Venezuela hits BP with back-tax bill

[JoePolitix]

There's that little matter of him building up a militia that is specifically loyal to him as an individual, if you really need an example.

I don't accept that this is a fair summary of the current Venezuelan initiative to form a peoples militia to protect against foriegn occupation. I started a thread about this a couple of weeks back.

That's not the work of Chavez at all, though. Chavez's regime is a response to the increasingly strong grass roots movements in Latin America and the increasing participation of excluded groups in civil society.

Dialectics comrade! Chevez and grass roots movements feed of each other, both have had a radicalising effect on each other since 1999.

In any case, the workers are still workers and the politicians and landowners are still politicians and landowners and that's exactly the way Hugo fucking Chavez likes it.

I can't think of anywhere else in the world where the prospects for socialism are so strong as in Venezuela.

 

[In Bloom]

Dialectics comrade! Chevez and grass roots movements feed of each other, both have had a radicalising effect on each other since 1999.

Do you have any evidence for this whatsoever? How have the grassroots movements become "radicalised" by Chavez?

I can't think of anywhere else in the world where the prospects for socialism are so strong as in Venezuela.

If by "socialism" you mean state capitalism, I suppose you're right.

 

[JoePolitix]

Do you have any evidence for this whatsoever? How have the grassroots movements become "radicalised" by Chavez?

There was no significant grassroots movement in Venezuela prior to the election of Chavez. The country's union federation - the CTV was corrupt and clientalist to the core. All the mass organisations I mentioned - the UNT, Bolivarian Circles, land committees, Social Battle Units and so on were formed in direct response to the conflict between the Chavatistas and the old oligarchs and to defend the social gains they have won from the Bolivarian revolution. There's absolutely tons of info on this available. I may post some up tomorrow when I have more time. But are you seriously telling me that without Chavez the Venezuealan working class would be as radicalised as they are currently?

If by "socialism" you mean state capitalism, I suppose you're right.

There can be no socialism without mass participation. There is nowhere in the world that has achieved this prerequisit more than venezuela.

 

[Streathamite]

Do you have any evidence for this whatsoever? How have the grassroots movements become "radicalised" by Chavez?

well, what evidence do you base this on?

In any case, the workers are still workers and the politicians and landowners are still politicians and landowners and that's exactly the way Hugo fucking Chavez likes it.

(i.e. bit in bold)

 

[Xipe Totec]

You say there are no checks to Chavez’s power yet he has been subject to recall by the electorate on a number of occations and I’ve lost count of the number of times he’s been re-elected (nine since 1998?).

Yes, there will be a presidential election next year.
Chavez, a man with very questionable attitudes to democracy, will have the entire apparatus of the state at his disposal, including the supposedly independendant electoral council.
Should he win, Venezuela will become essentially a one party state for the next 6 years.
Do you think this is an acceptable way for a country to be governed?

Laws are passed by the National Assembly. The President can ask the National Assembly to reconsider portions of laws he finds objectionable, but a simple majority of the Assembly can override these objections.

Yes, and the AN is now a rubber stamp for any decision the president makes

The reason that Chavez supporters have total control of the NA is because the reactionary opposition – who were set to do piss poor – boycotted the last election which was held to be free and fair by international observers. The opposition have given up on democratic politics and instead engage in destructive activities like organising bosses lock outs and violent street demonstrations.

I agree that the opposition is incompetant, and probably would have performed poorly in the election.
However, to lump the entire opposition as one monolithic block is counterproductive and a poor form of analysis.

They are has-beens.

If you are interested in a healthy political climate in Venezuela, of course...

The turn out in that election was low, partly because of the withdrawal of the opposition but also because there is a general distrust of the political parties in Venezuela that dates back decades.

True.

This doesn’t detract from Venezuela’s strong grassroots democracy – the UNT, Bolivarian Circles, land committees, Social Battle Units and so on. Participation in the political process is far much greater than in the U.S, U.K etc.

These are all great aspects to Venezuelan society, and to be applauded.
But what do they have to do with the county`s national government?

What are these progressive Latin American societies you talk about? Evo Morales Bolivia – a key Chavez ally or a murderous and reactionary regime like Uribe’s Colombia?

No and no.
Latin America is awash with communities offering interesting ways of life at the grassroots level, as you yourself have stated.
At national level, Brasil and Chile have quite progressive policies, for example.

As an aside, can I ask you what you think of the current US administration?
Are you worried by the consolidation of power by the by the executive branch?

 

[spring-peeper]

Yes, there will be a presidential election next year.
Chavez, a man with very questionable attitudes to democracy, will have the entire apparatus of the state at his disposal, including the supposedly independendant electoral council.
Should he win, Venezuela will become essentially a one party state for the next 6 years.
Do you think this is an acceptable way for a country to be governed?

Canada has had prime ministers run our country for long periods of time, so yes, I think that this is an acceptable way to run a country.

Why would you have a problem with it?

 

[Xipe Totec]

now how about answering the question?

I`m sorry, but I think the question is rather disingenious. Do you want me to give my opinion, with the benefit of hindsight, on which regime would be best?
Should I put myself in the shows of a Cuban in the fifties and try to guess what the rebels actually stand for?

btw, you bin to Cuba? i have. It is NOWHERE NEAR as repressive as US propagandists would claim. The strong impression I formed - by reading into subtext andnuance - was a man respected and liked by the people, who are in agood positon to view his regime, and contribution, in the round.

That is your opinion, and that is fine.
But what about people who have visited the country and formed different impressions to you?
And what is your opinion on the imprisonment of poets and homosexuals?

 

[boskysquelch]

Chavez, a man with very questionable attitudes to democracy

Care to elaborate on this statement?

 

[In Bloom]

well, what evidence do you base this on?

(i.e. bit in bold)

The fact that he has done nothing to change it or even advocate such a change in anything more than a strictly vauge, rhetorical manner. That would indicate to me that he has no problem with such a state of affairs whatsoever.

 

[Xipe Totec]

Canada has had prime ministers run our country for long periods of time, so yes, I think that this is an acceptable way to run a country.

Why would you have a problem with it?

If adequate checks and balances to the PM`s power exist, this system can work well.
Do you think that is the case in Venzuela?

 

[Xipe Totec]

Care to elaborate on this statement?

He has taken control of many of the institutions that work to moderate prresidential power.
He also headed a coup against the government in the early 90s.

 

[spring-peeper]

If adequate checks and balances to the PM`s power exist, this system can work well.
Do you think that is the case in Venzuela?

I've seen nothing to suggest that there is a problem with the Venezuelian system, but am always ready to learn things from a different point of view.

What problem do you see?

 

[spring-peeper]

He has taken control of many of the institutions that work to moderate prresidential power.
He also headed a coup against the government in the early 90s.

I thought the coup was a good thing - "power to the people" and all that.

 

[Xipe Totec]

I've seen nothing to suggest that there is a problem with the Venezuelian system, but am always ready to learn things from a different point of view.

What problem do you see?

When a politician subverts a democratic system to gain dictatorial powers, do you not find it worrying?

I thought the coup was a good thing - "power to the people" and all that.

Coups or revolutions tend to replace problems rather than solving them.
There are better methods for a people to gain power than violent overthrow of the government.

 

[spring-peeper]

When a politician subverts a democratic system to gain dictatorial powers, do you not find it worrying?

Coups or revolutions tend to replace problems rather than solving them.
There are better methods for a people to gain power than violent overthrow of the government.

You see things differently than I do. My take on the situation is very different. Could you link me to some sites that explain your position?

Ta

 

[Backatcha Bandit]

He has taken control of many of the institutions that work to moderate prresidential power.

Again, if you could be a little more specific... Which institutions?

He also headed a coup against the government in the early 90s.

It was the question of legitamacy of the Carlos Andres Perez government that led to the Caracazo - the widespread unrest following Perez attempt to impose the IMF/Neo-liberal reforms that fucked the country for the benefit of the few (aka 'The Washington Consensus').

Wasn't Perez impeached (just after Chavez was imprisoned) for corruption regarding $millions from a 'presidents' special secret fund', which was used to help fund some US puppet in Nicaragua?

The fact remains that the coup attempt had the support of the majority of Venezuelans. This support is confirmed by the results of the last - nine, isn't it? - elections that have returned Chavez to power.

 

[Xipe Totec]

Again, if you could be a little more specific... Which institutions?

The entire state apparatus - judiciary, armed forces, state enterprise, audit office and, since the last elections, the national parliment - are all under the control of Chavez supporters.

It was the question of legitamacy of the Carlos Andres Perez government that led to the Caracazo - the widespread unrest following Perez attempt to impose the IMF/Neo-liberal reforms that fucked the country for the benefit of the few (aka 'The Washington Consensus').

Wasn't Perez impeached (just after Chavez was imprisoned) for corruption regarding $millions from a 'presidents' special secret fund', which was used to help fund some US puppet in Nicaragua?

Do you think adopting liberal economic policies are grounds for staging a coup?
Do you think that equally radical economic policies by the current administration will make the government illegitimate?

The fact remains that the coup attempt had the support of the majority of Venezuelans. This support is confirmed by the results of the last - nine, isn't it? - elections that have returned Chavez to power.

Coups or revolutions tend to replace problems rather than solving them.
There are better methods for people to gain power than violent overthrow of the government.

I am not contesting the popularity of the action.
I simply do not think it is an effective method of affecting positive change.

You see things differently than I do. My take on the situation is very different. Could you link me to some sites that explain your position?

Ta

What kind of information are you looking for?

 

[Backatcha Bandit]

He has taken control of many of the institutions that work to moderate prresidential power.

The entire state apparatus - judiciary, armed forces, state enterprise, audit office and, since the last elections, the national parliment - are all under the control of Chavez supporters.

He obviously has a lot of supporters. How is that 'taking control'? What on earth do you want him to do about it? Deliberately lose support, or sack people who support him?

There appears to be no real substance to what you are saying.

Go on. Try again.

 

[Backatcha Bandit]

What kind of information are you looking for?

Anything that supports/clarifies the 'point' you are attempting to make?

 

[Xipe Totec]

He obviously has a lot of supporters.

He obviously does.
It is the level of their 'support', and the positions of power that they hold that is important.

How is that 'taking control'?

The president and assembly have both been elected recently. This puts the executive and legislative branches of government under the control of one party.
This is never a good situation, but not hugely troubling in itself.
However, looked at in conjunction with a politicised judiciary, army and civil service, alarm bells should start ringing.

What on earth do you want him to do about it?

Having a civil service that serves the public under whatever the government of the day happens to be is usually considered a pretty good thing.
Or are political appointments to important and supposedly independant public positions positive for the country?

 

[Backatcha Bandit]

Since the 'government of the day' would, in marked contrast to Carmona and his cronies, appear to have the interests of the vast majority of the Venezuelan public at heart, I don't see a problem.

I think what you mistake for 'alarm bells' are infact the death knell for oligarchs and snivelling apologists for the 'savage agenda' of neo-liberal economics.

Viva Chavez!

 

[Xipe Totec]

Since the 'government of the day' would, in marked contrast to Carmona and his cronies, appear to have the interests of the vast majority of the Venezuelan public at heart, I don't see a problem.

Checks and balances exist for a reason: to stop any branch of government from wielding too much power.
Whether you agree with the government in question is not the issue.
You may not see a problem now.
But what if Chavez loses the election next year (or in 2013, 2019 etc.) to someone you fundamentally disagree with? Who uses the power Chavez has consolidated to push a completely different agenda?
When a power grab such as this occurs, you must imagine your greatest political opponant holding the position to see if it is justified.

 

[Backatcha Bandit]

That's a fair point - or rather, it would be, were it not for the fact that Chavez has not 'consolidated' power in the way you imply. Infact, it would appear that he did quite the opposite:

Significant changes were made to the separation of powers. Instead of the usual three branches of government, the new Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela has five:

1. The executive branch (the Presidency).
2. The legislative branch (the National Assembly).
3. The judicial branch (the judiciary).
4. The electoral branch (poder electoral, or "electoral power").
5. The citizens' branch (poder ciudadano, or "citizens' power").

The electoral branch is headed by the National Electoral Council (CNE) and is responsible for the independent oversight of all elections in the country, municipal, state, and federal. The citizens' branch is constituted by the (defensor del pueblo) (ombudsman or "defender of the people"), the Chief Public Prosecutor (fiscal general), and the comptroller general (contralor general). It is responsible for representing and defending the citizens in their dealings with powers of the Venezuelan state.

Wiki - Constitution of Venezuela

So it seems he has actually dispersed power, rather than consolidated. I'm sure I needn't remind you that the constitution was ratified by no less than 71.78% of the population.

So, to return to your theme, what happened when Chavez lost (or more accurately - was robbed of) power to someone I 'fundamentally disagree with' - US lacky and corporate cock-gobbler Pedro Carmona?

While briefly in power, Carmona announced a number of decrees. He:

* dissolved the National Assembly, promising elections by December
* pledged presidential elections within one year
* declared void the 1999 Constitution adopted by referendum in 1999
* promised a return to the pre-1999 bicameral parliamentary system
* effective immediately, reverted the name of the nation to República de Venezuela
* repealed 49 laws that gave the government greater control of the economy
* reinstated retired General Guaicaipuro Lameda as president of Petróleos de Venezuela
* fired the Supreme Court judges, National Electoral Court, and the ombudsman

All these measures cost Carmona much of his support within the military that had rebelled against Chávez; some Venezuelans who were concerned that Chávez had authoritarian tendencies found these moves even more threatening.

As I was saying - Viva Chavez!

 

[spring-peeper]

What kind of information are you looking for?

Information on why you feel that Chevez is a bad person, why you think that his country is not safe while he is in power, anything that could support why you are so concerned.

All I'm finding is good stuff.

 

[cemertyone]

Yes, and his interests are those of the ruling class, like every other politician. He's no different, maybe slightly preferable to some neo-liberal puppet, but frankly, that's not enough for me to share the liberal left's collective hard on over Chavez.

Was that the same " Ruling class" that orchistrated his removal in a ill-judged military coup perhaps?.Maybe you need to do some home work before you come here with opinions which simply don`t stack up against the facts.
Because of course it was the " ruling class" (from the slums no less) who came to his defense during the putch against him....

 

[Kid_Eternity]

That's a fair point - or rather, it would be, were it not for the fact that Chavez has not 'consolidated' power in the way you imply. Infact, it would appear that he did quite the opposite:

Wiki - Constitution of Venezuela

So it seems he has actually dispersed power, rather than consolidated. I'm sure I needn't remind you that the constitution was ratified by no less than 71.78% of the population.

So, to return to your theme, what happened when Chavez lost (or more accurately - was robbed of) power to someone I 'fundamentally disagree with' - US lacky and corporate cock-gobbler Pedro Carmona?


As I was saying - Viva Chavez!

Excellent post! I shall keep that one on file for future reference (in case we get anymore freepers claiming Chavez is a dictator...).

 

[Backatcha Bandit]

Oh, Jesus. I suspect that should be 'when' rather than 'in case', KE... Check this shit out...

Hugo Chavez wants your vote

Looking for something to be alarmed about? Forget Dubai. Try Venezuela’s potential takeover of the U.S. voting apparatus. A secretive, intransparent company called ‘Smartmatic’ that’s known to have ties to the Venezuelan government, has just bought a U.S. voting machine company called Sequoia. And the deal has gotten no scrutiny from federal regulators, who cite outdated criteria for national military security as their only watchpoint.

That’s right, Venezuela, a country that holds the dirtiest, filthiest most intransparent and fraudulent elections in the hemisphere, elections that match those of Zimbabwe or Belarus, has just got its hands on a U.S. electronic voting company and now might be in charge with the outcome of your vote.

http://www.americanthinker.com/comments.php?comments_id=4744

The word 'hysterical' is barely adequate.

Ah, well. Viva Lukashenko!

 

[In Bloom]

Was that the same " Ruling class" that orchistrated his removal in a ill-judged military coup perhaps?.Maybe you need to do some home work before you come here with opinions which simply don`t stack up against the facts.
Because of course it was the " ruling class" (from the slums no less) who came to his defense during the putch against him....

Did you bother to read the rest of my posts on this thread?

 

[Kid_Eternity]

Oh, Jesus. I suspect that should be 'when' rather than 'in case', KE... Check this shit out... http://www.americanthinker.com/comments.php?comments_id=4744

The word 'hysterical' is barely adequate.

Ah, well. Viva Lukashenko!

Ah yes standard stuff; when corporations run or owned by Bush family members and friends own voting machines its fine but not some nasty real democracy from down south…

 

[cemertyone]

Did you bother to read the rest of my posts on this thread?

Sorry son i just have .....and iv`e tought you where some reganite tosser..but what you actually said is about the accumilation of power within one indivudal/institution.apoligies