Hugo Chavez has died

dr.bollocko

Chicken liver banned.

The poster. As opposed to some obscure Venezuelan tradition.

Chuck Stone

southsiderosie wrote: »

Chavez apologists will just say "well other countries do it too!" or other such whataboutery.

Human Rights Watch has issued several damning reports on the Chavez regime - feel free to read through them at your leisure.

A quick read of the summary of A Decade Under Chávez Political Intolerance and Lost Opportunities for Advancing Human Rights in Venezuela from your own link turns this up:

His [Chavez] first major achievement, the enactment of a new constitution in 1999, offered an extraordinary opportunity for the country to shore up the rule of law and strengthen the protection of human rights. The 1999 Constitution significantly expanded human rights guarantees by, among other things, granting Venezuela’s international rights obligations precedence over domestic law. It also created a new Supreme Court and sought to provide this court with the institutional independence it would need to serve as the ultimate guarantor of these fundamental rights.

But this historic opportunity has since been largely squandered. The most dramatic setback came in April 2002 when a coup d’état temporarily removed Chávez from office and replaced him with an unelected president who, in his first official act, dissolved the country’s democratic institutions, suspending the legislature and disbanding the Supreme Court.

http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/venezuela0908web.pdf

Context. Always context.

Blackbush1905

Chuck Stone wrote: »

A quick read of the summary of A Decade Under Chávez Political Intolerance and Lost Opportunities for Advancing Human Rights in Venezuela from your own link turns this up:



Context. Always context.

Whats your opinion chuck, great leader?

Most likely whacked by the yanks!

Chuck Stone

Blackbush1905 wrote: »

Most likely whacked by the yanks!

Do you have anything substantive to add or are you just here to boo and hiss?

ArtSmart

Hmmmm. Chicken. Liver.
Urghhhhhagghhh.


Anyhow....

Yeah. Aint easy. Since way back the States kind of feel Latin America should be it's bread/ oil/ rubber etc basket.

The States (ie the MNC's) did all they could do, killing/bribing/ supporting monsters like Pinochet wise, and yet still L.A. seems to want autonomy.

weird.


guess them hot tempered Latinos don't know what's good for 'em.


hopefully the States can give them the joys of the American Dream before it's too late.

mccarthy37

I wonder will Brian Dobson and Samantha Libreri get sent over to report on the funeral.

catallus

wendell borton wrote: »

While he was no way perfect, he did come to power with good intentions. His lasting legacy will be that he broke the hold that a small elite had on the nation that facilitated exploitation of the country.

I think this is a good point.

Chavez broke the hold of private capitalist enterprise over the natural resources of that country. It was seriously being bled dry by the markets and the international economy would have used it as a private mine of mineral wealth and labour to bolster it's corrupt financial markets. All this nonsense about repeated recessions is just a regurgitation of the mouthpieces of the international financial controllers.

But nothing is black and white: the points made about the rise in anti-global feelings in Venezuela has been made in this thread, but that's politics: sadly the rise of anti-semitic sentiment was part and parcel of Chavez's populist policies: an easy catch-cry against the United States of America/United Nations/United Kingdom.

We here in Ireland should look and see what is possible if we had leaders such as Chavez; we wouldn't be sold down the river by corrupted politicians who pay more attention to ratings agencies than to the needs and voices of their own people.

jank

R.I.P.

Hopefully this along with the imminent departure of Castro will spell an end to extreme socalist policies in South America. Follow the lead of Brazil and Chile.

southsiderosie

Chuck Stone wrote: »

A quick read of the summary of A Decade Under Chávez Political Intolerance and Lost Opportunities for Advancing Human Rights in Venezuela from your own link turns this up:



Context. Always context.

Yes, the context is that the attempted coup was over 10 years ago, and democratic institutions have deteriorated further under Chavez. Would you care to address that point...or the soaring violent crime rates...or the inflation rates?

jank

southsiderosie wrote: »

Yes, the context is that the attempted coup was over 10 years ago, and democratic institutions have deteriorated further under Chavez. Would you care to address that point...or the soaring violent crime rates...or the inflation rates?

This is true, whatever about good 'intentions' the country has gone backward since he came to power. No sane person would say otherwise.

ArtSmart

southsiderosie wrote: »

Yes, the context is that the attempted coup was over 10 years ago, and democratic institutions have deteriorated further under Chavez. Would you care to address that point...or the soaring violent crime rates...or the inflation rates?

So would socialist philosophy create these problems do you think?

or the weather?


or external agencies working against change in Venezuela?

or what. Exactly?

No system is perfect.

Be in Capitalist or Socialist.

Unless you feel one is inherently flawed?

ElChe32

Descansa en paz Comandante Chavez

southsiderosie

ArtSmart wrote: »

So would socialist philosophy create these problems do you think?

or the weather?


or external agencies working against change in Venezuela?

or what. Exactly?

No system is perfect.

Be in Capitalist or Socialist.

Unless you feel one is inherently flawed?

I feel a system where power is consolidated under one person is flawed. I'm indifferent as to what kind of economic system is involved. Chavez created a one-man show in Venezuela, so he should be held responsible not only for good outcomes like poverty reduction, but bad outcomes as well, namely high inflation, high violent crime rates, and the squandering of the oil boom.

ArtSmart

southsiderosie wrote: »

I feel a system where power is consolidated under one person is flawed. I'm indifferent as to what kind of economic system is involved. Chavez created a one-man show in Venezuela, so he should be held responsible not only for good outcomes like poverty reduction, but bad outcomes as well, namely high inflation, high violent crime rates, and the squandering of the oil boom.

same as this guy I guess.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvador_Allende

for sure, it aint easy to determine what is good n what is bad. But what corporate America wants, US foreign policy wants.

and if that means crippling anyone who trods on corporate toes, so be it.

catallus

southsiderosie wrote: »

I feel a system where power is consolidated under one person is flawed. I'm indifferent as to what kind of economic system is involved. Chavez created a one-man show in Venezuela, so he should be held responsible not only for good outcomes like poverty reduction, but bad outcomes as well, namely high inflation, high violent crime rates, and the squandering of the oil boom.

Power in any place in the world is never, ever consolidated under one person and never has been in the history of the world: even a cursory understanding of history would tell anyone this.

Anywhere in history, in any part of the world, power is always shared between the elite: it's called oligarchy. And under any system, be it the rule of sovereign kings, or communism, or parliamentary democracy, or anarchism, or fascism, or neo-conservative republicanism, an oligarchy always lurks behind the facade.

Henlars67

padd b1975 wrote: »

A benign dictator was the soundbite I heard most used to describe him.

RIP all the same.

by the right wing media

southsiderosie

catallus wrote: »

Power in any place in the world is never, ever consolidated under one person and never has been in the history of the world: even a cursory understanding of history would tell anyone this.

Anywhere in history, in any part of the world, power is always shared between the elite: it's called oligarchy. And under any system, be it the rule of sovereign kings, or communism, or parliamentary democracy, or anarchism, or fascism, or neo-conservative republicanism, an oligarchy always lurks behind the facade.

Eh, cults of personality have long been a feature of politics. While they may have a cabal behind them, political life revolves around them. While the Chavez situation is not as extreme as say, Stalin's or Mao's regime, Stalin and Mao were the center of gravity within the political universe during their times.

Despite all of the hysteria around Barack Obama, if he dropped dead tomorrow, there would be a clear line of succession and we would not expect any wild swings in policies, major changes to the structure of the economy, or a military coup. In situations where political power is vested in an individual, the end of their reign often leads to chaos - nobody knows where their next deal is coming from, or who may be exiled/sent to the gulag, etc.

ArtSmart

catallus wrote: »

Power in any place in the world is never, ever consolidated under one person and never has been in the history of the world: even a cursory understanding of history would tell anyone this.

Anywhere in history, in any part of the world, power is always shared between the elite: it's called oligarchy. And under any system, be it the rule of sovereign kings, or communism, or parliamentary democracy, or anarchism, or fascism, or neo-conservative republicanism, an oligarchy always lurks behind the facade.

True.

Even a 'despot' needs help.

I think some are confusing end product with process.

If we accessed political systems by that yard stick only, Ireland and indeed the USA and many other countries are in some sorry state of political oppression.

The meeja and de money dance a complex dance. And whilst truth is tricky, black n white declarations of political validity must be avoided - unless independent credible bodies suggest otherwise.

AFAIK, the case for Chavez, is still out.

southsiderosie

ArtSmart wrote: »

I think some are confusing end product with process.

No. Both the process and the end product are deeply flawed in this case.

catallus

southsiderosie wrote: »

Eh, cults of personality have long been a feature of politics. While they may have a cabal behind them, political life revolves around them. While the Chavez situation is not as extreme as say, Stalin's or Mao's regime, Stalin and Mao were the center of gravity within the political universe during their times.

Despite all of the hysteria around Barack Obama, if he dropped dead tomorrow, there would be a clear line of succession and we would not expect any wild swings in policies, major changes to the structure of the economy, or a military coup. In situations where political power is vested in an individual, the end of their reign often leads to chaos - nobody knows where their next deal is coming from, or who may be exiled/sent to the gulag, etc.

Cults of personality are just that: cults, a chimera to distract from the true powers; a good analogy in our present situation is the idea of parliamentary democracy (such as we have it) which at every turn bows down to the demands of the technocrats who are doing the bidding of the financial markets.

Political power is never, ever, ever, vested in an individual. It matters nothing about the system, the only question is how many people are in the elite.

My name is URL

southsiderosie wrote: »

I feel a system where power is consolidated under one person is flawed. I'm indifferent as to what kind of economic system is involved. Chavez created a one-man show in Venezuela, so he should be held responsible not only for good outcomes like poverty reduction, but bad outcomes as well, namely high inflation, high violent crime rates, and the squandering of the oil boom.

What kind of system, body-politic or democratic shift would be needed change that though? Jesus.. it'd be damn near impossible to convince people of that in already functioning economies

southsiderosie

catallus wrote: »

Cults of personality are just that: cults, a chimera to distract from the true powers; a good analogy in our present situation is the idea of parliamentary democracy (such as we have it) which at every turn bows down to the demands of the technocrats who are doing the bidding of the financial markets.

Political power is never, ever, ever, vested in an individual. It matters nothing about the system, the only question is how many people are in the elite.

So the Venezuelan political system doesn't revolve around Chavez? Do tell.

Lightbulb Sun

The vice president is saying the cancer was induced by Venezuelas enemies. Cool story bro.

catallus

southsiderosie wrote: »

So the Venezuelan political system doesn't revolve around Chavez? Do tell.

How about you go and do a bit of your own learning.

You could start with the history of that country in the twentieth century; the reasons for the rise to power of Chavez; his actions to wrestle the natural resources from private capitalists who were robbing the country blind for the benefit of the previous elite; and then do a bit of digging into why the United States of America did so much to destabilise the new government, and then have a think about how the present oligarchy can be corrupted by the old one into reverting to the old ways.

And keep an eye on the news.

southsiderosie

Lightbulb Sun wrote: »

The vice president is saying the cancer was induced by Venezuelas enemies. Cool story bro.

LOL, if the CIA was spreading cancer bugs, I think they would have gone for the Castros before Chavez... :pac:

Headshot

He was a very controversial character

was he a good or bad leader?

southsiderosie

catallus wrote: »

How about you go and do a bit of your own learning.

You could start with the history of that country in the twentieth century; the reasons for the rise to power of Chavez; his actions to wrestle the natural resources from private capitalists who were robbing the country blind for the benefit of the previous elite; and then do a bit of digging into why the United States of America did so much to destabilise the new government, and then have a think about how the present oligarchy can be corrupted by the old one into reverting to the old ways.

And keep an eye on the news.

Eh, I lived and worked in Latin America, have studied the region's politics extensively, and read and speak Spanish so I'm not getting my news filtered through the US media. And having lived with a Sandinista family, I am no stranger to the effect that US meddling has had in the region. I also acknowledged the venal nature of Venezuelan elites in an earlier post. In short, you don't really know shít about me, and your comments are way off-base.

That said, Chavez has always exhibited undemocratic 'tendencies' since his own failed coup in the early 1990s. He also squandered an oil boom, has presided over spiraling violent crime and inflation, stacked the courts and government with loyalists, and has generally had a deleterious effect on the country's democratic institutions. He is a classic caudillo, but more insidious than many of his predecessors because he uses the tools of democracy to weaken democracy. Just because he comes from the left rather than the right doesn't make it any better.

Blackbush1905

southsiderosie wrote: »

LOL, if the CIA was spreading cancer bugs, I think they would have gone for the Castros before Chavez... :pac:

Cubans smoke to many cigars they'll kill them on selves just slower, chavez is/was the newest asshole and threat to america!! He needed to go man, he was a threat to our freedom and liberty man!!

catallus

Southsiderosie, I never said i knew "shít" about you: I have an issue with your simplistic idea that Chavez was the overlord of the country without any assistance: to dilute your claims by saying the politics of the country "revolve" around him is a cop-out. And it is one that will be used by the salivating capitalists who will try to corrupt the current de-facto leaders.

And my comments were not "way off base". It's a simple fact of life that political life is controlled by elites.

space_man

southsiderosie wrote: »

Eh, I lived and worked in Latin America, have studied the region's politics extensively, and read and speak Spanish so I'm not getting my news filtered through the US media. And having lived with a Sandinista family, I am no stranger to the effect that US meddling has had in the region. I also acknowledged the venal nature of Venezuelan elites in an earlier post. In short, you don't really know shít about me, and your comments are way off-base.

That said, Chavez has always exhibited undemocratic 'tendencies' since his own failed coup in the early 1990s. He also squandered an oil boom, has presided over spiraling violent crime and inflation, stacked the courts and government with loyalists, and has generally had a deleterious effect on the country's democratic institutions. He is a classic caudillo, but more insidious than many of his predecessors because he uses the tools of democracy to weaken democracy. Just because he comes from the left rather than the right doesn't make it any better.

i think it's fair to say his country's future is hugely uncertain.

southsiderosie

catallus wrote: »

Southsiderosie, I never said i knew "shít" about you: I have an issue with your simplistic idea that Chavez was the overlord of the country without any assistance: to dilute your claims by saying the politics of the country "revolve" around him is a cop-out. And it is one that will be used by the salivating capitalists who will try to corrupt the current de-facto leaders.

And my comments were not "way off base". It's a simple fact of life that political life is controlled by elites.

Venezuelan politics have revolved around Chavez since he came into power. I don't think that is a disputable fact. If you think that he is just a front for a cabal of elites that is really running the show, I disagree. If you are saying that there is a cabal of elites that benefit from Chavez's power, I would agree. But I don't think that changes the fact that the characterization of Chavez as a caudillo, or that assertion that power in Venezuela is vested in Chavez (rather than his office, or the legislature) is simplistic - it's based on over a decade of observing the clear consolidation of power.

Blackbush1905

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Do you have anything substantive to add or are you just here to boo and hiss?

What tickles your fancy sunshine?

KyussBishop

Excellent article from Greg Palast, highlighting in detail, why the US hated Chavez:
http://www.gregpalast.com/vaya-con-dios-hugo-chavez-mi-amigo/

Mr Whirly

Anyone that hated golf that much has my vote. RIP.

Blackbush1905

southsiderosie wrote: »

Venezuelan politics have revolved around Chavez since he came into power. I don't think that is a disputable fact. If you think that he is just a front for a cabal of elites that is really running the show, I disagree. If you are saying that there is a cabal of elites that benefit from Chavez's power, I would agree. But I don't think that changes the fact that the characterization of Chavez as a caudillo, or that assertion that power in Venezuela is vested in Chavez (rather than his office, or the legislature) is simplistic - it's based on over a decade of observing the clear consolidation of power.

Chavez is/was a totalitarian narcissist, and don't get me wrong the US is the most corrupt nation on the planet, but what the **** are u talkin about rosie u silly southside girl, cabel of elites no not at all unless you were lifting your wosie wed dwess up to give chavo a skwink of rosies best, you didn't live in slums of caracas did you, he just likes your frilly knickers!!

Banned

Weathering

Didn't read any previous posts but Chavez was loved by the poor and disliked by the rich
A politician for the ordinary man not the wealthy

Blackbush1905

Weathering wrote: »

Didn't read any previous posts but Chavez was loved by the poor and disliked by the rich
A politician for the ordinary man not the wealthy

Weathering true & loyal chavez fanboy from the barrios of Caracas!!!

Weathering

Blackbush1905 wrote: »

Weathering true & loyal chavez fanboy from the barrios of Caracas!!!

Not a fan, nor a hater. I just stated the poor loved him and rich despised him
That would indicate to me that he's is helpful towards the poor and didn't bow down to rich pressures

Also, I just seen a clip of him making a speech in the UN years ago. He said "The devil stood here yesterday,the devil. I can still smell the Sulphur" Then he blessed himself. This was in reference to George W bush, after his illegal invasion of Iraq

Richard Hillman

If Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is leading the tributes, you know he was an awful man. Hopefully freedom is brought to Venezuela.

Weathering

Richard Hillman wrote: »

If Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is leading the tributes, you know he was an awful man. Hopefully freedom is brought to Venezuela.

He was legally elected by his people to serve them and ready to start his 4th term. I don't think freedom is needed when it was already in place. Why comment when you obviously know nothing about the subject.

Weathering

Weathering wrote: »

Not a fan, nor a hater. I just stated the poor loved him and rich despised him
That would indicate to me that he's is helpful towards the poor and didn't bow down to rich pressures

Well, it is certainly cheaper to buy a poor person's vote.

Any polls or references to back up your statement that he was hated by the rich? Or did you just hear that somewhere?

Hande hoche!

southsiderosie wrote: »

Eh, cults of personality have long been a feature of politics. While they may have a cabal behind them, political life revolves around them. While the Chavez situation is not as extreme as say, Stalin's or Mao's regime, Stalin and Mao were the center of gravity within the political universe during their times.

Despite all of the hysteria around Barack Obama, if he dropped dead tomorrow, there would be a clear line of succession and we would not expect any wild swings in policies, major changes to the structure of the economy, or a military coup. In situations where political power is vested in an individual, the end of their reign often leads to chaos - nobody knows where their next deal is coming from, or who may be exiled/sent to the gulag, etc.

I would hope there would be a coup. The thought of Joe Biden as the most powerful man, terrifying...

fishy fishy

Hammer Archer wrote: »

RIP.
He had his faults, without a doubt. But he was loved by masses of poor in Venezuela who had been repeatedly trodden on by countless previous regimes.

For anyone interested, I'd suggest watching the documentary "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised" which focuses on the attempted coup against Chavez back in 2002.

a great documentary and one which won awards worldwide - of course it was banned in the USA. what does that tell you.

RIP Hugo Chavez - pity there wasn't more like you.

Weathering

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Well, it is certainly cheaper to buy a poor person's vote.

Any polls or references to back up your statement that he was hated by the rich? Or did you just hear that somewhere?

Cheaper to buy a poor persons vote? Rather a dumb statement

Corruption,the oil rich higher classes ruled over Venezuela. When he came to power he nationalised the oil sector and used the money to give free health care and help the poor in every such way.

Once reelected in the early naughties the rich briefly overthrew him for 2days until the majority(poor) marched on the streets and the vast numbers quickly ousted the illegal establishment(annoyed rich higher
class)

You obviously don't have much time for the poor. It's cheaper to buy there vote(your words) but if the poor greatly out number the rich then it is collectively more expensive to look after them than it is to look after a select few(rich) ultra minority

tritium

Always disappoints me when people turn their ideologies into personalised hatred for someone who has just died!

Chavez did what he felt was best for his people. It's undeniable that he dismantled hugely corrupt structures that existed before he arrived which were helping to impoverish his nation. Whether what he replaced it with is any better- history will judge that.

Any elected political leader (and Chavez was just that) plays for a populist vote to some extent or other. Was Chavez anti- semetic? Probably, at least for convenience. Equally you might argue Bush was anti-Islamist or tatcher anti Irish. Was crime a problem under Chavez. Again probably, but equally many governments have a crisis with criminality

Anyway, RIP Hugo Chavez. At least he tried to make a difference. Let his friends mourn him now. There will be plenty of time for history to make it's judgement.

Balmed Out

Venezuela is a country full of oil, gold, silver etc etc. it has so many natural resources.
It has a year round pleasant climate with numerous harvests per year.
There is no excuse for Venezuela not to be a wealthy first world country.
It's also one of the most beautiful and diverse countries on the planet.

Hugo like all dictators lived in luxury, he may have done a lot for the poor but never enough to lift them from poverty.
I doubt that wasn't intentional.

I hope now Venezuela has the chance to embrace democracy and the affluence that has somehow been denied to it.

CucaFace

Stinicker wrote: »

R.I.P to a great man and a leader of the revolution. He actually done something for his people and was more of a politician than any of the corrupt money grabbing scum we call politicians here in the West.

I think many on here should really start looking into what Chavez really did before sprouting such rubbish about the man.

He left the country in a huge mess. They have unbelievable amounts of oil, and still only last week they had to devalue their currency by 46%.

Also inflation in that country is around 20%. People there actually buy cars to save their money, rather than keep it in a bank as cars there go up in value after you buy them.

You only have to look around Dublin to see how many Venezuelans are living here and they will tell you the real truth about this man who was in the end practically a dictator who used his power in office to force public employees to go onto the streets and attend rallies to get him elected before Xmas.

He may have had good ideals at the start, but his left wing ideals do not work in this world as has been shown many times before down through the last 100 years, and in the end its well accepted his own bank balances are well were well topped up with Venezuelan oil money.

I know many Venezuelans here that are happier to work in a Spar shop part time and share a room with a stranger then to live back in Caracas where you could be shot for your mobile phone at anytime while sitting in 2/3 hours traffic jams.

Balmed Out

I remember he used have a big poster in every village saying "for Venezuela, for Chavez or death"

Lovely fellow

fishy fishy

CucaFace wrote: »

I think many on here should really start looking into what Chavez really did before sprouting such rubbish about the man.

He left the country in a huge mess. They have unbelievable amounts of oil, and still only last week they had to devalue their currency by 46%.

Also inflation in that country is around 20%. People there actually buy cars to save their money, rather than keep it in a bank as cars there go up in value after you buy them.

You only have to look around Dublin to see how many Venezuelans are living here and they will tell you the real truth about this man who was in the end practically a dictator who used his power in office to force public employees to go onto the streets and attend rallies to get him elected before Xmas.

He may have had good ideals at the start, but his left wing ideals do not work in this world as has been shown many times before down through the last 100 years, and in the end its well accepted his own bank balances are well were well topped up with Venezuelan oil money.

I know many Venezuelans here that are happier to work in a Spar shop part time and share a room with a stranger then to live back in Caracas where you could be shot for your mobile phone at anytime while sitting in 2/3 hours traffic jams.

would they be the right wing venezuelans who went crazy when hugo chavez was democratically elected, that was before of course they organized a coup, kidnapped him and put in their own "American backed" leaders - comical to see. They had to bring him back tho, you see the world was watching. LOL

A bit like the mafia who were run out of Cuba by Fidel - they spout the same to from Florida.

Again people only hear what they want, and usually get their "knowledge" from right wing news stations such as fox and sky.

CucaFace

fishy fishy wrote: »

would they be the right wing venezuelans who went crazy when hugo chavez was democratically elected, that was before of course they organized a coup, kidnapped him and put in their own "American backed" leaders - comical to see. They had to bring him back tho, you see the world was watching. LOL

A bit like the mafia who were run out of Cuba by Fidel - they spout the same to from Florida.

Again people only hear what they want, and usually get their "knowledge" from right wing news stations such as fox and sky.

I get all my information from actual Venezuelans who live here. I have lived with Venezuelan's here and have many friends from there.

How about commenting on the dire state of their economy? How can you defend a country like that when they have more recourses then most other countries in the world?

You know you can’t even buy that currency and those living there can’t buy another currency without applying to the Govt t get permission and then only being allowed to get €900 worth of Euros.

Instead of saying nothing like you just did maybe you can actually respond to all these facts about Venezuela and what Chavez has done there??