Hugo Chavez dead--Hero or villan?

[OutWest]

Standing up for the poor is very profitable. Since he began his rule, about 100 billion has been stolen from the national treasury via the national oil company or PVDSA.

Apparently the source for this 2010 story is a "company" called CJIA. Here's what I found via Gogle translate:

"Jerry Brewer, director of economic intelligence company Criminal Justice International Associates, based in North Miami and Virginia, said three years ago that the fortunes of Hugo Chavez Frias at 2,000 million dollars. Studying CJIA, company that has an office in Caracas and in other Latin American capitals, was picked up in an article published on July 26, 2010."

http://translate.google.com/translate?h ... s-20130306

And here's what passes for a website for this shady, stinking CIA cutout:

https://sites.google.com/a/cjiausa.us/www/

My dad did a few projects for the CIA as well as many for DoD, and I am proud of his contribution to shattering the Soviet Union. Since then, the evil streaks in the CIA have metastasized and become pervasive. Phony-baloney CIA disinformation may or may not have served the good in the past. Today they are vermin - and should be treated as vermin.

The situation has changed. All of us from a right-wing background need to examine carefully the sources we read.

Vast corruption in Venezuela? It could not be so! The CIA made it all up! Whippie!
Venezuela and Brazil took very different turns. Socialist Lula was pragmatic and went after
the so called "third ways" and did not ruin his country's economy in the process. But I suppose
Brazil booming is also a CIA plot...just to make Venezuela look bad.

Venezuela, with huge oil deposits and revenues, is an economic basket case. What might be the cause of that?
None of the business locals I talked to within Venezuela think that the 2 billion figure is accurate. They think it is much more.
Capital flight within Venezuela has been catastrophic, and the rampant criminality is not just a social and economic problem, it is also a tool used by the government to go after opponents. Nearly all the opposition media has been shut down and any Venezuelan of any means seems to be hedging their bets with homes in other countries.
Meanwhile, oil production has plummeted, with control of production often awarded to incompetent cronies instead of
capable professionals, so production has fallen from 3 million BPD to about 1.5 million BPD.

The only choices out there are not always between the devil and the deep.
But of course, anyone who opposes those events must by definition be CIA stooge or an employee of the Rockefellers.

[Cornfed]

Like I said, I respect him for trying to his people, I just think it is a situation where he may have been sincere, but sincerely wrong.

What did he do wrong exactly? Most of the national income is effectively a free good coming from oil. The only question is what happens to the free money. Chavez had the radical idea that it would be better to spend it on ordinary people rather than let the Jews steal it. Why is this wrong?

[lone_yakuza]

.

[abcdavid01]

I am so proud of young guys like [Tsar] and ABCDavid.

I've learned a lot from people on this forum.

[gsjackson]

Vast corruption in Venezuela? It could not be so! The CIA made it all up! Whippie!
Venezuela and Brazil took very different turns. Socialist Lula was pragmatic and went after
the so called "third ways" and did not ruin his country's economy in the process. But I suppose
Brazil booming is also a CIA plot...just to make Venezuela look bad.

Venezuela, with huge oil deposits and revenues, is an economic basket case. What might be the cause of that?
None of the business locals I talked to within Venezuela think that the 2 billion figure is accurate. They think it is much more.
Capital flight within Venezuela has been catastrophic, and the rampant criminality is not just a social and economic problem, it is also a tool used by the government to go after opponents. Nearly all the opposition media has been shut down and any Venezuelan of any means seems to be hedging their bets with homes in other countries.
Meanwhile, oil production has plummeted, with control of production often awarded to incompetent cronies instead of
capable professionals, so production has fallen from 3 million BPD to about 1.5 million BPD.

The only choices out there are not always between the devil and the deep.
But of course, anyone who opposes those events must by definition be CIA stooge or an employee of the Rockefellers.

You might get the perspective of some of the 62 percent of Venezuelans who voted for Chavez after 14 years of him being in office -- voting in the most transparent and democratic elections of several dozen countries he has monitored, including the U.S., according to Jimmy Carter. I doubt many of them have second homes abroad to hedge their bets with, or are particularly concerned with the fortunes in Venezuela of international currency speculators. They're very happy to have seen a significant alleviation of extreme poverty, which was Chavez's first priority.

As a citizen of a country where every single bit of public policy in which financial interests are at stake -- at all levels of government -- is bought and paid for, I don't get too impressed by evidence of corruption in other countries. I will need evidence of "nearly all media opposition shut down" in Venezuela before I'll believe it. But God knows I wish somebody would shut down the corporate media in the U.S. They do nothing but advance the monied interests, and everyone knows it.

[zacb]

[quote="Cornfed"][quote="zacb"]Like I said, I respect him for trying to his people, I just think it is a situation where he may have been sincere, but sincerely wrong.[/quote]
What did he do wrong exactly? Most of the national income is effectively a free good coming from oil. The only question is what happens to the free money. Chavez had the radical idea that it would be better to spend it on ordinary people rather than let the Jews steal it. Why is so i this wrong?[/quote] well, first of all, he devalued his country's currency, which only declines the living standard of the poor. Second, it is wrong for a government to steal from anyone, rich or poor. I don't care if it is the Us, the Jews, or Venezuela, they are all f'ed up. Abolish all of these turds, and end peoples attachment to this stockholm reality we are in. End nationhood, and let the individual and comunity reign supreme! So in short, f the un, f every nation, f crony corparations, and I guess f control freaks.

[Tsar]

[OutWest]

Vast corruption in Venezuela? It could not be so! The CIA made it all up! Whippie!
Venezuela and Brazil took very different turns. Socialist Lula was pragmatic and went after
the so called "third ways" and did not ruin his country's economy in the process. But I suppose
Brazil booming is also a CIA plot...just to make Venezuela look bad.

Venezuela, with huge oil deposits and revenues, is an economic basket case. What might be the cause of that?
None of the business locals I talked to within Venezuela think that the 2 billion figure is accurate. They think it is much more.
Capital flight within Venezuela has been catastrophic, and the rampant criminality is not just a social and economic problem, it is also a tool used by the government to go after opponents. Nearly all the opposition media has been shut down and any Venezuelan of any means seems to be hedging their bets with homes in other countries.
Meanwhile, oil production has plummeted, with control of production often awarded to incompetent cronies instead of
capable professionals, so production has fallen from 3 million BPD to about 1.5 million BPD.

The only choices out there are not always between the devil and the deep.
But of course, anyone who opposes those events must by definition be CIA stooge or an employee of the Rockefellers.

You might get the perspective of some of the 62 percent of Venezuelans who voted for Chavez after 14 years of him being in office -- voting in the most transparent and democratic elections of several dozen countries he has monitored, including the U.S., according to Jimmy Carter. I doubt many of them have second homes abroad to hedge their bets with, or are particularly concerned with the fortunes in Venezuela of international currency speculators. They're very happy to have seen a significant alleviation of extreme poverty, which was Chavez's first priority.

As a citizen of a country where every single bit of public policy in which financial interests are at stake -- at all levels of government -- is bought and paid for, I don't get too impressed by evidence of corruption in other countries. I will need evidence of "nearly all media opposition shut down" in Venezuela before I'll believe it. But God knows I wish somebody would shut down the corporate media in the U.S. They do nothing but advance the monied interests, and everyone knows it.

Well be my guest...hurry down to your people's paradise and enjoy it.

[gsjackson]

Vast corruption in Venezuela? It could not be so! The CIA made it all up! Whippie!
Venezuela and Brazil took very different turns. Socialist Lula was pragmatic and went after
the so called "third ways" and did not ruin his country's economy in the process. But I suppose
Brazil booming is also a CIA plot...just to make Venezuela look bad.

Venezuela, with huge oil deposits and revenues, is an economic basket case. What might be the cause of that?
None of the business locals I talked to within Venezuela think that the 2 billion figure is accurate. They think it is much more.
Capital flight within Venezuela has been catastrophic, and the rampant criminality is not just a social and economic problem, it is also a tool used by the government to go after opponents. Nearly all the opposition media has been shut down and any Venezuelan of any means seems to be hedging their bets with homes in other countries.
Meanwhile, oil production has plummeted, with control of production often awarded to incompetent cronies instead of
capable professionals, so production has fallen from 3 million BPD to about 1.5 million BPD.

The only choices out there are not always between the devil and the deep.
But of course, anyone who opposes those events must by definition be CIA stooge or an employee of the Rockefellers.

You might get the perspective of some of the 62 percent of Venezuelans who voted for Chavez after 14 years of him being in office -- voting in the most transparent and democratic elections of several dozen countries he has monitored, including the U.S., according to Jimmy Carter. I doubt many of them have second homes abroad to hedge their bets with, or are particularly concerned with the fortunes in Venezuela of international currency speculators. They're very happy to have seen a significant alleviation of extreme poverty, which was Chavez's first priority.

As a citizen of a country where every single bit of public policy in which financial interests are at stake -- at all levels of government -- is bought and paid for, I don't get too impressed by evidence of corruption in other countries. I will need evidence of "nearly all media opposition shut down" in Venezuela before I'll believe it. But God knows I wish somebody would shut down the corporate media in the U.S. They do nothing but advance the monied interests, and everyone knows it.

Well be my guest...hurry down to your people's paradise and enjoy it.

So the "nearly all opposition media shut down" is just a neo-con opinion monger talking point, with no relation to truth? I figured as much. Sounds like Charles Krauthammer.

[Jester]

Well be my guest...hurry down to your people's paradise and enjoy it.

And you're returning to the land of drones, TSA groping, gay marriage, Jewish media, and Black and Mexican gangs in schools, right?

My condo is available June 1, send me a deposit.

Your daughter will love it here.

[Jester]

So the "nearly all opposition media shut down" is just a neo-con opinion monger talking point, with no relation to truth? I figured as much. Sounds like Charles Krauthammer.

A year or more ago my mother parroted to me the Fox Newsbit that Chavez had shut down an opposition-owned TV station.

I simply stated that there are NO opposition TV stations in America.

[OutWest]

Well be my guest...hurry down to your people's paradise and enjoy it.

And you're returning to the land of drones, TSA groping, gay marriage, Jewish media, and Black and Mexican gangs in schools, right?

My condo is available June 1, send me a deposit.

Your daughter will love it here.

You are of course presenting the routine leftist and rightist false paradigm- that the only choice is about flavor of the despotism. Within this folly, the cure for the ever growing despotic state in the USA is simply a different kind of despotic state somewhere else. That way, the statistics always win one way or the other- it is just a matter of what flavor of sauce the goose will be cooked in. Because I don't like the authoritarian statist rule of the late Chavez, it does not mean I somehow love the emerging authoritarian rule in the USA. The solution to authoritarian abuse in the USA is not some other flavor of oppression by a Fidel Castro.

That is the BS of the authoritarian left and right- that your only choice in the world is what kind of statist you will be ruled by. Notice how if I were to knock some regime like the late Pinochet of Chile...some would say I must be a commie lover. If I knock the leftist abusers, then I must love George Bush and Fox News. .

This way the authoritarians will always win by default. The apparatus of abuse will be in place one way or the other, and it will be just a matter of positioning as to whether those abuses will be from the left or the right varieties of abusers. What is the likelihood that authoritarian structures will be abused heinously? History shows that number must be around 100%. History also shows that authoritarians are often elected- by 62% of the vote or whatever. If votes are simply a popularity contest and an opportunity to vote in whoever will promise the most free stuff, no country will long survive.
In the USA, plunder has won the day. The plunder of financial institutions and pure corporate interests and the plunder of
the rest in pandering to voters to simply vote their personal interests. This becomes class warfare with no common cause, and no country will long survive that. One critical role of a healthy middle class was to help resolve these two extremes, but with the ongoing destruction of the middle class, such remedial forces are soon to be lost.

I see little hope for a country and culture wherein contemplation is reduced to nothing that will exceed the length of the lyrics of a rock song or the text of a bumper sticker.

So get in your digs and cheap shots while you can boys, your system of soylent green awaits, whether from corporate or populist bakeries. Most love state supremacy and only bemoan it when it cannot be used to achieve their own favored ends.

[abcdavid01]

OutWest, how do you feel about universal suffrage?

[OutWest]

OutWest, how do you feel about universal suffrage?

Sounds good and reasonable in theory and ends up being a measuring stick for the education system...with predictable results. If you subscribe to it purely, you are likely an optimist and if you want to temper it in some way, you are likely a realist. How can one protect the destiny of a country from the possibility that most of the population can degrade into mindless sheep of one flavor or the other? A stampede is a stampede, regardless of the direction.

A wise old woman- the widow of a WWII admiral, once told me that she thought that women getting the vote would in history be seen as the end of the USA as a republic. She reasoned that men had hope of being persuaded to vote for interests that were larger than their own, but women would not be so inclined. She reasoned that women were more manipulable both by corporate interests and by despots and populists. Interestingly, the campaign to weaken and belittle men came into full bloom in her lifetime, both by the corporate advertisers who saw women as more ideal consumers and by statists, who saw women as more ideal sheep to populate the voting booth.
Women protest this notion strongly, but they seem to confirm it by their actions. The purveyors of information seem to have concluded that this is correct- hence the war on male influence and leadership at all levels.

[abcdavid01]

It's funny, but liberals are typically seen as more spiritual and tolerant. My mother and sister both have minor hoarding problems, as does my sister's boyfriend. You said you didn't like the Left/Right paradigm, but it was the Right mainly opposing female suffrage. In any case, my father and I, being traditionalists, do not have this problem. He is very neat (having been a Naval Officer) and I'm downright anti-materialist.

I've usually been able to find common ground with most members here even those on opposite sides of debates. I look at a political theory as a heirarchy of needs. Sometimes extreme authoritarianism is necessary to prevent two violent tribes from engaging in a bloodbath. It was wrong of us to go into Iraq in the name of democracy.

One way it might be looked at is to define Left as Chaos and Right as Order. Freedom flows from Order and Anarchy flows from Chaos. Fascism as per Hitler, Stalin, etc. Have elements of both Left and Right. Hitler had his subordinates compete with each other.

So, as you say, the important things to value are education for the ruling class (or those with political power i.e. voting rights) and anti-corruption. In some cases I would be willing to overlook corruption if the alternative is chaos. There's no such thing as a perfect government after all.

America at its best was a meritocracy, when it limited voting rights to property owners. It prevented the kind of abuse that could come from dictators, but only those who had passed a barrier to entry were granted political rights.

Unfortunately I see America as being so uneducated that its only hope is authoritarianism. Not the kind we have now with its inherent chaos. The violent mixture of Left/Right. Simply, I would want to restrict voting rights. That is the only way to save the country. There's no going back though, so the only hope is to completely start over. That might just mean another revolution.

You might be opposed to authoritarianism, but its important to define terms. Opposing women's suffrage is more authoritarian than supporting it. Heirarchy of needs. Whatever model fits.