And because of the absence of reports of the government putting hundreds of people to death in Venezuela, I will confess I’m just not that concerned right now.
I can’t help but note that so did Iraq, four short years ago. Saddam wasn’t going to live forever. And upon his death, maybe it too would have started down the road towards democracy.
And Venezuela, too, might head back in that direction after a few years. Too soon to tell, too soon to care.
One thing I understand is that it’s much more possible to change the welfare of a small country rapidly than it is to do the same to a country with 1 billion or so people. It’s like trying to turn a rowboat v. a supertanker.
In short, I think the PRC-Taiwan comparisons are absurd.
To say it better, I was referring to a different (not Chavez) leader.
If he had attempted to do the moves against big oil while being a leader as a result of a coup, I think an intervention of all American nations to free Venezuela of the tyrant was certain then if that had been the case.
But, Chavez was elected, and besides the idiocy of the Venezuelan opposition, one should not forget the idiocy of the Bush administration by not telling the coup plotters (some of them contacted the Bush administration before the coup) that a coup was not a good idea. That then caused many that would had opposed Chavez to grumpily tolerate him in Venezuela.
You know, one of my fraternity brothers was from Venezuela and was really fond of pooping. Whenever he shat it wasn’t “laying some pipe” or “pinching a loaf.” No, he never took a dump, he took a Chávez.
Personally from the standpoint of a moderate, the man’s a menace. An ignorant menace to boot. Each of us should send him a pocket dictionary with the word “oligarch” highlighted.
One must accept this though: unless something positive is done about Mr Chávez, he is the kind of turd our grandkids will inevitably end up flushing. The hell of it is unless he openly cheats the people of their oily bolívares, I can’t see why US Leftists shouldn’t universally support him. Which leaves us where? Doomed to repeat history?
A year or so ago I was not more than a 100 meters away from that bozo when he was rousing people in Montevideo to go and kill yanks in his name; of course all wrapped on glorious rethoric, but the kernell was that message.
A more accurate paraphrase of his words that day where that, should he die we should blame the US and go to war to avenge him.
That may be just rethoric, for now; but he´s inciting violence. Sooner or later under his directions or unintendedly by the flames he´s fanning violence will happen and blood will flow.
He´s getting more and more intoxicated with power and upping his rethoric accordingly. If he keeps going down this road he´s bound to do something stupid.
And from a pretty well-off family there, right? Chavez is, whatever else you may think, a populist as well as a demagogue. People like your friend are, to “the masses”, the enemy. No wonder.
One other thing one must accept is that the American ideal, however often flouted, is to support democracy in other countries. Even if we don’t like the leaders those democratic processes select, ya know?
So you agree that the Chinese people started having their living conditions improve when the Chinese government began to abandon socialism, but you simply can’t bring yourself to say the words?
Coward.
Sam Stone has posted about “mysterious deaths” in Venezuela since Chavez came to power, but I’m not clear on the details, nor whether such deaths can fairly be laid at his feet.
Do you mean to say “tryant”? Oligarchy is what Venezuela had before Chavez.
Why? We still haven’t flushed Castro. Never had any good reason to, either.
Shit Elvis, you’re a demagogue, but could I ever expect you to operate an oil empire without getting screwed royally? Running a petrol conglomerate takes ruthlessness. That kind of rap takes skills. Connections. Without that shit you’re nothing more than a despot pissing in the wind meanwhile fucking your people in the ear.
As for Democracy, I don’t know what your flavor of it is, but in my world it means and I quote, “we the People, in order to form a more perfect union can bust they ass if they don’t do what we tell them.”
I first met this particular fraternity brother at Boys’ State. He was an exchange student from a high school near Lima.
Ermm . . . No, it isn’t, Elvis. It never was. Whatever W or the neocons might say to the contrary. The Soviet Union was an idea-state, and part of that idea was to promote Communism in other countries. But America is a nation-state that happens to have a democratic-republican form of government; that does not imply any duty to spread that system abroad.
So much for all that “beacon of democracy”, “a shining city upon a hill”, “a light unto the world” crap, huh? Wow. I did preemptively grant that it’s “often flouted”, but wow.
Cid, last time I checked, Lima wasn’t in Venezuela.
I take your basic point – it’s never been a basic theme of what America was about. However much I agree in principle, I have to disagree with that as a specific.
Woodrow Wilson called World War I “a war to end all wars” and “a war to make the world safe for democracy.” And, however much they failed in executing the purpose, the intent of first the League of Nations and then the United Nations Organization was in fact to do precisely that, with Americans (and Winston Churchill) at the forefront of the movement. For a period beginning in 1917, there was a movement among leftist idealists in this country to spread democracy throughout the world. Starting in 1942, it became an avowed national purpose, with left and right together in backing it. And it continued to be so through the Truman and Eisenhower years, petering out as it became evident that we were prepared to support anti-Communist dictators and repressive regimes who were willing to ally with us. No specific date for the end of that period, but Kennedy’s death and our backing of the Diem regime in Vietnam are good first-cut choices for closure of that idealistic period.
Oh, I see you had to type more and show how ignorant you are, The pragmatic reality was that Chavez got trounced for his moves on taking more control of the Venezuelan oil that on paper was supposed to be controlled by the government. Failing in the coup then the opposition set a campaign of strikes (many oil workers complained they were really in a lock down) neglect, and sometimes sabotage to make oil production go down.
I predicted then that if the oil was not flowing soon that Chavez was a goner, but if after his takeover the oil flowed to the ships that then even the US would pull back doing moves against Chavez.
I was correct, The opposition being wrong in saying that Chavez taking control would sink oil production (and the way they attempted to sink the economy and at the same time clumsily say that Chavez was responsible) was one reason why I decided the opposition was more bananas than Chavez.
Lima, Ohio, you way-behind dickmonkey. Secondly, you think Peru’s got a Boys’ State program? 
:dubious: Yeah, so much for that.
It’s all rhetoric and you won’t find it in the Constitution or even in the Declaration, which is all rhetoric.
In any case, those phrases are all about the U.S. inspiring democracy by example. One of the reasons, and a very good reason it was, why Lincoln was so concerned the American experiment would not self-destruct (in a decade when hardly any other country on Earth had democratic government and it had already failed in a few that had tried it); but he never had in mind any actual subversion of foreign tyrannies, funding/arming revolutionary movements, etc.
Same thing happened to the Chilean economy under Allende. (Only then the U.S. was more directly responsible.)
Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t.
I never said it wasn’t rhetoric, I said it was an ideal. Which it is. Which is no less real, ya know.
Polycarp has it right, except for the part about it having ended.
Don’t be so angry. Somewhere along the line he must’ve fucked you in the ear, I guess. He is not a businessman. He has no oil connections.
One day soon Pres Chávez will be cornholed by Chevron. They’ll be gentle and lube him up with light sweet crude and he’ll become another oil company whore until he either caves or we hang him. Simple fact.
Furthermore, Chávez’s Teen-Beat-style poster of Fidel won’t help him here. Chávez is holding treasure. Castro held an avocado stone and will die in a desert.
:dubious: Who’s “we,” Paleface? 'Cause it ain’t gonna be the U.S.