HA HA! Take that Chavez!

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker

He also only acts when he has the law on his side. So, for example, he didn't move against RCTV or Globovision, despite both television companies lying about a situation which led to a coup attempt and then supported that coup attempt. I think we could be fairly certain that if such a thing happened in the U.S., those companies would be toast immediately.

Uh, no.

You disagree they would be toast?

[Kuciwalker]

Yes, though it's a bit academic since the US would have to change so much for a coup attempt to be conceivable.

[chequita guevara]

Well . . . what happened to pro-Southern newspapers in the North during the Civil War?

[Kuciwalker]

You think something that happened over a century ago is a good guideline?

I wonder when the Germans are going to start killing Jews again.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Oerdin


There is more to democracy then just popularity. There is also the rule of law, a balance of powers, and minority rights. It's not just Venezuela which fails here, Russia is in the same boat.

If nothing else, democracy must not be authoritarian. I believe you are proposing a government be forced onto the people.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Flubber
1. I dislike expropriation of things especially from those that do not choose to be part of your system.

Then you don't believe in a system that benefits everyone. It's not like mugging little old ladies you know. The way I see it if you want to own the means of production and take control over society then be ready when your license is revoked and your property is nationalized. If you are going to cry about it like a little old lady who has been mugged I'm going to just laugh at you.

2. The cronyism for high position is apparently reaching new heights. Apparently being pro-Chavez is a precondition for most high posts-- That may be little different than many countries but when the government is taking over lots of industries it becomes more of a key. THis will hurt some of their key industries

Well you can't have the old guard in there. Those guys are definitely corrupt. You don't honestly propose that do you?

3. I am suspicious. His moves have tended to be those planning a long-term personal stay in power. I was encouraged by his referendum defeat but still troubled by the powers he was seeking.

I hope he is in power for a long time. Like it or not, he's a great leader for his people, and people around the world. And I don't agree with a lot of his policies. He really is something else though.

[Kidlicious]

The reality of this is that people can choose who owns the factories and places where they work. They can choose how much they are to be paid. They can choose these things just as they can choose the president, the congress and the constitution.

It doesn't matter if you like it or not. That's the way it's going to be.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Kidicious

Then you don't believe in a system that benefits everyone.

Actually I do. I just don't think you have to take what people A and B have in order to benefit X and Y and Z

Originally posted by Kidicious

The way I see it if you want to own the means of production and take control over society

I do not agree that owning the means of production means you exercise control-- Wealth brings influence and power but people( entertainers for example) can accumulate great wealth without ever owning means of production

Originally posted by Kidicious

If you are going to cry about it like a little old lady who has been mugged I'm going to just laugh at you.

I haven't been crying yet and the only laughing is me if you think that your model will come to fruition across the industrialized world

Originally posted by Kidicious

Well you can't have the old guard in there. Those guys are definitely corrupt. You don't honestly propose that do you?

Actually many of the people I am talking about were moderatey apolitical-- project managers, team leads, plant managers etc which had been hired by the oil companies for their technical qualifications-- with the nationalization, lots of these people were replaced by political hacks-- The only way most of the prior employees were the "old guard" was the fact that they were better educatednad therefore better off than average. My venezuelan co-worker said in her unit, a guy with a Masters in Engineering was replaced by a guy that hadn't finished high school ( but who is a vehement Chavez supporter)

Bottom line is way more positions became politicized. It used to be that you could get a good job with industry. With centralization, more and more stuff becomes a government job

[Impaler[WrG]]

Didn't western oil companies participate in the coup attempt against Chavez and basically tried to destroy the country wholesale by deliberately sabotaging the Oil infrastructure of the country. That would constitute an act of treason and would justify the ceasing of assets.

[Ben Kenobi]

You forgot the old standbye excuse - "He wasn't a real communist anyway."

Exactly.

If the revolution succeeds, then he is the vanguard of the people.

If it fails, well he wasn't a TRUE commie anyways.

They should call that the no true communist fallacy.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Kidicious
The reality of this is that people can choose who owns the factories and places where they work. They can choose how much they are to be paid. They can choose these things just as they can choose the president, the congress and the constitution.

This just sounds like rhetoric which actually means nothing

Originally posted by Kidicious


It doesn't matter if you like it or not. That's the way it's going to be.

If we are talking US and Canada, don't hold your breath waiting for the revolution

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Flubber


This just sounds like rhetoric which actually means nothing

That's what happened in Venezuela. Jeez Flubber, I'm not going to go back and forth with you like this for 15 pages. That's why I'm putting it to you very frankly. Unfortunately you aren't getting it.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Impaler[WrG]
Didn't western oil companies participate in the coup attempt against Chavez and basically tried to destroy the country wholesale by deliberately sabotaging the Oil infrastructure of the country. That would constitute an act of treason and would justify the ceasing of assets.

To the extent that they were actually involved in the coup attempt, then I'd say that penalizing them would be fair game. However, how does one really know what happened in that failed coup? I certainly don't know what happened. There were lots of accusations (CIA, for instance), but when it comes down to it, what constitutes proof? There are those who look at the history of the region, and the CIA, and decide that it fits the pattern and is therefore true. I won't be convinced (though I grant it's certainly plausible) unless there is something more concrete than accusation. Same goes for these oil companies. Were they involved? I dunno. Could they have been? Sure.

...

Che,

I know you're a "real communist." I do. It's why I asked you to set aside global communism for a moment (seeing as, for now, it's not happening).

You say you would prefer companies behave ethically and not take an exploitative deal b/c the local dictator/oligarchy is happy to screw their people over. I can't argue with that from a moral standpoint (there is, of course, the reality that if you don't deal with the nasty dictator, someone else will, but that doesn't make dealing with him less repugnant).

The problem I see with it is that it's a very vague standard. Where is the line between a fair deal and an exploitative one? I don't think either of us has the answer.

-Arrian

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
You think something that happened over a century ago is a good guideline?

Did I say it was a good guideline? No, I said it has happened and would happen here under the right circumstances. In fact, I know for a fact that any media outlet that called for a coup d'etat and it actually happened would be shut down, and the editors and publishers would go to jail. There's a little thing called the Smith Act. While SCOTUS overturned part of the law (you can call for revolution in general), it didn't over turn the whole thing, so if someone acts on your incitement, you're in deep doodoo.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Impaler[WrG]
Didn't western oil companies participate in the coup attempt against Chavez and basically tried to destroy the country wholesale by deliberately sabotaging the Oil infrastructure of the country?

I've actually never heard that. The state run oil company did do those things, and that's why a lot of them got sacked and why so many Venezuelans are now in exile in Alberta.