Shooting at people to blacken chavez' name again?

[JoePolitix]

Concise political analysis (by me)

The International "Labo(u)r" (sic) Organisation criticises Venezuela, praises Colombia and proclaims solidarity with Venezuela's boss class (fine friends of labourers everywhere):

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news/2846

Comment: What a bunch of pricks.

Ends.

-----

 

[JoePolitix]

Reforming Venezuela's Constitution

Presentation by Bernardo Alvarez Herrera, Ambassador of Venezuela to the US at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington DC.

As Venezuela prepares to vote on a number of reforms to its 1999 Constitution, it’s useful to put the changes into context.

As societies evolve and their needs change, so too must their laws, customs and constitutions. In 1816, Thomas Jefferson, one of America’s founding fathers, wrote on this very point: “I know also that laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths disclosed and manners and opinions change with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also and keep pace with the times.” Similarly, in 1824, he argued, “We have not yet so far perfected our constitutions as to venture to make them unchangeable. But still, in their present state, we consider them not otherwise changeable than by the authority of the people.” Jefferson even went as far as to argue that constitutions should change with every new generation, or, in his time, every 19 years.

Since President Hugo Chávez’s first election in 1998 and his most recent re-election in 2006, Venezuela has undergone a dramatic revolution in peace and democracy. After a failed coup attempt in 2002 and a sabotage of the oil industry in 2003, the Venezuelan government has aggressively worked to expand the means for political participation; create an equitable and sustainable economy; and address longstanding social deficits.

To that end, and in accordance with Article 342 of the 1999 Constitution, on August 15 President Chávez proposed 33 reforms to the constitution. The reforms were aimed at helping speed the redistribution of national resources to Venezuela’s neediest; decentralize political power and grant communities more say in federal affairs; and outline the legal foundations of the country’s new system. After the reforms were proposed, the National Assembly debated the reforms in three rounds, approving a final slate of 69 reforms in late October.

But unlike traditional political debates, the discussions of the reforms occurred throughout Venezuela and were open to massive public participation. In a 47-day period – from August 16 to October 7 – some 9,020 public events were held and 80,000 phone calls made to a special hotline, mechanisms through which the Venezuelan people were free to offer opinions and critiques. Over 10 million copies of the reforms were distributed to the public, and one poll found that over 77 percent of the Venezuelan people had read them. The reforms are set to be voted on in a national referendum on December 2 – leaving their fate in the hands of the Venezuelan people.

Much has been made of the reforms, most of it ignoring or distorting key details. One reform would extend the presidential term limit to seven years and do away with term limits. Of course, the president would still have to face regular elections and the recall referendum, an innovative democratic mechanism that allows the Venezuelan people to cut short the term of any elected official. Another set of reforms would codify new forms of public property, though while restating the rights to private ownership. And another reform would limit certain political liberties during national emergencies, though while maintaining key due process rights and the right to life and personal integrity – thus keeping with international standards.

Of course, critics tend to ignore many of the most progressive reforms. One would prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation or health. Another would lower the voting age to 16 – following a similar move made in Austria this year. Two others would formalize the right to adequate housing and right to free public education, while others still would create a social security fund for the self-employed, protect Afro-Venezuelan heritage and guarantee the full rights of prisoners.

The critics of the reforms not only misunderstand their purpose, but they also fail to recognize that since President Chávez was first elected, their worst fears and warning have not come true. Democracy remains vibrant in Venezuela (the 2007 Latinobarometro finds that Venezuelans are again second most likely in the region to express satisfaction with their democracy), the economy continues to grow (four consecutive years of 11.9 percent average growth) and social programs are yielding important advances (a drop in poverty from 55 percent in 2003 to 30 percent in 2006). Moreover, many of the critics of the reforms seem to underestimate the capabilities and intelligence of the Venezuelan people. Even though Venezuela’s process of change has proceeded peacefully, democratically and openly, there is still a poor understanding of the capacities of the Venezuelan people to determine their own interests and govern themselves. To these critics, the Venezuelan people – the great majority of which are literate, educated and engaged – are easily manipulated. This simply isn’t true.

The reforms to the 1999 Constitution are fully consistent with the changing needs of a democratic country like Venezuela that is seeking an alternative model of participation and development. The process by which the reforms were debated indicates a high level of civic engagement and participation, a key element of any democratic system. When you remove the reforms from the usual political dynamic surrounding Venezuela, it becomes clear that many of the reforms’ basic principles – increased participation and social justice – are agreed on by most people. Ultimately, the Venezuelan people will be able to decide whether or not these reforms succeed in the national referendum set for December 2. The basic request of the Venezuelan people is that this democratic process be understood and be respected.

Bernardo Alvarez.
Venezuela Ambassador to the United States.
November 19, 2007

 

[lostexpectation]

anyone know how many questions there are in this referendum 67 (the number so of changes to the consitution? or a lesser number?

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Even if they are supporters of Chavez, unless they are working for him, it's not really something that can be used to criticise him. It's merely criminal activity which is experienced in all countries (most countries experience political violence as well)

Most likely it's the secret police.

 

[Backatcha Bandit]

Short documentary from Aljazeera English on the subject of the referendum:

(Pt. 1)

(Pt. 2)

 

[JHE]

anyone know how many questions there are in this referendum 67 (the number so of changes to the consitution? or a lesser number?

A lesser number. Off hand, I don't know how many.

I read some weeks ago that the govt had agreed not to lump all the proposals in together. Instead, there will be batches of amendements to vote on.

 

[JHE]

According to Wiki, there are two 'blocks' of amendments. The voters are asked to choose Yes or No for each of those two 'blocks'.

http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proyec...onal_de_2007_en_Venezuela#Pregunta_y_opciones

 

[Donna Ferentes]

Are those blocks or blocs?

 

[JHE]

I think I prefer 'batches' or 'sets' or 'groups', but 'blocks' will do.

(A 'bloc' is of people or of groups of people, countries, parties etc, innit?)

 

[cantsin]

OK. I can't remember all the details but my uncle used to have a job as the deputy head of the science and tech dept. in South Africa. He was at a conference once and Chavez was there with some deputies from his government. My uncle said that after they had said what they were going to say he basically stood up and disagreed with them and completely undermined what they was saying and just made a self promoting speech about his achievements, taking all the limelight and obviously not having much idea about what he was discussing. Obviously this is just one incident but the impression my uncle got of him was that he was a populist and just really out to consolidate his own power.

I'm not arguing that he is a dictator or that he should be deposed or anything, i'm just saying that he isn't that great a guy, but no way am i saying that anyone should intervene or anything like that. I just think that the uncritical acceptance by some people here of a lot of the stuff he says about himself is a little bit creepy, that's all. I'm not even arguing that he's necessarily a bad leader or we shouldn't accept the fact that he's there, i'm just saying that we need to be a bit careful.

so your response to detailed eyewitness reports , footage and analysis of events that clearly illustrate important problems with the reporting of events in Venezuela at the moment ...is this ....!!!

 

[lostexpectation]

did he lose both votes? oh it seems he didm ah well not too bad, he accepted it too.