spring-peeper
Well-Known Member
Ah - but he is definitely amusing 
Venezuelan Regional Elections
- Thread starter Jeff Robinson
- Start date
Ah - but he is definitely amusing
Most dictators have amusing things about them unless you have the misfortune to live under their rule.
spring-peeper
Well-Known Member
I just enjoy his attacks against America, the fact that he subsidizes fuel to low income families in the US, England and stuff like that.
spring-peeper
Well-Known Member
Every country in the world is currently struggling with the current recession. It would surprise me that a country such as Venezula would be any different.
The economic downturn is not the fault of any one country or person.
CyberRose
أرفع الشفرات
Well if you're talking about Manuel Rosales then in any other country he already would be in jail for his part in the 2002 coup...
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
You do know that most of Venezuela's media (TV etc
) are privately owned and vehemently anti-Chavez, don't you?His recent antics on state-owned media, for instance, need to be seen in this context. If you didn't know that most of the media provides a non-stop stream of anti-government propaganda, it might look pretty bad. He operates in an environment that other democratically elected governments, including that of this country, would not stand for.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Yes. Again, context is all. In the case of Chavez, a little knowledge can be dangerous.
We will see how popular mini me remains when the drop in oil prices hits home and the money for all his goodies dry up.
The Russian army in Venezuela is rich stuff. No one in the US believes they are some type of threat. The whole farce is to flex those flabby muscles at Uncle Sam. Russia with its dying population and corrupt, oil addicted oligarchs just ain't what it once was. The whole show of the Russian navy heading to Venezuela seems almost quaint after the conflicts in Cuba or Nicaragua.
Chavez is on the sidelines and Russia is not far behind. As the Russian population dies out, who do they expect will keep all those pesky ethnic groups like the Georgians, Estonians, Lithuanians, Ukranians and Chechens in their place?
What will guys like Chavez do when they don't have George W. Bush to kick around anymore?
Chavez is on the sidelines and Russia is not far behind. As the Russian population dies out, who do they expect will keep all those pesky ethnic groups like the Georgians, Estonians, Lithuanians, Ukranians and Chechens in their place?
What will guys like Chavez do when they don't have George W. Bush to kick around anymore?
CyberRose
أرفع الشفرات
You do know that most of Venezuela's media (TV etc
His recent antics on state-owned media, for instance, need to be seen in this context. If you didn't know that most of the media provides a non-stop stream of anti-government propaganda, it might look pretty bad. He operates in an environment that other democratically elected governments, including that of this country, would not stand for.
http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/15255
Look at TV in the UK, how much does the "opposition" own? It's such an alien concept isn't it? Yet when we talk about Venezuela it's as if there is some kind of fundamental right being violated. The BBC is government owned, but is unbiased (and indeed is anti-government in a lot of cases). I wouldn't even describe Sky is being pro- or against- a particular party in the context of Venezuelan politics.
In fact, isn't there a law in this country that during elections TV stations must not show any kind of bias?
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Yet another glib opinion. Oil prices are still much higher than they were when Chavez came to power. Consider this graph of inflation-adjusted figures:
As you'll see, prices still need to drop considerably further to get back down to where they were in 2002. Venezuela will indeed be affected by the fall in prices, but oil revenues will not drop below where they were six years ago. There will still be oil money for Chavez to spend for the foreseeable future.
hipipol
Peckham Wry
Not sure recent your data is
Seems that your graph is hurtling upwards with a tendency to the vertical mate, which actually aint matched by what I see every day
By the way, d'you realise that the intials of your username are LBJ? Are you from Texas????
So, re Mears q about not having having Bush to kick around anymore( tho why that would just like sticking your foot in a pile of fresh dogshit so why bother?) you could tell him that they could elect you!!!
Seems that your graph is hurtling upwards with a tendency to the vertical mate, which actually aint matched by what I see every day
By the way, d'you realise that the intials of your username are LBJ? Are you from Texas????
So, re Mears q about not having having Bush to kick around anymore( tho why that would just like sticking your foot in a pile of fresh dogshit so why bother?) you could tell him that they could elect you!!!
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
Yup, not allowed to do politics on the day of the general election.
On the oil price...Chavez is fucked if it drops below $50 for a medium-long term.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
It doesn't include the recent reduction. The graph stops a few months ago, so let us assume that the topmost point on it is the peak value.
As peak price was around $140 per barrel, the price per barrel will have to drop to under $50 to return to the level of 2002. It is still hovering above $50 per barrel. My point stands. Venezuela will continue to make a great deal of money from oil for the foreseeable future.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
What do you base this assertion on?
'Is fucked' or 'will have to change some of his spending plans'?
hipipol
Peckham Wry
Fair enough but I suspect will will see it drop below 50 fairly soon
Oddly I suspect that HC has actually benefitted from the Capitalist warriors of Vitol and Glencore and their massive spec positions in oil - plus all the hedgies who piled in on the back of em - with the redemption frenzy hitting those guys now we will get back to the proper demand based pricing, net result will be a major drop in oil price. Couple the end of the speculative frenzy with the downturn in economic growth, even if the price holds due to supply side constriction there will be less bought so net returns will fall.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
The comparison the Perón doesn't stand up, I'm afraid. Perón was a populist, yes. But he was also a fascist who greatly admired Mussolini. His speeches to Argentinian business leaders show his true colours – the way to 'save' the country from communism was to coopt the working classes. He banned communist unions and created his own unions, throwing some scraps to the poor to keep them quiet. His was a corporatist, vertical view of society, in which the factory owners and their workers form a 'family' with a shared mutual interest.Hes a bit like Peron in Argentina, but without the uniform of the interesting wife
Chávez and Perón really have very little in common.
Yet another glib opinion. Oil prices are still much higher than they were when Chavez came to power. Consider this graph of inflation-adjusted figures:
As you'll see, prices still need to drop considerably further to get back down to where they were in 2002. Venezuela will indeed be affected by the fall in prices, but oil revenues will not drop below where they were six years ago. There will still be oil money for Chavez to spend for the foreseeable future.
No one knows where the price of a barrel is going, it could go much lower. The bubble has burst in the oil futures market and it will be painful for countries like Venezuela and Russia whose countries are dependent on oil exports. They still can make considerable profits but it also means future budget projections will be slashed, and the spending will have to slow.
hipipol
Peckham Wry
Hmm, the way to save the country is to kick out the gringos, nationalise oil...
Any use of language to disguise the true nature of both, ie Perosnality Cult Type, massive ego, conviction that only THEY can Save the Country, classic messianic bollocks, in that way I see the same thing in both.
HC could have used the oil revenues to set up micro bank functions, perhaps creating legal frameworks and tax exemptions for co-operatives, essentially started a bottom up change which would outlive his whirlwind centralist approach - I am deeply mistrustful of any charismatic leader as they tend to weaken institutions - mainly because they see them effectively as self selecting elitist cliques - without creating the newer and fairer replacements, instead chosing to rule by fiat - their reforms die with them and the backlash falls of those left behind
Good point there. Chavez could have done all these bottom up reforms and stepped down at the right time and left behind not only a better functioning society but with his own personal legacy and image intact. Instead he has indulged his personality cult and become a dangerous joke.
Jeff Robinson
Marxist-Lentilist: Jackboots and Jackfruit
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
What I don't really understand regarding the attitude of the Chavez knockers is that for the first time in history, Venezuela's resources are being targetted at the poor. For decades, successive governments did nothing, absolutely nothing, for the poor while their constituency lived in relative luxury (they still do – Chavez has not stopped those with money from living in luxury).
Would you rather the Chavez project failed and we went back to a US-approved neo-liberal regime? Surely the right attitude is one that supports Chavez but criticises him from within. If I were Venezuelan, this would be my position, I think – that of a critical supporter, urging Chavez to build stronger institutions so that his 'revolution' (it isn't really a revolution in the usual sense of the word, that's just his rhetoric) can outlive his rule.
Would you rather the Chavez project failed and we went back to a US-approved neo-liberal regime? Surely the right attitude is one that supports Chavez but criticises him from within. If I were Venezuelan, this would be my position, I think – that of a critical supporter, urging Chavez to build stronger institutions so that his 'revolution' (it isn't really a revolution in the usual sense of the word, that's just his rhetoric) can outlive his rule.
Jeff Robinson
Marxist-Lentilist: Jackboots and Jackfruit
I quite agree lbj - I think it's already happening to an extent - see the youtube above (or watch later if you're at work).
hipipol
Peckham Wry
My fundemental doubts about Chavez have not been changed by that clip - as the University lecturer said, are these councils ( dependant as they are on direct cash from the Prseident) simply a way of reviving "clientism"?
My orginal reponse on this thread about the rise in the murder rate was to the idea that simply sticking the boot into the Yanks was somehow enough (dont get me wrong, I reckon its a good place to start from)
Does anybody have info about about more major infrastructure programmes, its all very well having groups of local people doing up their sahnties, but what about water, power, santitation - these require city wide planning.
I think getting people involved at the grass roots is vital, but none of them will have any experience of organising the larger stuff.
Is there fast tracking of smart but disenfranchised kids throu schools programmes? Is there a schools building programme? Whats being done to train the farmers in better production methods, irrigation projects, etc
I see a lot of surface, but a lot also seems to lead to a cult of personality - exactly the sort of thing that gave the Gang of Four so much power in China
My orginal reponse on this thread about the rise in the murder rate was to the idea that simply sticking the boot into the Yanks was somehow enough (dont get me wrong, I reckon its a good place to start from
)Does anybody have info about about more major infrastructure programmes, its all very well having groups of local people doing up their sahnties, but what about water, power, santitation - these require city wide planning.
I think getting people involved at the grass roots is vital, but none of them will have any experience of organising the larger stuff.
Is there fast tracking of smart but disenfranchised kids throu schools programmes? Is there a schools building programme? Whats being done to train the farmers in better production methods, irrigation projects, etc
I see a lot of surface, but a lot also seems to lead to a cult of personality - exactly the sort of thing that gave the Gang of Four so much power in China
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
With one crucial difference. Chavez is democratically elected.
Jeff Robinson
Marxist-Lentilist: Jackboots and Jackfruit
"It is striking that the course on which Hugo Chávez has embarked since 2006 is the exact opposite of the one chosen by the postmodern Left: far from resisting state power, he grabbed it (first by an attempted coup, then democratically), ruthlessly using the Venezuelan state apparatuses to promote his goals. Furthermore, he is militarising the barrios, and organising the training of armed units there. And, the ultimate scare: now that he is feeling the economic effects of capital’s ‘resistance’ to his rule (temporary shortages of some goods in the state-subsidised supermarkets), he has announced plans to consolidate the 24 parties that support him into a single party. Even some of his allies are sceptical about this move: will it come at the expense of the popular movements that have given the Venezuelan revolution its élan? However, this choice, though risky, should be fully endorsed: the task is to make the new party function not as a typical state socialist (or Peronist) party, but as a vehicle for the mobilisation of new forms of politics (like the grass roots slum committees). What should we say to someone like Chávez? ‘No, do not grab state power, just withdraw, leave the state and the current situation in place’? Chávez is often dismissed as a clown – but wouldn’t such a withdrawal just reduce him to a version of Subcomandante Marcos, whom many Mexican leftists now refer to as ‘Subcomediante Marcos’? Today, it is the great capitalists – Bill Gates, corporate polluters, fox hunters – who ‘resist’ the state."
Slavoj Žižek
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v29/n22/zize01_.html
elbows
Well-Known Member
Why would it be necessary to consolidate power in order to mobilize new forms of politics? Why is a failure to grab more power seen as withdrawal? What are the specific forces that are getting in the way of new politics? Will turning 24 parties into one actually do anything to tackle those forces?
History seems to have plenty of examples of people seizing vast amounts of power so that they can redistribute it fairly, but the latter usually fails to happen. No matter how much power and control is obtained, opposing forces working against the cause remain, giving justification to hang onto power, and over time this power corrupts. Few are immune to the great doublethink of democracy, that you want to give power to the people but only once the people have been taught to do the right thing with the power, and attempts to teach them are where it gets ugly.
