and I mean anyone. It's not easy, but nothing in life is easy. The reality is that capitalism is not made for everyone, and some people will always bitch and moan like venom x is doing. People like venom expect the government to solve all their problems. The government did not get the girl pregnant, why should the government help the girl? Ronald Reagan said it best: The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'

Expect the government to solve my problems? Friend I have enough resources that I don't need the government. I expect the government to help people that don't have resources solve their own problems. Keyword: help people solve not solve. You people repeat your mantra non stop, oh you just want the government to solve your problem. Yeah, the government didn't make her pregnant, but your co-ideologist capitalizt said mistakes were an opportunity for growth. If you had carefully read what I posted, you would have noticed that I was demanding an explanation on how that girls situation was going to be an opportunity for growth. Now that you have entered in the discussion, maybe you would like to explain it yourself.

Also, could you people stop quoting other people's one liners, which are probably out of context anyways, and start posting your train of thought. What, can't justify your point of view yourself?

quote:

Originally posted by venomX Expect the government to solve my problems? Friend I have enough resources that I don't need the government. I expect the government to help people that don't have resources solve their own problems. Keyword: help people solve not solve. You people repeat your mantra non stop, oh you just want the government to solve your problem. Yeah, the government didn't make her pregnant, but your co-ideologist capitalizt said mistakes were an opportunity for growth. If you had carefully read what I posted, you would have noticed that I was demanding an explanation on how that girls situation was going to be an opportunity for growth. Now that you have entered in the discussion, maybe you would like to explain it yourself. Also, could you people stop quoting other people's one liners, which are probably out of context anyways, and start posting your train of thought. What, can't justify your point of view yourself?

What if the same girl gets pregnant again, do you expect the government to "help her solve her problem" again? Why should my taxes go to a girl that cant keep her legs closed?

I did not expect you to like the quote Mr.Chavez.

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Seriously man you're talking out fo your arse! Are you tryin to tell me every country in Europe is a dictatorship?! I'm lookin out the window and it don't look much like a dictatorship to me!

Seriously man, are you trying to tell me that every European country is Socialist?
And I did NOT say every country in Europe is a dictatorship so please take the bag of marbles out of your mouth, thanks.
Besides, I did mention Sweden didn't I?

quote:

How many do you know from Venezuela?

I know of one from work and I think they probably have a better prospective of what's going on than anyone on this board when it comes to Venezuela...

quote:

But why can every other country elect heads indefinately but not Venezuela?! I don't understand why this policy is OK for other countries but when ones you don't agree with do it it's dictatorship? He has to be elected like he has every other time. I honestly can't see your problem, and you keep referring to the people he's "propping up". What right do you have to dictate to the MAJORITY in Venezuela who they should have as leader and what economic policies they chose to implement?

How many terms can a U.S. President serve again?

quote:

Basically, your whole critique of Chavez is borne not out of an educated analysis you have conducted that suggests Venezuela is a dictatorship, but a fear and hatred of an economic system you have no knowledge of, and when combined with the prejudice preached by your idols in America, lead you to equate, falsely, socialism with dictatorship.

Fear and hatred?
How about facts?
There's nothing I mentioned about Chavez that can be refuted.
He has nationalized the energy sector.
He plans on a life-time term like his buddy Castro.
He has given speaches that the wealthy should give up their money - "It's bad to be rich".
He subsidizes farming and industrial cooperatives.
He has handed over farming land from wealthy farmers to the poor.
He will raise taxes on foreign oil producers.

quote:

Venezuela president Hugo Chavez has unveiled a project to reform the country’s constitution allowing him to be re-elected indefinitely, as well of a series of changes “intended to 1) reinforce Chavez powers and 2) make sure that no one has access to enough power to launch a threatening bid against Chavez in any future election.”

>More here<

Better yet and from a Venezuelan blog; from the same link above...

quote:

Making sure that no one can mount a challenge But what Chavez might be more scared of is the surge of some charismatic leader that could find some support when people eventually get tired of Chavez. Thus the other set of constitutional changes, the most important perhaps, are designed to make sure that no one can rise to any significant power position or even to notorious enough fame to launch a successful presidential bid. The first one is to set term limits to any other public office. Governors and mayors will have only two consecutive terms at most. The excuse? Only national projects deserve unlimited time. We will pass on the absurdity and obviousness of that one. But there is more. A “geographical redistribution” is planed. The only objective here is to create new administrative structures where the executive office master will be appointed by Chavez. Thus for example, the vote rich area of Caracas will be downgraded again to a federal jurisdiction which is a code word of less autonomy. Ask the folks of Washington DC about that…. The chutzpah of chavismo goes far enough to propose names such as special vice presidents to these super governors that will be above the locally elected folks. But that will not be enough anyway. The advantage of creating a “socialist state” is to weaken private property as much as possible. So, weak governors whose resources form the sate will be siphoned in large part by super governors will not be able to raise electoral cash in their districts to the levels that the government will dispose from public administration. See the last December election for a preview. The only capitalist that will be allowed to exist and to finance whichever candidates it feels should be elected will be the state. Other candidates will have to scrap with small donations given by anonymous donors as the political list system existing now in Venezuela will discourage most form allowing their name to be used. Still, to make sure it works, another tool will be created: the communal councils will be given constitutional rank. That way mayors will be weakened in turn. The theory here is that communal councils deal directly with Caracas. And thus ultimate decentralization becomes the ultimate tool for centralization as only communal councils controlled by red shirts will get anything done. Not to mention that communal councils will be much easier to intimidate than municipal council or state legislatures. At the level of communities debate will be public and it will be very easy for local chavistas to detect, to decide who is and who is not pro-Chavez. The totalitarian implications of this are staggering. And thus, if the constitutional “reform” passes it will be the official death certificate of Venezuelan democracy. Because, in addition to all of these ways to curtail democracy Chavez in fact admits he is not a democrat. He admitted the other day that he wanted to become the next Fidel Castro. Does that mean that he will eventually dispense with the formality of fraudulent elections? But it gets better, today Chavez said the following: "the interests of the Venezuelan opposition, all of it, without exception, are in lockstep, aligned with the interests of the North American Empire. Thus their role to criticize." That is right, Chavez said it, by criticizing his proposals in this blog I am serving the US interests and I am a traitor to Venezuela. It is astounding that Chavez these days let's himself go to say such inane things. Truly, a man blinded by his hate. Can anything be done? Stay tuned.

You say it's my hatred for Chavez and I'm telling you it's HIS ACTIONS that influence my decision...

Again from the same blog...

quote:

Strengthening his power Some measures will be designed to increase Chavez power. They will be, for example, economical. The Misiones will be integrated in the constitution to become mandatory. Amen of transforming a constitution into a mere law. This way Chavez will “institutionalize” a parallel public sector outside of normal ministries. In this parallel bureaucracy only Chavez appointees will flourish, ideology will be first and dividends will go mostly, when not exclusively to those that profess undying devotion to Chavez. Other measures will be more political or brute force. For example the president will get even more control over the armed forces. Eventually in less than a decade, all officers in charge will have been formed in chavista schools or Cuban camps. This will be effected by Chavez near complete discretion as to who gets which promotion. The increased militarization of society, a military bound in allegiance to Chavez, will divide Venezuelan society into a group within the military structure and militia, and the civilians who will be second class citizens. Other legal measures are sure to be added, such as modifying certain civil rights of the 1999 constitution such as article 350 to make civilian rebellion against abuse of power illegal.

These things are actually happening and I'm being called paranoid?
Yea, ok...

venom, only a few generations ago, nearly EVERY American was dirt poor and living in the ghetto. In the early 1900s when floods of immigrants were coming to this country, sweatshops, poverty, and hunger were the norm for most people. Living conditions were horrible, and it seemed hopeless, but you know what?...These are the very people who built the VAST middle class we have today. Because we lived in a capitalist society, these people had the OPPORTUNITY to pool their resources, take risks, and most importantly, to be REWARDED for taking those risks in a free market.

There is nothing "temporary" about these welfare programs Chavez is creating. He has basically promised every Venezuelan an income FOR LIFE, paid for by land confiscation and oil revenues. Now if we had done the same thing in America over the past century...putting America on the dole and sending everyone in the country a monthly check paid for by our oil reserves, do you think we would have seen the innovation and growth we had in the 40s, 50,s and 60's?

Hellz no!

Socialist policies create stagnation in a society...When people are made generally comfortable doing nothing, there is less incentive to take risks...and even if you are lucky enough to succeed in a welfare state, the rewards are going to be much LESS due to high taxation of your profits, so why bother?

Here George, this is for you...

This is not to rub anything in your face, but rather to prove my point on Hugo...

quote:

Getting Real About Chavez By Jeb Koogler For a long time, I’ve defended Hugo Chavez. I thought that he was fighting a worthy battle against greed and corruption, against years of foreign domination and cronyism. I thought he was trying to improve the lives of poor people, while establishing a strong economy, an independent and self-respecting nation, and a vibrant democracy. But now, after watching events unfold in the past few months, I’m ready to admit that I was mistaken. Like many of those who lean left, I figured that Chavez’s megalomaniacal governing qualities were a bit unnerving, but not anything serious to be worried about. In retrospect, I realize that I was willing to overlook his authoritarian tendencies because of one main thing: his avowed commitment to social justice issues and his dedication to ending poverty. Recently, however, I’ve changed my mind in a major way. Although I have tried to remain optimistic, Chavez’s actions in the past few months clearly indicate that he is set on becoming a dictator. Perhaps a dictator dedicated to the poor, but a dictator nonetheless. The evidence is abundant (though I will just list a few of the most recent examples). In late 2006, for instance, Chavez canceled the operating license for RCTV, the second-largest tv channel in Venezuela and one of the most public forums for opposition to his regime. Was it just anti-Chavez activists who called foul to this act of censorship? Not at all. Indeed, José Miguel Vivanco, the Americas director for Human Rights Watch, referred to the incident as “clearly a case of censorship and the most grave step back in the region since [the 1990s media crackdown of Peru’s Alberto] Fujimori.” Then, in late January of 2007, in an unbelievably bold act, Chavez passed through the Venezuelan legislature a measure that gave him the power to rule by decree. For eighteen months, he was granted the ability to make sweeping economic and social changes without the direct consent of the legislature. Most recently, as The New York Times is now reporting, Chavez has decided to unveil a plan that would get rid of presidential term limits entirely. Unfortunately, with control of all branches of government, it looks like this blatantly undemocratic effort to become ruler-for-life might actually succeed: Willian Lara, the communications minister, said Mr. Chávez would announce the project before the National Assembly, where all 167 lawmakers support the president. Supporters of Mr. Chávez, who was re-elected last year with some 60 percent of the vote, also control the Supreme Court, the entire federal bureaucracy, public oil and infrastructure companies and every state government but two. Meanwhile, Chavez appears to be establishing a cult of personality, not unlike other authoritarian leaders: As Mr. Chávez, 53, settles into his ninth year in power, images of him have become impossible to avoid here. On billboards, posters and murals, he is seen hugging children, embracing old women, chanting slogans and plugging energy-saving Cuban light bulbs into sockets. The sum of these recent developments, combined with previous measures to stack the courts and the legislature, have solidified Chavez’s rule to the point where there should no longer be any doubt about the direction in which the country is headed. Chavez is pushing for dictatorial-like powers and there seems to be little hope, at least in the near future, of re-establishing any semblance of democratic governance. Unfortunately, many of us on the left have been silent on this issue for far too long. While we have been quick to criticize our own administration and other foreign governments (think Vladimir Putin) for undemocratic policies, there has been a tendency to overlook the authoritarian governing styles of leftist regimes like that of Venezuela. For some reason — probably because these leaders profess the dogma of economic equality and social reform — many of us on the left have defended these liberal autocrats. But it’s time to wake up and get our priorities straight. We should not be blind to what is going on in Venezuela. We can no longer forgive Chavez’s dictatorial tendencies merely because of his avowed commitment to the country’s poor. Indeed, it is a grave mistake to overlook tyranny or authoritarianism even when it is couched in the rhetoric of liberal reform and social justice. Ultimately, while Chavez’s vision of an end to poverty and the creation of a more equitable society is an honorable and an important one, his way of achieving these goals is not. Upholding democracy is infinitely more important than any of these other aims.

>>Source<<

I don't know how much this is a "right or wrong" issue, as it's largely philosophical when it comes to ism debate. In any event Capitalizt is right and Venom is wrong.

quote:

originally posted by Venom X Come and tell me that when you're down in the slums, broke, with 2 children and low income job. Come tell me that when you're living in a crowded neighbourhood, can't sleep because of the noise, and can't step outside without worrying about getting robbed or shot. You come tell me that when you can't feed your children, when you can't afford their education, when you're stress levels are giving you chronic diseases or pushing you towards addiction. You come tell me that when you aren't born into a comfortable life or a privileged group.

My heart does not bleed like yours.

quote:

The whole point of socialism is to pander to the lowest common denominator.

quote:

Some people don't have the information, the resources, the education to be able to afford making mistakes and learning from them. When a 14 year old girl from a poor neighbourhood with little education gets pregnant, you tell me, who is she going to learn from this mistake? When all her energy, if she survives the birth, will have to be dedicated to tending to a child and finding some low income job to pay for rent, electricity and food. That is, if she can find a job. Not many companies hire people without a highschool education. You tell me, how is she supposed to find even a decent low paying job, when she has to worry about who is going to care for her kid. There's another cost if she wants to work, daycare. You tell me how she can go back to school, if she can barely afford a place to live, food to eat, and someone to watch over her child when she is trying to earn a living. How can she advance in life, when she can barely make it through a whole day. And thats for the mother only. That child will get a horrible education, will be undernourished and poorly cared for, even if she can get a daycare to take the child to. All things that affect a child's mental and physical development. Now you tell me how all the people like this lady, who are the ones that benefit from socialist policies, could live when the government "leaves them alone".

Someone you know personally?

quote:

Libertarianism is as romantic as communism and only slightly less than anarchy.

are those factors that are even relevant? It doesn't change the fact that the system you advocate is structurally flawed. "slightly less than anarchy" is not a bad thing. The government that governs best, governs least. Where do you fit into a socialist world like the one you advocate? Certainly not working in the salt mines with your vast pool of resources!

quote:

Newsflash buddy, most of the people in the world are broke, hungry, stressed and poorly educated. They can't afford to be so gungho about freedom as you can.

Maybe they would benefit from a shot of capitalism in the arm and not endless dependence on the government for handouts. In the end, I subscribe to the system who's basis is to encourage self-actualization over forced mediocrity. If you think the problem is that people don't have enough money, the system that is going to provide the most favorable conditions for money flow is capitalism, not a world were flourishing private enterprises are taken over by the government at the point of a gun, forfeiting all of their revenues to the government, killing income growth and taking prosperity with it. You think that's an encouraging environment for job growth? Bring a man a fish and you'll feed him for a day, teach a man to fish and you'll feed him for life.

Advocates of socialism generally have their hearts in the right place. Like everyone, they want the best for their society.. and enact policies which are supposed to lift the lowest common denominator.

Problem is, is that most socialist policies produce outcomes that are the exact opposite of what they set out to achieve.

Their take-from-the-rich-give-to-the-poor mentality does nothing but hold back an entire country while giving a few people a couple of bucks extra per week to spend on rations.

quote:

Originally posted by Fir3start3r Seriously man, are you trying to tell me that every European country is Socialist? And I did NOT say every country in Europe is a dictatorship so please take the bag of marbles out of your mouth, thanks. Besides, I did mention Sweden didn't I?

You equate the welfare state to socialism, you are therefore equating all the governments of Europe to dictatorship. This is obviously a load of crap and demonstrates your complete lack of knowledge and understanding of the word "socialism". Socialism is an umbrella term for anything left wing (altho socialists themselves would disagree!). As you can see from my avatar, there is a Party of European Socialists - this is the left wing party in the European Parliament and the UK Labour Party are members - can you honestly say that everything you believe about "socialism" applies to the UK (and other EU countries?)

quote:

I know of one from work and I think they probably have a better prospective of what's going on than anyone on this board when it comes to Venezuela...

Not really. If he left because of Chavez he's likely to be in opposition which means he's likely to be one of the rich people that lost out - hardly the most unbiassed of people to talk about Chavez right? 80% voted him in originally, then 60% last year reconfirmed their support - those figures are huge.

quote:

How many terms can a U.S. President serve again?

Two, and? Because this is the law in America that means it is the pinnacle of electoral law? How arrogant and ignorant can you get when you dismiss the electoral laws of shit loads of countries (who lets face it, have far better societies than America) because it isn't American?!

quote:

Fear and hatred? How about facts? There's nothing I mentioned about Chavez that can be refuted. He has nationalized the energy sector. He plans on a life-time term like his buddy Castro. He has given speaches that the wealthy should give up their money - "It's bad to be rich". He subsidizes farming and industrial cooperatives. He has handed over farming land from wealthy farmers to the poor. He will raise taxes on foreign oil producers.

Other than the acquisition of land from wealthy land owners, none of the above is actually bad (which is probably why no-one is trying to refute it!) Oh and a quick Google of Chavez+farms turned up this:
http://venezuelasolidarity.org.uk/v...s_campaign.html
Looks like the government is actually taking back what were originally stolen by these wealthy farmers. It implies that if they have the correct title deeds, they can keep their land. Another example of the corporate media in the West spreading misinformation about an economic policy which threatens its own economic interests

quote:

>More here< Better yet and from a Venezuelan blog; from the same link above... You say it's my hatred for Chavez and I'm telling you it's HIS ACTIONS that influence my decision... Again from the same blog... These things are actually happening and I'm being called paranoid? Yea, ok...

Like I said, I'm still finding out stuff about Chavez - and that is no easy task when pretty much all Western media and 80% of Venezuelan media is rabidly anti-Chavez - something proven time and time again when I do simple tasks. The reason I am reluctant to form the same kind of views as you is because I can see quite easily how even the British press twist events (even easier for US sources!) and how they are designed to make people like you react. Regarding the blog you posted about him strengthening his control on power, I have no doubt whatsoever that he would like to hold onto power - just like every other politician that ever existed. But I don't really see what is different about the way Chavez is going about it than how other countries leaders go about it

quote:

Originally posted by Fir3start3r Here George, this is for you... This is not to rub anything in your face, but rather to prove my point on Hugo... >>Source<<

Don't worry about rubbing my nose in it!!!

The article doesn't really add to anything I have been able to find out already. If RCTV is the only example of media censorship then it's not the best example, what with them being involved in the CIA attempted coup! (How's that for democracy in action eh?)

Most stories I read about Venezuela seem to take something that would be completely normal and innocent in any other country and twist it into something sinister.

Can you at least admit that there seems to be a concerted effort by the Western and Venezuelan media to smear Chavez as being a dictator, which seems to run counter to their own "democratic" views considering he has the support of the vast majority of the population?

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.