I'm not here for a "honest debate"? You tried to use economic sources from 2002 to apply to today's economic standards in Venezuela. You blaim literally anything that goes wrong in Venezuelas prisons, with statements of along the lines of "its Chavez's fault that some guards shot tear gas at a prisoners riot and called them pigs". You claim that people uphold Venezuela's democratic socialism to the standards of Europeans political and socio-economic systems. You claim that Venezuela is turning into a state ruled by one "vanguard" party, when clearly its not.
Shall i go on?
No it shows how idiotic i take this claims at face value. (Which is part of debating.)Shows that you are not here for honest debate.
No thats not my "tactic" at all. My "tactic" is to speak my mind and try to find something supplemental to debate on after reading your responses. Which is getting harder and harder to find. But then you dont respond to points made by my posts.Obviously your tactic is to piss me off so that I either say something stupid or disappear and quit pointing out the obvious signs that Hugo Chavez is not a champion of freedom.
Freedom? Are people in Venezuela "not free"?Which the truth is that not once have you mentioned freedom,
Well THEY ARE free and fair. Many NGO reports have confirmed this.you just espouse that the elections seem free to you and that the people are getting stuff.
You have even admitted this.
This is why its hard to take you seriously.Freedom never fits into the socialist equation.
Do you have the freedom to starve?In fact large portions of the peoples freedom are always sacrificed for the so called greater good of society.
Do you have the freedom to no housing?
Do you have the freedom to be dictated by a boss at work?
Do you have the freedom to no health care?
Socialism is applying democracy and freedom into the workplace. Workers owning the means of production democratically.
"Privatization is a neoliberal and imperialist plan. Health can’t be privatized because it is a fundamental human right, nor can education, water, electricity and other public services. They can’t be surrendered to private capital that denies the people from their rights."-Hugo Chavez
Hmm source on this?In reality Hugo Chavez is just a puppet of Cuba.
See statements like these are hard to take seriously without any proof or any thought into them at all.
Why would Hugo Chavez (a anti imperialist) be a puppet of Cuba (who are anti imperialist)?
They are allied states and Chavez has developed close relations with the Castro bros and various other Cuba officials but he is no way a "puppet". They are allies.
And why do you state this?Sure he has his own ambitions but without Cuba he would not still be president of Venezuela.
The way Latin America is turning out right now i defiantly im gonna raise the BS flag. Look at all the leftists being elected in Latin America. Take a look at the Pink Tide: Pink tide - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Chavez was just the beginning.
He was a big "threat" to America that they supported a coup against him.Plus Chavez can live only so long so him as a threat is really minimal at best.
And what kind of "threat" are we talking about here? Is it the FOX News claim that he is "more dangerous than Al Qaeda"?
Or is it the threat that he aint so good for US corporate profits?
I doubt that a democracy is going to break out into a civil war. Maybe a few riots but civil war na...The real danger lies in the possibility of civil war in Venezuela.
What assets? Cheap oil to Cuba for doctors to come to Venezuela?Most likely Cuba would protect its assets.
NoHave you ever heard this slogan? "No Army is Revolutionary"
I would disagree with that slogan
Ok...... They were an outdated army... Moderninizing it problem aint a bad idea..Hugo Chavez is putting large amounts of money into Venezuela's armed forces.
Ok... Russia makes pretty damn cheap armsArms from Russia and so on,
Well Colombia a massive US ally has bases right next door to Venezuela, and we did try to overthrow him in a armed coup, and we do support opposition parties with millions of dollars and history shows that the killing a left wing leader we dont like VIA CIA, or other resources is not out of the picture.and the excuse is that the US might invade.
True i think Chavez might be a little paranoid on this claim if i was a leader of a left wing party in Latin America i wouldnt take US supported invasion or coups out of the picture.
Operation Balboa, which was a supposed simulation but who knows if it will ever be actually used.Show me anywhere that shows that we want to invade Venezuela.
US Supported Coup 2002
Well we do "want to take" (neoliberally speaking) Venezuela. Why else would we support a coup against him?Sure we have interest in toppling Chavez but no where have we even gave a sign of wanting to occupy Venezuela. Yet Hugo Chavez will go on for hours telling his country about the US wants to take Venezuela.
Castros conspiracy theory?Lol you speak of conspiracy theories while Chavez keeps asserting his own conspiracy theories. Some are just funny some are just as crazy as Castros or like that nut in Iran.
This is where the Marxist analysis comes in. In the rush to support an emerging
"revolutionary" situation in South America, many radicals have completely
forgotten that capitalism is not just some form of government, but a mode of
production that is not isolated in one nation, class, or done away with simply
by having the workers run "their" own factories. Chávez very skillfully keeps
the attention on policy differences with the US government so as to throw up a
smokescreen with which to hide the fact that he is actually marching right in
step with neo-liberal globalization's grand scheme for the region.
What possible use is it to go on and on about how unjust the war in Iraq is, for
instance, when Halliburton remains the chief services contractor for PDVSA?
How enormously distracting is it for Chávez to play verbal war games with
Condoleezza Rice while welcoming Chevron - the murderous company she
once directed - into the country with open arms, even calling them "great
friends of the revolutionary process"?
So you claimed they were "a Marxist vanguard party", now this whole article just pretty much claims they are not Marxist and are in fact neoliberal?
Your going around and around contradicting yourself you do realize this right?
Hmm interesting analysis, and opinion piece.On the one hand, Venezuela's oil nationalization left much of the industry's
infrastructure undeveloped, and building relationships with the transnationals
is the only way to overcome this without immediately bankrupting the country.
Chávez certainly can't hope to go from relying solely on oil and importing up
to 80% of Venezuela's food, to a completely "sovereign" and self-sufficient
nation overnight... but on the other hand there is absolutely nothing to suggest
that he is doing anything other than trying to deepen this dependency. Under
the banner of socialism and with slogans of "development", Chávez has presided over the biggest handover of national resources in Venezuela's history.
And how else could they possibly hope to do it? In late 2003 Bolivia nearly
went through a revolution just at the suggestion of privatization. Chávez, on
the other hand, is such a "revolutionary" that he can sign over the rights to the
massive offshore Deltana Platform - which will create a "dead zone" in the
ocean and have access to more gas reserves than ALL of Bolivia combined -
and nobody will even realize that it just happened!
For Chávez, anything that brings in money from the country's energy reserves
(combined, the largest in the world) is positive. His single driving goal is to
convert Venezuela into the number one energy producing country on earth -
and for this to happen he relies not only on the transnationals, but the continuity of the capitalist system that consumes that energy. Despite scattered references to "the environment", he has absolutely no intention of developing or
providing the alternative energy solutions necessary to reduce economic dependency on the oil market. In fact, the only type of energy Chávez seems to
be interested in that doesn't come from gas, petrol, or coal... is nuclear.
[...]Of all the people we met around Plaza Bolívar and the streets of Western Caracas, by far the most interesting was a fellow Tupamaro, probably in his thirties,
who pulled me aside and explained, "What we need to do is line up all those
politicians in the National Assembly and have them machine-gunned." Entirely
in agreement - but still wanting to play devil's advocate - I asked, "What about
[Gustavo] Cisneros?" By his reply I knew he hadn't been joking around, "You
need to forget about Cisneros, that guy has already escaped; all those people
are long gone, and they took the money with them. The ones you need to pay
attention to, the people who are robbing us right now - are the same ones who
are in this 'revolutionary' government."
To fully understand the dramatic nature of his viewpoint, one has to realize that
in last year's elections, officialist parties took total control of the National Assembly, meaning that this particular Tupamaro was proposing the assassination
of some of the country's most "revolutionary" and committed Chavistas.
http://www.redanarchist.org/propagan...nvenezuela.pdfInteresting analysis by an anarcho-communist.
Whats your point?
Well he is an anarcho-communist. Meaning he believes there should be no state.. And many far left wingers claim that Chavez is "not revolutionary enough." Youll get that with the left. You have your authoritain socialists etc. who claim he is not living up to Marxism and making the transition from capitalism to socialism fast enough.. Or youll have you anarchists who claim that he is just another statist tool. Or youll have the democratic socialists and other various leftists who believe that it should be up to the people and the vote.Even the extreme Left recognize that Chavez is not all that he claims.
You hurt my feelings.In fact you sound more like an hack than anything else.
Well you have not lead me to believe that he is some sort of authoritarian figure what your trying to make it out to sound because you really have not offered anything convensing other than "why doesnt he stop these prison riots" or "why did he use a newly created police force to bring down crime" or "well the elections were free and fair they werent because he used bad rhetoric!" And then you bring up "well he is creating a Marxist vanguard party" and then you bring in a anarcho-communists opinion as evidence that claims that Chavez is no marxist.All that you seem to be able to do is ad hominem little interludes while trying to evade the fact that Hugo Chavez is not the good guy.
Well your "extreme left" opinion piece you just listed says he sucks..It seems that the Extreme Left is just using him and hoping that he will be a good little doggy and as soon as he is no longer useful for the movement off with his head.
I dont know? Will he get the nomination if Chavez is truly going to die in like a month?I wonder how they will like Adan Chavez?