Chavez to rule by decree

[CCIP]

I would claim that rampant capitalism under democratic regimes destroyed just as many if not more... It works decently well when stabilized and restrained by law, and more importantly - guarded by a strong and numerous middle class, but it is a huge problem for societies where the economy is grasped by a relatively small elite, which is where it becomes as bad if not worse than a socialist dictatorship. Unfortunately I'm seeing this concentration tendency even in the West now... No wonder there are Eastern Europeans who look back to the communist regimes - it's not the government system, it's the relative socioeconomic stability (everyone being near-equally ********ed is a way of stabilizing things, of course). Nor is it any wonder that there are nations with huge empoverished majorities who have little affinity for liberal democracy as well.

Originally Posted by Sea Demon

Absolutely not. There are a couple people I've worked with who believe in this stuff like it's a religion. Both net producers of society. I think they had a general "fear of envy" thing going on though. But if you look at the life of Karl Marx, he was not a net producer at all. He was a "philosopher" "poet" "essayist" "political economist". Don't get me wrong. I think poets and essayists are important parts of a nation's culture. However it's not a field that produces much in terms of a nation's capital. I'm just saying it's so easy to see the fraud perpetrated by Marx. It's unfortunate that it has endured and the pursuit of it has destroyed so many lives.

Don't back off your position. You are correct. It has been my experience that the only people who want socialism are those who either can't or won't give back.
Those who proclaim they are 'for the peolple' are those who's wealth give them a standing which makes them emune to the uphevel they advocate. As example, I give you the Barbara Streisands of the world.

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by waste gate

Don't back off your position. You are correct. It has been my experience that the only people who want socialism are those who either can't or won't give back.
Those who proclaim they are 'for the peolple' are those who's wealth give them a standing which makes them emune to the uphevel they advocate. As example, I give you the Barbara Streisands of the world.

I hear you. But I'm not backing off my position that socialism is a con job that was derived from a bum (Karl Marx) that was not a net producer of his society. You are correct that "collectivism" is heralded largely by those who don't give or produce for society. But I think the other motivator is some sort of a "fear of envy" or elitism by those who have produced wealth like the Barbara Streisands of the world. At any rate, it's nothing but a giant scam.

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by CCIP

I would claim that rampant capitalism under democratic regimes destroyed just as many if not more... It works decently well when stabilized and restrained by law, and more importantly - guarded by a strong and numerous middle class, but it is a huge problem for societies where the economy is grasped by a relatively small elite, which is where it becomes as bad if not worse than a socialist dictatorship. Unfortunately I'm seeing this concentration tendency even in the West now... No wonder there are Eastern Europeans who look back to the communist regimes - it's not the government system, it's the relative socioeconomic stability (everyone being near-equally ********ed is a way of stabilizing things, of course). Nor is it any wonder that there are nations with huge empoverished majorities who have little affinity for liberal democracy as well.

Hogwash. All of it. Capitalism has always given and created more opportunity than any other type of society in existence. Not only that, we have enjoyed a higher standard of living as well. Capitalism w/Democracy has not destroyed or politically repressed like those nations that have sought Socialism/Communism in the 20th Century. I think the count is at 100 million in the 20th Century dead by regimes grasping for the Socialist utopia. The problem that you see is that not everyone is guaranteed an equal outcome. But you fail to see that in a free and capitalistic society, there is a freedom to pursue. There is a freedom to invest. There is a freedom to become rather than be directed. This is what drives human nature. You are never going to be assured that everyone has everything on an equal footing. That's OK. As long as there is an opportunity for everyone to succeed. And right now, that exists. Well at least in the USA.

Those empoverished nations you talk about are ones who are not embracing capitalism as a basis for economic development or growth. As long as you pursue equal outcomes as a substitute for equal opportunity, you're screwed. Sorry, but I don't want to be equally miserable as everyone else. Let me be free and allow me to invest, innovate, and produce. The problem with the socialist is that they believe innovation/investment success is something to be punished because it doesn't guarantee equal outcomes. Do you see a flaw in punishing success CCIP for a nation to grow? Especially to make everyone equally f**ked as you say? I sure do. This is why Socialism is doomed. And will always be doomed. It is a con job that goes against the interests of human nature. Nothing anybody can do to change it. Human beings are neither robots or ants.

[elite_hunter_sh3]

Originally Posted by XabbaRus

Going slightly OT, but didn't Yugoslavia tear itself up and NATO and the UN picked up the pieces? And while I don't necessarily agree with Yahoshua that socialism = restrictions on freedoms per se the examples we have did impose restrictions however I think he simplifies it too much.

the only reason yugoslavia split up is because of foreign intervention what happened was PARAMILITARY (rogue units who didnt listen to government) they killed innocent civilians the real army who did listen to the government never comited these atrocities , how do i know this? because my uncle was a general for the yugoslav army and he was never givin orders to kill innocent civilians he testified this in the hague. milosevic was murdered in the hague all the b.s propaganda said he died of a problem with his heart. now NATO bombed schools , hospitals and Bridges, since when do schools and hospitals help the military strategically during wartime??? heres my proof



this was a former hospital as u can see NATO did bomb hospitals and civilian infrastructutre wile bombing some military targets, NATO has proven to be ineffective in neutralizing our military only effective in tearing us apart thus getting rid of a strong power in europe and getting rid of our economy and causing us to change to some pathetic form of democratic government right now for us to get back on our feet is to bee communist and everyone works for the nation so it can be rebuilt. then when its strong enough THEN we change to a good form of democracy not capitalism.

[elite_hunter_sh3]

the paramilitary were the ones responsible for the genocides in kosovo and bosnia they are the shame in our nation they were a bunch of frustrated units who thought they were doing something good but in fact were making things worse. the government was blamed for this even though they were trying to stop it. thats why i believe that CLinton or any clinton member is a idiot a BIG idiot, clinton didnt get his facts right and for that i hope he rots in hell if anyone here can even think of lecturing me on my familys history and my countries problems and history then u might as well cut ur internet cable.

[U-533]

Originally Posted by elite_hunter_sh3

i support venezuela , cuba and north korea(a little bit i dont like their nuke policy) i support socialism because capitalism is pathetic IMHO , socialism everything is paid for esp university in america u pay thousands of dollars for a few pills or a few hundred thou for a simple operation luckily i live in canada and im proud of canada that our health care system is free and 2nd best in world only being beaten by american private health care

(almost) free education
free health care
high taxes(rather have high taxes then to have low taxes and pay for every little thing)

anyone else agree here that free education and health care is THE #1 MOST IMPORTANT thing a country HAS to HAVE no matter what?

Obviously you have never lived in a socialist country.
It is not what most people have been lead to believe.
Some one has to pay for all that free stuff.


Here, where I live, only the "MOOCHERS" want a free ride, and even when they get the free ride they do not appreciate it.



The term "MOOCHER" is used here as a person who can work but refuseto and recieves Government Money.

[elite_hunter_sh3]

Originally Posted by U-533

Obviously you have never lived in a socialist country.
It is not what most people have been lead to believe.
Some one has to pay for all that free stuff.


Here, where I live, only the "MOOCHERS" want a free ride, and even when they get the free ride they do not appreciate it.



The term "MOOCHER" is used here as a person who can work but refuseto and recieves Government Money.

obviously uve been brainwashed i have physical proof from family from random people from my country that i have asked in the 60's 70's and 80's yugoslavia was strong they had a stable economy and had a good government so dont go calling around people that believe in socialism moochers because socialists work for each other the only reason why people think socialism is bad because it was said by the americans that it was communism communism is the dictatorship form of socialism yugoslavia was democratic socialism why Josef Tito was a croatian leader he was the glue that held yugoslavia together he was so good he was elected over and over until he passed away may he rest in peace. serbs were never fond of croatian leaders but tito they admired him and respected him and would die for him if they ever had to, after he died in the late 80's everything started going downhill from there.

[TteFAboB]

Originally Posted by Torpeddo Fodder

So, I wonder how many peple there are left who still think this guy isn't a dictator

As many as those who believe that democracy is the opposite of dictatorship, when in fact it is its cause. The magic word is vote. Tell them there was a voting and they'll buy it, even if there's fraud, even if the Executive has unlimited power over everything else. As Stalin said: "It's not who votes that counts, it's who counts the votes".

Originally Posted by Officerpuppy

The balance between the poor and rich in latin america is very great, there virtually is no middle class

Latin America is a very big continent, it includes South, Central and some would like to throw in Mexico aswell. There is a middle class in virtually every country. The "balance" between poor and rich varies tremendously from country to country too.

Originally Posted by Marcantilan

Well, Chavez is always following Castro´s advices (and Castro is not a democrat, for sure)

Sadly, this is the beginning of the end of another fragile South American democracy...

Talk about fragility. How many constitutions did Venezuela had? 26? Is this the 27th? Sometimes it is better to respect and maintain the laws you have than to change to better ones. What good is a good law if nobody is willing to respect it or believe that they'll last no more than a few years? At least Nestor Kirchner takes advantage of the chaos in Mercosur to remain friendly but not submissive to Chavez, unlike his goons in Bolivia and Ecuador. But that's Argentina's prerogative as South America's 2nd economy. Chavez needs Argentina, especially for legitimacy, more than the reverse.

Originally Posted by Yahoshua

I believe we have just witnessed the very means by which a democratic government will be dismantled and replaced with a dictatorship, namely ours.

You believe wrong. Chavez is facing from 30% to 40% of opposition. Americans would reach that level in half a year of similar policies. Granted, I didn't see much rejection to Pelosi's proposal to create a public national radio station together with that law that breaks the spine of the little ones.

Originally Posted by elite_hunter_sh3

anyone else agree here that free education and health care is THE #1 MOST IMPORTANT thing a country HAS to HAVE no matter what

I agree. If with free education you can barely write, imagine how far you would be without it! Just kidding, you can probably write decently in Serbian or something else.

Originally Posted by CCIP

I do agree in part: when people are in a desperate situation economically, many freedoms that a middle-class-centred society considers crucial matter little to them. Someone who promises them an even marginally better living is seen as a saviour then. This is true of my native Russia

Venezuela was economically better off before Chavez than it is now, there were less people in desperate situations before him than there are now and unlike Russia Chavez never had unanimous support to do as he pleased, Lenin won the war and Stalin crushed whatever opposition existed, real or virtual, and that's the reason for the slow centralization of power, he must do what is possible, only as far as he can go safely, it is actually the reason why Chavez has taken this measure: Herbert Koeneke, chief of the political sciences department of University Simon Bolivar, is saying that the current surprise-escalation of authoritarianism is due to the 20% decline in the price of Oil since past August, something that "scares him [Chavez] alot". Notice how this "Lei Habilitante" was passed on congress three days after Rafael Ramírez, Oil & Energy minister, attempted to negotiate with the OPEP a cut in global Oil production to raise the price back up by 10%. Far from any planned master messianic plan, it is a desperate measure to avoid bankrupcy.

The saviour has been exposed, now it's a matter of avoiding popular insurrection and securing power, appealing to the groups that are happy to cling to the priviledges Chavez provides. Everything depending on a high Oil price.

Originally Posted by CCIP

You can yell about it as much as you like, but I don't think a more democratic regime can even promise so much as stability in this case. In this case I'm not surprised that many poorer countries are turning to socialism; in some cases it certainly ends up a human rights wreck, but I don't think it's a fantastic deal to be democratic and with a hopelessly empoverished population, either.

You can yell as much as you like too but it doesn't change the fact that Venezuela is empoverishing. What do you mean by "stability"? Have you seen the 2 million people protest against Chavez in the last election? The "Chavista" gangs that are taking control of Caracas, who fired against the crowd killing two and who are beginning to demand protection money like a mafia, soon to be officialized in the "Bairrista" association of Caracas? The Venezuelan economy and internal peace hanging on the price of Oil, his plan to control financial operations plummeting Caraca's stock market by 30%, destroying the retirement savings of thousands of Venezuelans, the situation is so dire Marco Aurélio Garcia from Brazil has said that the "Brazilian government will support Venezuela's industrial development, with investments, technology transfers and cooperative projects" because "Venezuela can't continue to live exclusively from Oil". What's currently being done in partnership are two refineries, one in Carabobo one in Refice, the final planning of a transcontinental gasoduct, the subway of Caracas is being financed by the Brazilian BNDES, all of this because Chavez's resources are limited to the Oil revenue and he's running short of it. The profits of the PDVSA are being eaten by the outbreak of inflation which has been out of control for a while now, so much for stability. Chavez opened the Orinoco bay to foreign companies because he lacked the money necessary to invest to pump the Oil out. Now, a few years later, after the platforms have been built, he comes to announce that he's taking control of the platforms. He "did the Lenin", just like in Baku. He wants to implement a policy of "substitution of imports". Many countries in South America attempted to implement these policies back in the 70's and some of the early 80's. It's an attempt to force the creation of national industries to replace what has to be imported. All failed, miserably. It was a complete disaster because no country ever had a fraction of the money required to do such a thing and as mentioned Chavez doesn't even have the funds to invest in the Oil industry, his source of power, let alone in the entire industry.

Venezuela has empoverished and will now lag behind without funds to construct anything but worse, it will fail to keep pace with other South American countries. A fantastic deal. No democracy, no wealth, no stability. Granted Venezuela has never been an example of democracy or stability or wealth. It does take skill to manage to worsen the situation even more, but far from unintended it is methodic: the poorer the population the more submissive it is.

Originally Posted by joea

Anyway, let me remind you folks Chavez WAS elected....

Elected for what? To leave office after 5 years. Nope, not anymore, he's been democratically elected to destroy the democratic institutions, to destroy democracy. Fear not joea, the time has come at last for unlimited re-elections. Let's see how many times we can say that he has been elected before raising an eyebrow. "Don't forget guys, Chavez has been elected for the 56th time, consecutive!". Not even Saddam had 100% of the congress in his hands.

However, even here the situation is changing for the worse. Chavez has announced that he will reform the "federation". Instead of city councils and provincial governments, both will be merged into new units that will not be elected, but legitimated by small assemblies. Not even 1/10th of the population will be represented nor be allowed to vote.

More later, ran out of time. It's incredible what a label can do. The guy says he's building the Socialism of the 21th century and nobody bothers checking what's going on before jumping to promised dreams.

[tycho102]

Komrade Che Approves!

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by tycho102

Komrade Che Approves!

Che's dead.

[elite_hunter_sh3]

che was a good man and a good leader he had potential to control all of south america and unite all the countries tere under one gigantic hispanic nation . good for him may he rest in peace

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by elite_hunter_sh3

che was a good man and a good leader he had potential to control all of south america and unite all the countries tere under one gigantic hispanic nation . good for him may he rest in peace

Che was a murdering thug. And he wasted his life vying for something that will never be.

[elite_hunter_sh3]

Originally Posted by Sea Demon

Che was a murdering thug. And he wasted his life vying for something that will never be.

right now i believe ur a boob who jumps to conclusions show me the evidence and i will believe you.
have a nice day.

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by elite_hunter_sh3

right now i believe ur a boob who jumps to conclusions show me the evidence and i will believe you.
have a nice day.

If you don't know who Che was, that's your problem. I'm not going to do your homework for ya'.