I apologize for the delay.
You assume to much. I'm not a fan of the American election process nor am I happy with any of our leadership.
Populist democracy is dangerous and the people are foolish.
So you're simply hostile toward the expansion of democracy. That's not so difficult to admit, but it would be rather inconsistent for anyone to crow about "dictatorship" while maintaining such a stance.
I personally don't like to throw human lives around liberally and I don't generally call for their destruction.
Cases like this are different though. I'm sick and tired of dumb asses making the tyranny of the majority ok through "democracy".
The mass tyrants need to be reigned in.
What specific instances of "tyranny" can you cite by Chavez, keeping in mind that the myths produced by the American mass media will not get you very far?
It is called impeachment.
It's blatantly obvious that impeachment and recall are not equivalent procedures. Impeachment typically requires some legal offense by a public official, while a recall can be immediately instituted if a public official is not acting in accordance with the mandate of the citizenry.
And it is you who wants to make this country to be "a shining beacon of democracy". There is no difference between Obama - and "Without it everything would be at risk — all the social programs, and everything he has done for the poor," - this is exactly what Obama run on with all the millions invested, given away to agitate the mob. Chavez exactly demonstrates how dangerious is the path of democracy Democrats have been pushing us to.
There's little functional difference between Democrats and Republicans; they essentially function as two factions of one party. Were you under the impression that I am a Democrat? I'm sorry to disappoint you. There is also no equivalence between Obama and Chavez; Obama is a mixed-market capitalist, despite the amusing attempts by his political opponents to mendaciously depict him as a socialist (largely caused by their own ignorance of political economy), whereas Chavez is a genuine socialist.
It is almost as entertaining as the American Left's adoration of Chavez with his socialist revolution agenda. What has it gotten the people of Venezuela? High unemployment and 30% inflation with NO hope for the future because his regime has run off about every legitimate company who would consider doing business in a country that can decide the next day to take over their assets and nationalize their efforts.
Venezuela is heading for a sewer because of the failed ideas and policies of a mentally challenged Socialist who wants to become dictator and uses the ignorance of the poor to propel himself to that position.
Unemployment rate:
9.1% (2007 est.)
Population below poverty line:
37.9% (end 2005 est.)
Inflation rate (consumer prices):
20.7% (Year ending November 2007)
Economy - overview:
Venezuela remains highly dependent on oil revenues, which account for roughly 90% of export earnings, more than 50% of the federal budget revenues, and around 30% of GDP. …..record government spending helped to boost GDP in 2006 by about 9% and in 2007 by about 8%. This spending, combined with recent minimum wage hikes and improved access to domestic credit, has created a consumption boom but has come at the cost of higher inflation-roughly 20 percent in 2007. Imports also have jumped significantly. Embolden by his December 2006 reelection, President Hugo CHAVEZ in 2007 nationalized firms in the petroleum, communications, and electricity sectors, which reduced foreign influence in the economy. CHAVEZ still has significant control of the economy and has indicated he intends to continue to consolidate and centralize authority over the economy by implementing "21st Century Socialism."
Venezuela Economy 2008, CIA World Factbook
The majority of this criticism is entirely inapplicable if aimed at the alleged "failure" of Venezuela's socialist economic policies, as the matter of increasing economic turmoil as of late is primarily a result of the global economic trouble rather than any specific domestic ailment within Venezuela.
The Bolivarian Revolution has been largely successful in that oil nationalization has promoted successful increases in economic growth, and viable socialist economic policies have also promoted social benefits in addition to this growth. As noted in
The Chávez Administration at 10 Years: The Economy and Social Indicators:
The current economic expansion began when the government got control over the national oil company in the first quarter of 2003. Since then, real (inflation adjusted) GDP has nearly doubled, growing by 94.7 percent in 5.25 years, or 13.5 percent annually.
Moreover, as Robin Hahnel notes in
Venezuela: Not What You Think, this economic growth has also had the effect of combating unemployment.
Like most Latin American economies, the Venezuelan economy deteriorated during the 1980s and most of the 1990s. From 1998 to 2003 real per capita GDP continued to stagnate while the Chavez government survived two general strikes by the largest Venezuelan business association, a military coup, and finally a devastating two month strike by the state owned oil company. However, after Chavez survived the opposition sponsored recall election, annual economic growth was 18.3% in 2004, 10.3% in 2005, and 10.3% in 2006, and the unemployment rate fell from 18.4 % in June 2003 to 8.3% in June 2007. Moreover, most of the growth was in the non-oil sectors of the economy, as the oil sector barely grew during 2005 and 2006. While this impressive growth would not have been possible without the rise in international oil prices, it also would not have been possible had the Chavez government not ignored the warnings of neoliberal critics and pursued aggressive expansionary fiscal and monetary policies.
My belief is that Venezuela have prospered because they have not sought to utilize the centralized state capitalist model of the Soviet Union (inaccurately depicted as "socialist" by so many), and have instead promoted decentralized collectivization. Indeed, it is not possible to overemphasize the critical importance of participatory governance and worker-owned enterprises in this new era of prosperity. Hahnel goes on to note the successful nature of the worker-owned enterprises that now represent a significant component of Bolivarian socialism.
New worker-owned cooperatives not only provided much needed jobs producing much needed basic goods and services, they also featured what was soon to become a hallmark of Bolivarian socialism -- popular participation at the grassroots level. When Chavez was first elected President in 1998, there were fewer than 800 legally registered cooperatives in Venezuela with roughly 20,000 members. In mid-2006 the National Superintendence of Cooperatives (SUNACOOP) reported that it had registered over 100,000 co-ops with over 1.5 million members.3 Generous amounts of oil revenues continue to provide start-up loans for thousands of new cooperatives every month, and the Ministry for the Communal Economy continues to spearhead a massive educational program for new cooperative members. However, the ministry provides more than technical assistance regarding technology, accounting, finance, business management, and marketing. It also teaches participants about cooperative principles, economic justice, and social responsibility.
So contrary to the typically mendacious claims of "tyranny" and "dictatorship" in Venezuela, I would find that program to be in ideological tandem with libertarian principles of decentralized social and economic structures governed through democratic frameworks.
On what grounds is the democratically elected president of Venezuela a "despot"?
and from what I understand (from only cursory interest in articles on BBC) fairly incompetent in running his country's oil economy (why is every oil exporting nation run by assholes?)
Indeed? I would find the claim that the "oil economic" is poorly managed to be somewhat dubious, considering this aforementioned fact:
The current economic expansion began when the government got control over the national oil company in the first quarter of 2003. Since then, real (inflation adjusted) GDP has nearly doubled, growing by 94.7 percent in 5.25 years, or 13.5 percent annually.
Much of the criticism of Chavez is...poorly assembled, to say the least.
Let's keep it civil folks.
