Hugo Chavez - Dictator for Life?
(See here) where the AP reports, in a piece that appeared in the NYTimes, that Venezuelan President Hugh Chavez now enjoys dictatorial power in ruling Venezuela.
I do not understand why the Venezuelan government even bothers monkeying around with parlor games. Just go ahead and get it over with. No more need for Democratic institutions, just be done with the charade and declare Hugo Chavez "Dictator for Life".
I wish to point out to everyone that Hitler, too, was first elected by "the people". I note with interest how the piece notes that Chavez supporters waved signs stating "Socialism is Democracy". Hitler first won power through election while leading the "National Socialist" party to electoral victory in Deutschland (Germany).
Socialism might not be undemocratic, but dictatorship sure is!
I do not understand why the Venezuelan government even bothers monkeying around with parlor games. Just go ahead and get it over with. No more need for Democratic institutions, just be done with the charade and declare Hugo Chavez "Dictator for Life".
I wish to point out to everyone that Hitler, too, was first elected by "the people". I note with interest how the piece notes that Chavez supporters waved signs stating "Socialism is Democracy". Hitler first won power through election while leading the "National Socialist" party to electoral victory in Deutschland (Germany).
Socialism might not be undemocratic, but dictatorship sure is!
posted by Little David at 1/31/2007 01:27:00 PM
23 Comments:
"The National Socialist Party", was not really socialist at all.
Yeah, and Hugo Chavez really isn't a dictator. Give me a break.
Well, the Nazi party really wasn't socialist at all and frankly Chavez was elected by an overwhelming majority (the same cannot be said for the current American president).
With regards to this beat up, you are of course aware that the right wing leanings of the New York Times? The reality is rather more mundane:
Here's what's actually happening: The Venezuelan assembly is poised to pass a law that will give the executive branch greater leeway to establish norms on a certain range of issues. Most of these involve guidelines for the president's own cabinet-level agencies. In other words, the Venezuelan version of the IRS will map out the country's tax structure; the Transportation department will devise its own strategic plan for public transit nationwide, etc. This represents a shift of certain powers from the legislative branch to the executive, to be sure, but on paper they don't seem to stray too far from the powers that the executive branch in the United States already has. Venezuelanaysis.com has a full listing of the ten issue areas that are affected.
It is important to note that this type of power-transfer is allowed under the Venezuelan constitution of 1999, which expressly permits the President to issue executive orders specifically within these issue areas. Of course, the constitution continues to guide the country's overall legal framework, which is to say that no "decree" can supercede constitutional law.
I'm highly suspicious of Chavez and certainly he loves his grandstanding but this is a non-issue.
Cheers.
Heh heh, well the right wing within America calls the NY Times a left wing rag. Personally, I have found little to object to within the NY Times. However, I am extremely tolerant of eveyone's right to speak their minds in the "great debate". I only object to those who try to force their viewpoint on us before the debate is completed.
As for Hugo, I applauded when the coup attempt against him failed. However I am extremely troubled by his over reaction to the failed coup attempt.
Hugo is engaging in activity that is stifling public debate. As long as the oil holds out, he can probably can maintain public support as he ladles on the government benefits to the masses.
Does he serve as a fine example for other third world countries? Let us examine how he provides medical care to "the masses". He provides thousands of Cuban Doctors in exchange for oil. What? The Venezuelan model is incapable of motivating enough of their own "best and brightest" to become Doctors? If Venezuela is the model, then what is another developing country that does not enjoy oil wealth supposed to do to provide health care for their citizens?
And what about all the Cuban citizens that now see so many of their Doctors being sent to Venezuela? What, they no longer need the medical care that could be provided?
Beyond medical care, let us examine other aspects of his society's needs. Will his model provide rewards for those who help him meet his society's needs or is it going to be a one man show?
My own estimation is that Venezuela is showing increasing evidence of becoming a "one man show" that only works because of the oil wealth. Deprived of the wealth, the system would collapse because there is nothing visionary in where Hugo Chavez leads.
Be that as it may, the original article as reported in the NYT is misleading junk.
Regards.
Well, the NYTimes has only served as a fruitful source of topics that Americans needed to discuss and debate.
I can not defend this as being totally true now, however evidence is that this was true in our history.
That you even would bother to argue against the validity of the NYTimes position even argues for the validity of the value the NYTimes represents to American society.
Perhaps, in my pipe dream, National Public Radio will one day supplant the New York Times on our plates and help us focus on the issues required for public debate. However it is not my wish that what we focus on somehow ends up being what is the most popular video stream coming from "YouTube" if you understand what I mean.
Lethal Poison:
You claim you do not know what a dictator is. Watch Hugo Chavez and how his government developes. I myself see little promising and many things troubling.
Is a dictator less of a dictator if "one person" decrees become law? Was Hitler less of a dictator because he was elected by "the people"?
Are their no similarities between unreasonable social support for what was going on in their societies then what is going on in Venezuela today?
I guess there is some difference. Hitler climbed to the top on the back of hatred. Hugo Chavez climbed to the top on the back of oil.
Without the benefit of oil, the Hugo Chavez revolution would collapse. When the oil runs out, so will the revolution.
1. Without the benefit of oil, the Hugo Chavez revolution would collapse. When the oil runs out, so will the revolution.
Reply- What else did you expect him to use? Bananas? Venezuela has been being abused by capitalism for centuries, and therefore has developed as little more then a resource outpost full of cheap, uneducated labor.
The one thing he has to pull his country up and modernize it is the oil revenues, and I think hes doing a pretty good job of that.
Do you think the US would be where it is without some of its resources? How big was coal and steel in the US? Oil and gas? Timber? Fishing grounds?
All countries exploit their resources, that is nothing new. Its a matter of who benefits from that exploitation. In Venezuela, the people benefit. In the US, whatever private entity that purchased the resources benefits, and often at the expense of others.
But in America, we had the benefit of George Washington (and Thomas Jefferson, and Alexander Hamilton, and Benjamin Franklin and... oh you get the idea) to set up the institutions and who agreed to live within the laws they set up.
Now, just how willing is Hugo Chavez to retire and himself live under the same system he is setting up for everyone else? I would be most impressed if he agreed to retire without a pension and lived like a Venezuelan peasant. What the heck, he would at least have free medical care provided by Cuban Doctors!
1. I would be most impressed if he agreed to retire without a pension and lived like a Venezuelan peasant. What the heck, he would at least have free medical care provided by Cuban Doctors!
Reply- Maybe there would be Venezuelan doctors if the peasantry wasnt oppressed by global capitalism since the discovery age.
If I recall, Cubas health system was abyssmal until Fidel Castro took over.
Where did you see me criticize Cuba?
OK, I'll start here. Cuba was unable to exist during the cold war without large scale subsidies from the Soviet Union.
Cuba's Castro is another example of a dictator with one man rule where dissent and free speech are squashed.
1. Where did you see me criticize Cuba?
Reply- you didnt criticize Cuba, you repeatedly criticize Venezuela and Chavez for depending on foreign doctors from Cuba though. As if this is some sort of slight on Venezuela, even though, clearly, its going to take Chavez a very long time to clean up the dump capitalism has made out of Venezuela, and be able to cultivate a population and infrastructure that will produce highly educated individuals.
This is what took Castro decades of Russian funding to do. Unlike Castro though, Chavez has oil revenues to work with.
2. OK, I'll start here. Cuba was unable to exist during the cold war without large scale subsidies from the Soviet Union.
Reply- Why is this? Because Cuba was such an industrialized powerhouse with inexhaustible resources?
No, it was because it had been dependent on a sugar cash crop and tourism from industrialized capitalistic nations, primarily the US.
3. Cuba's Castro is another example of a dictator with one man rule where dissent and free speech are squashed.
Reply- Do you have evidence that Chavez is squashing dissent and free speech as Castro has been reported to do? Because he is trying to remove term limits, this is some sign that hes going to do this?
Hugo Chavez spends long hours on television giving monologue presentations while denying equal air time to the opposition. Venezuelan citizens only get to hear one side of the story.
This is not what he is going to do in the future, it is what is already going on.
1. Hugo Chavez spends long hours on television giving monologue presentations while denying equal air time to the opposition. Venezuelan citizens only get to hear one side of the story.
Reply- So, Fox News gives equal air time to the opposition? This is nothing new.
Whoever controls the media outlets decides who is heard.
Yes, Fox News is at least right of center in their reporting. But we Americans also enjoy CNN, MSNBC, CBS, NBC, ABC, PBS, NPR etc.
Please see this (BBC News) piece that reports Hugo is not going to be just satisfied with dominating the air waves, he seems to want to shut down any broadcast outlet that dares to voice opposition.
1. Please see this (BBC News) piece that reports Hugo is not going to be just satisfied with dominating the air waves, he seems to want to shut down any broadcast outlet that dares to voice opposition.
Reply- Good thing CNN never advocated a coup or violent overthrow of the government huh?
You think for a second if someone came on the news and tried to organize an armed revolt against the US, that they wouldnt immediatley be arrested and tried for treason?
This station he is shutting down is not only "against" him, it seems to be an extremist revolutionary network, advocating physical force against government officials.
So under Chavez, one one-sided system of government is going to be replaced by another system of one-sided government.
Under the Chavez system, he gets to rule by decree and does not even have to bother with convincing the legislature anymore.
Oh yeah, things really are improving under Chavez allright <--- previous comment laced with sarcasm.
1. Oh yeah, things really are improving under Chavez allright <--- previous comment laced with sarcasm.
Reply- If you are one of the majority of the peasantry without a pot to piss in, yeah, things are getting much better.
I guess I could care less about the plantation owners, oil tycoons and media owners and their boohoo sob stories about how they got their shit taken away, now they are bitter and theyre trying to revolt. Whaaaa.
So, call me a populist and file a lawsuit.
OK, let us watch and see if the Hugo model yields results.
Of course, those of us who are impatient might in the mean time choose to resort to models that have withstood the test of time and actually seem to work.
Even "socialist" Sweden is a capitalist society albeit with a strong socialist influence.
Stock tip? Go short on investments based upon Hugo Chavez's Venezuelan model. He still has oil to sell, but if you dare invest any money in his society, he is apt to just steal your investment from you when he nationalizes what you invested in.
1. Of course, those of us who are impatient might in the mean time choose to resort to models that have withstood the test of time and actually seem to work.
Reply- The US model of capitalism has been consitantly shown to fail. Check out most of the old imperialist countries. Spain, France, Britain, Netherlands.....they all followed the US model or similiar, and in all countries their people got pissed, and in 2 of them, they had revolts/civil wars over it. They are all heavily socialized.
Turns out, the general populace doesnt much like being slaves and living in squaler while the upper crust capital owners profit off their backs.
Unfortunatley, huge amounts of welfare have kept those populations appeased. I contest that an overburdened welfare system is not the correct solution.
I suppose getting back to topic...
Certainly I agree that Chavez has dictatorial leanings but let's be honest about this. He has not broken or sought to amend any of the nation's constitutional laws. Furthermore, he is supported by an absolute (and hugely significant) majority of the Venuzeulan people.
Some of this righteous democratic vigor should perhaps be directed at another president - who has dismal support from his nation, has sought to consolidate executive power like no other president of the nation, and has exhibited tight control of the nations media.
Once again, with regards to the original article that this blog is based on, the basis of that article if false. It is a clear misinterpretation of reality.
Regards.
So, Michael, you object to what George Dubyah Bush does (through executive orders) but then would praise what Hugo Chavez is now going to do (through Presidential decree)?
Personally, I think the American President and the Venezuelan President are both acting in ways that are worthy of condemnation.
By the way, Hugo Chavez IS trying to amend the Venezuelan constitution. According to the constitution, his current term would be his final term. He thinks he needs to serve beyond that and wants to change the constitution to allow for this.
As I said before Little David, Chavez has clear dictatorial leanings.
However, I maintain my comments on this thread. YOUR ORIGINAL ARTICLE is based on a misrepresentation to the point of fabrication. It should be acknowledged as such.
Regards.
Post a Comment
<< Home