Venezuelan opposition march

[MichaeltheGreat]

However, the USSR was very active directly and through proxies all throughout Latinamerica, as they wanted to create any geopolitical counters and complications they could for the US, and bring cold-war geopolitics close to the US border.

The evil US and innocent victim commies (not refering to those killed, but the notions that the Soviets, Cubans and activist elements of local communist parties throughout Latinamerica preceding Allende's time) point of view is almost as laughable as the Fezian one.

[chequita guevara]

Yes, but mostly the Commies were terribly legalistic. In almost every country, the Communists opposed revolutionary elements. It lead to a temporary break between the Soviets and the Cubans (heck, the Cuban Communist Party was opposed to Castro's revolt). In Chile, after Pinochet came to power, they did try and get weapons in the 1980s to try and launch a revolt, but the weapons were discovered and seized. Most often, it was indigenous radicals far to the left of the people the USSR were sponsoring that caused trouble (though they were inspired by the Cuban revolution).

[MichaeltheGreat]

Your namesake had a problem with those bourgeoise-commie party types.

The US has been pretty dumb at differentiating (and exploiting ) the differences in left-leaning organizations and ideologies, and an abysmal ability to understand Latinamerican politics (it's tough when your chief sources of information are United Fruit and M. A. Hanna types, various ex-Sergeants, Colonels, plus smattering of Harvard and Oxford educated white Spanish-viceroy descended lackeys.)

I was just pointing out that just because the US was a bunch of commie-haters, it didn't mean the USSR wasn't looking to gain some advantage close to our turf.

[chequita guevara]

They just wanted a dagger at our waist, to counter the one we had at their waist. Can't say I particularly blame them.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

The "democratically elected dictator" acts to ease food crisis.

How very undictatorial from him.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/venezuela/story/0,12716,864884,00.html

Hugo Chavez, the embattled Venezuelan president, today stepped up efforts to deliver petrol and food to overcome shortages from an oil strike that has paralysed the country.
Mr Chavez, who has already resorted to using troops to move idle tankers and take over oil state terminals and ports, sent soldiers to distribute cornmeal across the country so that Venezuelans could enjoy their traditional dish of hayacas - cornmeal, meat and vegetables wrapped in banana leaves.

Accusing the opposition of trying to "sabotage the holiday spirit", Mr Chavez said he would make sure all Venezuelans enjoyed a happy Christmas.

"Without cornmeal, you can't have hayacas on Christmas," Mr Chavez said during his weekly television address. "Our armed forces will be distributing cornmeal to the people so that all Venezuelans can have hayacas at Christmas."

Venezuela, the world's fifth biggest oil exporter, has been crippled by strikes in a show of strength between oil workers and the president. The striking workers accuse Mr Chavez of authoritarianism and economic mismanagement and say they will continue their protests until Mr Chavez resigns or calls early elections.

Fuel and some basic food supplies are now scarce in many parts of the country, and the stoppage has pushed up oil prices the international market. The capital, Caracas, has virtually shut down, with shops closed and traffic reduced to a trickle in contrast to the normal congestion.

Mr Chavez, a populist former paratrooper, has vowed to see off the strikers and has attacked his opponents, a loose group of business leaders, unions and media barons backed by Venezuela's upper and middle classes, for blocking his reforms.

In his defiant weekly address, Mr Chavez said striking workers will be sacked and prosecuted for the damage they have caused. Mr Chavez said the head of the state-owned oil company Petroleos de Venezuela (PDVSA) had already started dismissing workers involved in the national stoppage.

Mr Chavez, who led a botched coup in 1992, has appointed former military officers to government posts and has recruited the armed forces to build roads and paint schools and deliver food to the poor as part of his so-called "Bolivar Plan".

Mr Chavez has also angered the US, Venezuela's largest trade partner, by forging closer ties with Fidel Castro's Cuba and Opec fellow member countries Iran and Libya.

Although his popularity has fallen sharply, along with Venezuela's economic fortunes, Mr Chavez commands strong support in many poor neighbourhoods, where he is seen as a popular hero. Mr Chavez survived a failed military coup in April that was suspected of having received US backing.

[El León]

How dictatorial! Contrasted to Somoza during the Nica earthquake where the army distributed bullets instead of aid.

Disclaimer: I DO NOT BELIEVE CHÁVEZ SHOULD BE OUSTED, LESS SO IN THE METHOD.

That said, this article shows exactly why the man worries me. Coup attempt... military past... I'm glad the Venezuelan army is distributing food, but I never like it when the army is too strong in a country. Makes bad situations possible... And I don't like his populism-left wingism ambiguity.
Perón also had this ambiguity... Too bad for the leftists that did not see his shift coming...

[Lawrence of Arabia]

He is using food to gain support.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
He is using food to gain support.

I'm shocked that it took so long for someone figure that out.

[chequita guevara]

Actually, he has support. He's using food to undermine the opposition, making them look like scrooges.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Actually, he has support. He's using food to undermine the opposition, making them look like scrooges.

Isn't that the samething?

[El León]

Not at all.
It goes back to the question - Is Chávez unpopular because:
a) "The people" don't like him
b) Some people don't like him and don't want "the people" to like him.
?

Which would then frame the possible scenarios as:
a) This is a measure to gain support.
b) This is a way to expose the people who don't like him.

However, "the people" is largely a myth. So I think the answer is part a and part b. Many people don't like him (what a surprise. no one likes presidents in general), and it is clear that there is a very well outlined sector of society that does not (not a surprise - you cannot infringe the interests of a group of people without it repsonding).
Nothing new here.
The difference is that it is not usually not appropriate to paralize the economy of a country in the name of "the peopl" unless "the people" really don't like the prez. Which does not seem like the case, if you study the Solidarity movement in Poland or the recent protests in Argentina.
And that very well outlined sector of the society in Venezuela that does not like Chavez has all the democractic tools it needs to oust him without holding the economy hostage.

[Chris 62]

Che, several pages back you asked for the Venezuelan Constitution.

Can you read Spanish?

http://www.venezuela-oas.org/Constitucion%20de%20Venezuela.htm

I can translate some of it:

Article 1
The Bolivariana Republic of Venezuela is irrevocably free and independent and bases its moral patrimony and its values of freedom, equality, justice and international peace, in the doctrine of Simón Bolivar, the Liberator. Independence, the freedom, the sovereignty, the immunity, territorial integrity and the national self-determination are right cannot be waived of the Nation.

Article 2
Venezuela is constituted in a democratic and social State of Right and Justice, that it advocates like superior values of his legal ordering and its performance, the life, the freedom, justice, the equality, solidarity, the democracy, the social responsibility and in general, the preeminence of the human rights, the ethics and political pluralism.

Article 3
development of the person and the respect to its dignity, the democratic exercise of the popular will, the construction of a right and loving society of La Paz, the promotion of the prosperity and well-being of the town and the guarantee of the fulfillment of the principles, rights and duties consecrated in this Constitution.

The education and the work are the processes fundamental to reach these aims.

Article 4
The Bolivariana Republic of Venezuela is a decentralized federal State in the terms consecrated by this Constitution, and it is governed by the principles of territorial integrity, cooperation, solidarity, concurrence and coresponsibility.

Article 5
The sovereignty resides intransferiblemente in the town, who directly exerts it in the form anticipated in this Constitution and the law, and indirectly, by means of suffrage, by the devices that exert the Public Power. The devices of the State emanate of the popular sovereignty and her they are put under.

Article 6
The government of the Bolivariana Republic of Venezuela and the political organizations that compose it is and always democratic, participative, elective, will be decentralized, alternative, responsible, pluralistic and of revocable mandates.

Article 7
The Constitution is the supreme norm and the foundation of the legal ordering. All the people and the devices that exert the Public Power are subject to this Constitution.

Article 8
The national flag with the colors yellow, blue and red; the national anthem Gloria to the brave town and the shield of arms of the Republic are the symbols of the mother country. The law will regulate its characteristics, meaning and uses.

Article 9
The official language is the Castilian. The indigenous languages also are of official use for the indigenous towns and must be respected in all the territory of the Republic, to constitute cultural patrimony of the Nation and the humanity.

...There are 350 Articles, any decent translator should make it readable to the non-Spanish speaker.

[Az]

The US has been pretty dumb at differentiating (and exploiting ) the differences in left-leaning organizations and ideologies

ermm, they did it pretty well with China. ( It's rather hard for me to call Mao a commie, but what the heck.. )

[El León]

They are right, he is a shameless cryptofeudalist, cryptocentralist and a traitor! Just look at the constitution:

Originally posted by Chris 62
Article 3
...the construction of a right and loving society of La Paz, the promotion of the prosperity and well-being of the town...

See? He is unabashedly looking after the best interests of Bolivians, not Venezuelans! No wonder the "Bolivariana" denomination.

And a shameless centralist, whereas the constitution asserts in one part that

Article 4
The Bolivariana Republic of Venezuela is a decentralized federal State in the terms consecrated by this Constitution...

The constitution turns "the terms" around! Look:

Article 5
The sovereignty resides intransferiblemente in the town,

"The town" must obvioulsy mean Caracas! The dictator!

...The devices of the State emanate of the popular sovereignty and her they are put under.

Don't even want to go there! Immoral!

any decent translator should make it readable to the non-Spanish speaker.

As you can see, we human translators cannot be substituted by machines... But I guess in this case the electronic ones shall sufice...

[El León]

Originally posted by Azazel
ermm, they did it pretty well with China. ( It's rather hard for me to call Mao a commie, but what the heck.. )

"Communist" and "dissenter" are interchangeable words in the vocabulary of the US power elite from the 30s and, by the looks of some people in this forum, this continues.

You are not in agreement ergo you are a communist.

EDIT - On that note, you could also try:

You are not in agreement, ergo you are liberal, burgeois and decadent.

You are not in agreement, ergo you are an enemy of the people.

En todas partes se cuecen habas, we would say in Mexico. ("Lima beans are cooked everywhere" i.e., the phenomenon of clamping down on dissenters by labeling then as "enemies" without really understanding where they're coming from is not just a US phenomena).