Chavez Says He May Seek 'Indefinite' Re-election - Page 24

Trajan Octavian Titus · 10-29-06, 04:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeftyHenry

LOL you actually would. Did the American's violate the British constitution during their revolution?

The colonists were not British citizens not to mention there is no British constitution. Furthermore; it was infact the crown which violated the natural rights of the Colonists in the case of Chile it was Allende who was violating the rights of the Chileans, your analogy works but not the way you think it does in this case Allende was the crown.

Quote:

There was democracy under Allende. I point to the 1972 elections for the hundred and sixty eight time.

A dictatorship of the proletariat even if Democratic in form is still a dictatorship a tyranny of the masses found in absolute Democracy where the rights of the minority are ****ed over and out is not Democracy it is the perversion of a Representative Republic.

Quote:

How? Did you read my big words? I thought maybe if I wrote big, you'd understand easier but that didn't work.

You still haven't rebutted my point that there were free and fair elections in 1970 and 72.

One can not vote to steal the rights of the minority that is not liberty that is tyranny of the masses.

Quote:

Capitalism killed democracy in Chile. How? The majority of the people wanted socialism or state capitalism yet capitalism was forced on them against their will.

Ya and the majority of Germans wanted National Socialism, good for them it makes it no less of tyranny, but while Fascists only hate rich minorities Communists hate the rich in general and any system of government founded on hatred is not long for this world.

Quote:

No as I've pointed out before, that was only to the upper middle class supurbanites who produced nothing.

Well you're also FOS the massive shortages were not just for the bourgeiouse under Allende the shortages were incurred on everyone.

Quote:

Workers, farmers, and the masses in general got everything they needed through union supply lines.

Sure they did and that must be why there were massive worker strikes from 72 on until the tyrant Allende was removed.

Trajan Octavian Titus · 10-29-06, 04:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeftyHenry

LOL the sad part is that TOT probably believes that Nixon's elections were free and fair

while Chile's 1972 election wasn't because the people didn't elect the people he agrees with

I'm sorry but Allende only won a plurality, in the '72 elections Nixon only lost one state to Mcgovern.

Trajan Octavian Titus · 10-29-06, 04:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joby

What the **** are you talking about? Most of the time we agree, but this?

There was massive amounts of false info leaked by the government to voters. The media was pretty much told to keep a lid on a massive number of stories or face the government. Huge amounts of money were paid so people could tap the phones of the opposition and steal their personal info to use against them. Reporters were threatened with their lives for even thinking about exposing the massive amounts of curruption occuring

...oh...****...you're not talking about nixons 1972 victory...or the fact that the US president used the fbi and foreign nationals to destroy the opposition...

my bad. continue as you were...

No ofcourse you're right the fact that Mcgovern only won one single state couldn't have anything to do with the fact that the American people simply rejected a socialist like Mcgovern.

Volker · 11-02-06, 05:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Volker

I would like seeing Venezuela to have a seat there. But ihe election is difficult, because both, Guatemala and Venezuela have a lobby. There are 192 countries and 128 are needed for a two-third majority. Last I checked it was 110:77 for Guatemala. Chile did abstention.

In 1979 there was a situation like this between Colombia and Cuba. After the 154. ballot both countries withdrawed and Mexico won being the surrogate candidate.

So now we have another surrogate candidate, it will be Panama who gets the seat. The voting is estimated to take place next Tuesday.

Kim Jong Il · 10-03-07, 09:42 PM

Looking at it from a DEMOCRATIC Socialist perceptive such as mine, I don't exactly support Chavez's actions, though I think I see what he's trying to do.

From the beginning, Chavez's supposed goal was to establish that of a Leninist Communism ("For those of you who do not know the socialism I plan for my country should read Marx and Lenin"). This requires a Revolution, obviously. How such a Revolution is obtained is divided into two methods.

A violent revolution. Advocated by Leninists. And an Indirect revolution, working from within a State. Advocated by Democratic Socialists and Social Democrats all around, including me, partly because D.S. and S.D. believe in rather than abolition of the State, a reform of the State is necassary. Social Democracy preserves a bit of Capitalism, however, in which Democratic Socialism simply preserves a Democratic State. Now, Chavez seems to have gone with Indirect revolution, and is in a position of power with which he can know work towards a model society.

His abolition of term limit, it seems, is a plea for more time to "revolutionize" in fear of a reelection of a more Right Wing president that makes all his work seem pointless.

Kim Jong Il · 10-03-07, 09:49 PM

And cuz he's a total 3ekjbd.

Vader · 11-11-07, 08:44 PM

Chavez is overdue for a visit from some Langley jungle boys.

Trajan Octavian Titus · 11-13-07, 09:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vader

Chavez is overdue for a visit from some Langley jungle boys.

Damn skippy.

cascadian · 11-13-07, 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trajan Octavian Titus

The same can be said of fascism:

On the one hand it's straight from the horse's mouth, on the other hand, are you going to believe what Hitler tells you?

Hitler at one point was enamored with the US and its oppression of blacks. SFW? Does that make the US a Nazi country?

German National Socialism was a German/Aryan-centric political philosophy, "adding" up Nationalism and Socialism as you did in your post doesn't make any sense.

So... when Chavez fails at a coup attempt he's demonstrating " contempt for the democratic process", but Musharraf has a successful coup and you didn't seem to be bothered by that. For that matter, do you see the opposition to Chavez and their failed coup as some kind of democratic alternative?

Trajan Octavian Titus · 11-13-07, 11:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cascadian

On the one hand it's straight from the horse's mouth, on the other hand, are you going to believe what Hitler tells you?

Hitler at one point was enamored with the US and its oppression of blacks. SFW? Does that make the US a Nazi country?

German National Socialism was a German/Aryan-centric political philosophy, "adding" up Nationalism and Socialism as you did in your post doesn't make any sense.

Fascism is a nationalistic form of socialism, there's no better way to describe it.

Quote:

So... when Chavez fails at a coup attempt he's demonstrating " contempt for the democratic process", but Musharraf has a successful coup and you didn't seem to be bothered by that. For that matter, do you see the opposition to Chavez and their failed coup as some kind of democratic alternative?

The coup attempt against Chavez was a counter-coup and it would have been best for Democracy had it succeeded which is proven through the situation in Venezuela today. As to Musharaff again I supported it at first because it was necessary to prevent a violent Islamist revolution, however, as I have made clear I no longer support Musharaff.