Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Blocking Bolivarian Boulevard
The Venezuelan revolution might have to get by without a dictator-for-life:
In a fiercely contested referendum yesterday, voters rejected reforms that would have scrapped term limits on Mr Chavez's rule, given him control over foreign currency reserves and boosted powers to take over private property.
Mr Chavez conceded just after election officials said early yesterday that the "no" camp had about 51 per cent of the vote and that the President scored only about 49 per cent support.
Although he remains powerful and popular, it was the biggest electoral blow to the anti-US leader since he swept to power in 1998.
|12.3.07 @ 11:27AM|#
Since the official tally was 51% to 49% I have to assume that
Chavez and three of his commie buddies were the only people to vote
for Chavez's new powers, everlasting life, omnipotence and
socialist paradise against fascists and yankee imperialists.
I wonder how long it will take for Chavez apologists to spin the
fact that their hero got bitch-slapped into some grand symbol of
statesmanship.....
|12.3.07 @ 11:29AM|#
Since the official tally was 51% to 49% I have to assume
that Chavez and three of his commie buddies were the only people to
vote for Chavez's new powers, everlasting life, omnipotence and
socialist paradise against fascists and yankee
imperialists.
The bad news is how narrow it was.
The good news is the opposition was much stronger among the 18-30
year old set, particularly on college campuses. This says that
young Latin Americans don't wish to return to the bad old days of
the 60s and 70s.
ed|12.3.07 @ 11:30AM|#
the President scored only about 49 per cent
"Only"? Last time I looked, 49% is almost half. That's cause for
optimism?
"Bitch-slapped" Lamar? With half the vote? Holy hyperbole.
I guess Kerry and Gore also got bitch-slapped.
|12.3.07 @ 11:31AM|#
R C Dean | October 31, 2007, 3:30pm | #
Don't you people know political Kabuki when you see it? There is no
frikkin' way Chavez doesn't get his way here.
What part of "repressive demagogue" and "one-party Congress" adds
up to "Chavez fails to consolidate power"?
|12.3.07 @ 11:31AM|#
Hey, I'll threadjack about something else: Has there been any news on the Liberty Dollar raid by the feds?
robc|12.3.07 @ 11:32AM|#
joe,
So we have something to throw back at you, what would you put the
odds of Chavez going quietly into the sunset at the end of his
term?
So you have something to throw at me, Im going with a 1%
chance.
Episiarch|12.3.07 @ 11:34AM|#
joe is now mastering the Reason search engine. This should be fun. Do me next, joe! I don't recall if I said anything really juicy but if I did, get me.
|12.3.07 @ 11:35AM|#
If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you;
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,
But make allowance for their doubting too:
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or, being lied about, don't deal in lies,
Or being hated don't give way to hating...
Yours is the Earth and everything that's in it,
And -- which is more -- you'll be a Man, my son!
- Rudyard Kipling
Oh, the irony!
|12.3.07 @ 11:36AM|#
robc,
I think those odds got quite a bit better yesterday.
The take-home lesson here: democracy isn't about the man, it's the
people and the system.
|12.3.07 @ 11:36AM|#
"Holy hyperbole."
If you can't truck in enough campesinos to win a vote, you got
slapped down.
|12.3.07 @ 11:36AM|#
Jesse, a little context would be helpful. Most democracies do not impose term limits on their leaders (the UK and Canada come immediately to mind) yet no one critcizes them for being undemocratic. Furthermore, you must admit the process of adopting and ammending the Venezuelan constitution has been much more democratic than than occurred in the US- three-fifths of a person anyone?
|12.3.07 @ 11:37AM|#
Every once in a while the world surprises me with a burst of
sobriety and common sense.
The usual suspects on the Reason Blog, however, have yet to do so.
;-)
|12.3.07 @ 11:37AM|#
Joe, I wouldn't go too far with the search engine if I were you.
I bet I could find some quotes from you talking about how the
Democrats would end the war in two weeks back in January.
With regards to Chavez, lets see if he calls in the army and blames
the CIA for "election fraud" or if he accepts the decision.
|12.3.07 @ 11:37AM|#
Oh, Episiarch.
I'm saving you for when the Democratic president ends the Iraq
War.
|12.3.07 @ 11:38AM|#
Bill Pope, I'm thrilled the US Constitution doesn't allow ballot initiative to amend the Constitution. Think of the insanity that would ensue. It would be the Californication of the federal government.
|12.3.07 @ 11:40AM|#
Didn't Chavez refuse to invite election observers this time? I
think he tampered with the vote but STILL didn't get the majority
he needed.
Also, is there anything that can stop him from contesting this
result in the near future? By temporarily respecting the result, he
burnishes his democratic credentials, but then in a week or two,
when he "discovers" information that opponents of the nation have
tampered with the vote, Chavez gets his way.
PS Any celeb commentary on the vote result? I gotta hear what Sean
Penn and Naomi Campbell think.
|12.3.07 @ 11:40AM|#
Cesar,
I imagine Chavez is going to pull the Full Dornan over his loss. It
was only those illegal immigrants the opposition trucked in from
Orange County!
Which will only serve to harm his image in the eyes of the
Venezuela public.
|12.3.07 @ 11:42AM|#
Cesar,
Hold on. Venezuela doesn't allow the Constitution to be amended
through a popular vote, either.
First, amendments need to win in the congress (IDK if they require
a super-majority), and then the public has to approve them.
The popular vote is actually a check on zany amendments.
|12.3.07 @ 11:45AM|#
You know, I'd just like to point out that for all the sh*t I've
taken, I have never once - not even once - accused anyone of hoping
that things go to hell in Venezuela so their predictions can be
proven right.
That is a really lousy, dishonest accusation to make in any
political context.
BakedPenguin|12.3.07 @ 11:45AM|#
joe, I don't blame you for enjoying this, but Chavez has shown
in the past he's not above extra-legal means to gain power. You
might consider waiting a bit before throwing those predictions back
in their faces. I do think you're right about him shifting to blame
mode, and the Devil (aka Dubya) will top his list.
Bill Pope - most democracies are parliamentary, which means they
are often made up of fractious coalitions that don't stay in power
for long.
|12.3.07 @ 11:45AM|#
PS Any celeb commentary on the vote result? I gotta hear
what Sean Penn and Naomi Campbell think.
I'm more interested in a response form Naomi Klein. You know,
Chavez was supposed to be the savior of the oppressed brown people,
protecting them from evil yanqui "disaster
capitalism"--whatever the fuck that means.
Like socialist revolutions don't happen in times of crisis! For a
Marxist she sure as shit doesn't know her own ideology.
First, amendments need to win in the congress (IDK if they
require a super-majority), and then the public has to approve
them.
The popular vote is actually a check on zany amendments.
I prefer state legislatures as a check on crazy amendments, but
Venezuela isn't federalist. But thats better than California-style
Constitutional reform.
|12.3.07 @ 11:46AM|#
The take-home lesson here: democracy isn't about the man,
it's the people and the system.
My take is, to his credit, Chavez didn't commit massive voting
fraud this election.
My other reply to this
Juan|12.3.07 @ 11:47AM|#
Maybe I'm too high on this, but I think Chavez just had his Midway, his Borodino....
|12.3.07 @ 11:47AM|#
Oh, crap!
The take-home lesson here: democracy isn't about the man, it's
the people and the system.
My take is, to his credit, Chavez didn't commit massive voting
fraud this election.
My other predictions,
still hoping I'm wrong, hold.
Episiarch|12.3.07 @ 11:50AM|#
Oh, Episiarch.
I'm saving you for when the Democratic president ends the Iraq
War.
I look forward to it. I am pleased about being wrong here (so
far--let's see what Hugo does over the next few days), and if a Dem
president ends the war, I will be pleased in that case too. I will
enjoy your gloating.
|12.3.07 @ 11:54AM|#
It would be the Californication of the federal
government.
Cesar,
Flea is gonna kick your plagiarizing ass.
Juan|12.3.07 @ 11:56AM|#
This is great! Chavez will be out of power in...
2013? Big whoop.
Yeah, it sucks, but there's an opportunity to start eroding the
base, starting with regional elections next year.
Moreover, this confirms what almost everyone knew: the source of
his electoral success is in those who benefit from government
largess, but don't want anything to do with the Cuban system.
Aiming for these voters will suck in a libertarian website, but
it's sure better than the alternative.
|12.3.07 @ 11:59AM|#
The astonishing thing about this vote is that Chavez was trying
to become a dictator-for-life, and the announced turnout was only
about 55%. Mind-blowing apathy there.
But, considering the 49% Chavez allegedly got, anyone think he
won't try again with a slightly watered-down version, with a lot
(or more) ballot-stuffing to get the 2% extra needed for
passage?
I'm still highly skeptical this guy leaves power peacefully in
2012, but today, at least, a little celebration is in order.
robc|12.3.07 @ 11:59AM|#
I think those odds got quite a bit better
yesterday.
Well, yeah. Reverse the vote and I would have gone with zero
percent instead of one.
|12.3.07 @ 11:59AM|#
BakedPenguin,
Don't you think that the fact that he just lost an election -
failing utterly to use any extra-legal means to cheat and win -
should find its way into your analysis of the situation?
Seriously, think off all the people we've seen Chavez compared to
on these threads over the past few years. Stalin. Mao. Pol Pot.
Saddam. Fidel. Putin. Mugabe.
Can you even imagine any of them allowing an electoral loss to
happen when they were in full control of the apparatus of
state?
|12.3.07 @ 12:02PM|#
Can you even imagine any of them allowing an electoral loss to
happen when they were in full control of the apparatus of
state?
Joe, I'm going to Godwin this thread but theres actually a point to
this. Hitler failed to gain a majority in an election, too. A few
days later he gained dictatorial powers anyway under the pretext of
a pretended "emergency". Chavez will use democracy when its useful
to him. When it proves not to be don't be surprised if he throws it
overboard.
|12.3.07 @ 12:04PM|#
Cesar,
Hitler was a challenger, not in control of the govenrment, when his
party had its gains in the 1932 elections, and was appointed
Chancellor.
|12.3.07 @ 12:05PM|#
Cesar,
The fact that Chavez allowed this electoral defeat to happenn
should be a relevant bit of data in making predictions about his
behavior.
|12.3.07 @ 12:08PM|#
There was a great story in the Boston Globe this weekend.
One of the military men who, along with Chavez, founded the
revolutionary cell that launched Chavez's coup went over to the
opposition. Imagine Zell Miller giving his speech at the 2004
Republical Convention, if Zell Miller had been John Kerry's
campaign manager in 1972 and had been a top aid to him ever since.
"We believe in socialism, but within a democratic system."
I think the bottom line here is that, contra Michael Moynihan's
article from last month, the fact that an elected president adopts
left-wing policies is not, in fact, proof that he is out to destroy
electoral democracy.
anon|12.3.07 @ 12:10PM|#
Untermensch|12.3.07 @ 12:13PM|#
''Don't feel sad,'' Chavez urged supporters, especially given the ''microscopic differences'' between the ''yes'' and ''no'' options in a referendum that opponents feared could have meant a plunge towards dictatorship.
From MSNBC. This bit was on CNN's web site earlier today, but has
since vanished. Strange how this revision to the constitution was
vital, but when he lost, suddenly it's no big deal, a "microscopic
difference." If I were a true believer in Chavez and heard him call
what was the Most Important Vote of the Millenium a "microscopic"
difference, I'd say, "you know what bud, screw you" and go
home.
My guess is that this vote will be like the referendum on
independence for Quebec: passion will change and this will be
Chavez's zenith. People will move on to other things.
|12.3.07 @ 12:14PM|#
"the fact that an elected president adopts left-wing
policies is not, in fact, proof that he is out to destroy electoral
democracy."
Joe, I'm with ya to a point. Aren't you forgetting what the vote
was about that Chavez lost? Remember he wanted all that unchecked
power, ability to rule for life, take control over major industries
and suspend individuals rights with little justification in times
of "emergency"?
The guy lost his bid for caudillo status. I have to assume, albeit
with little support, that the results were so overwhelming that he
would have had another putsch on his hands if he didn't concede.
The 51-49 business was merely to save face. That's just a guess,
but not totally unfounded unless latin american elections have all
of the sudden become reliable as a diebold machine.
|12.3.07 @ 12:15PM|#
Give it some time. Not to say that I expect the worst, but elections are seldom cut and dry within a day or two. There is a lot of meat on this particular bone and it will take a while to worry it all off. This goes for the SCOTUS 2nd Amendment thread as well.
BakedPenguin|12.3.07 @ 12:17PM|#
Don't you think that the fact that he just lost an election - failing utterly to use any extra-legal means to cheat and win - should find its way into your analysis of the situation?
It did, joe. My point was just that the game's not yet over. He
still has a long time in power, and the timing of this election
might be significant.
If he won this election, he could claim a legitimacy for the power
grab. He didn't win, but he has a few years left to plan by other
means to stay in power if he so desires. He may be enough of a
democrat to step down at the end of his term, but I'd like better
than 50/50 odds before I bet on that.
Cesar, Flea is gonna kick your plagiarizing ass.
You might want to read about what happens to plagiarists
here.
|12.3.07 @ 12:26PM|#
Lamar,
I'm only with me up to a point, as well. I still don't trust that
guy, but I think the comparisons are more to Bush (and his
executive power grabs and love of the word "traitor" to describe
people who disagree with him) than to Pol Pot or Hitler.
|12.3.07 @ 12:28PM|#
Don't you people know political Kabuki when you see it?
There is no frikkin' way Chavez doesn't get his way here.
What part of "repressive demagogue" and "one-party Congress" adds
up to "Chavez fails to consolidate power"?
Color me surprised.
Color me shocked if Chavez doesn't find a way to make this happen
anyway. 49% practically begs for another bite at the apple. He's
still a repressive demagogue with a one-party Congress. joe, are
you willing to go on record that this is his final attempt to
consolidate power? If not, you might want to tone down the
gloat.
Don't you think that the fact that he just lost an election -
failing utterly to use any extra-legal means to cheat and win -
should find its way into your analysis of the situation?
Whoa, joe, how can you possibly know he didn't use extra-legal
means to cheat?
stephen the goldberger|12.3.07 @ 12:30PM|#
Well now the system and rule of law has kept Chavez in check (which gives support to Joe's arguments that Chavez is democratically elected and operating within the framework of Venezuelan law). The question is where does he go from here? Can they bring the referendum up again? I dont know but I really don't think he's gonna go quietly into the night when his term is up. He will probably have some sort of influence for decades to come.
Gahan|12.3.07 @ 12:38PM|#
I must admit, I'm pretty surprised at Chavez's calm demeanor all of a sudden. Just days ago he was calling the 'no' crowd traitors and dishing out threats left and right about what he was going to do if there was any "interference" from the U.S. or Spain. Next thing you know he's thanking the opposition for participating in such an orderly election. Seems kind of bipolar to me.
fyodor|12.3.07 @ 12:40PM|#
I think this was good news for Venezuela both cause it was the
right vote and cause it showed Chavez can lose a vote, which is
good in its own right.
What will happen in the future? I'll let the future call that, but
this can't help but be a good omen compared to the alternative.
Gahan|12.3.07 @ 12:42PM|#
As far as the narrow margin, all the polls suggested that this was going to be a squeaker. I don't think 51-49 outcome is the result of any government tampering.
|12.3.07 @ 12:50PM|#
I also remember reading where one of Chavez's major supporters
recently bolted to the other side.
I think Chavez may have had some visits from other power-brokers in
Venezuela who told him in no uncertain terms they weren't going to
go along with any further grabs for power. This vote is simply a
face-saving way for him to climb down.
|12.3.07 @ 12:59PM|#
RC Dean,
joe, are you willing to go on record that this is his final
attempt to consolidate power? Of course not. All politicians
attempt to consolidate their power.
If not, you might want to tone down the gloat.
On this, of all days, how about you make a reall effort to get this
through your skull - I haven't made any predictions that he
wouldn't try to consolidate his power. What I have been saying for
years now is that he has done so, and will continue to do through,
through legal, democratic means. All of your yammering about
democracy, and you can't seem to grasp that distinction between
coups and ballots.
Whoa, joe, how can you possibly know he didn't use extra-legal
means to cheat? Because he lost.
|12.3.07 @ 1:02PM|#
grumpy realist, I think you give Chavez too much credit as a
politician.
This isn't a well-choreographed Plan B by a smooth operator who
knows all the angles. This a blunder by a hamfisted goon who simply
assumed that of course the people would support him.
|12.3.07 @ 1:06PM|#
What makes this referendum's defeat so impressive is that it was
larded down with goodies intended to bribe people into endorsing
the grab for executive power, and the public still didn't buy
it.
The six hour workday. The money for local councils. I think
everyone was going to get a pony, too. And the public still
rejected it.
On a lot of immigration threads, we see people offer the argument
that "those people" from Latin America would be bad for American
democracy, because they're in love with caudillos and giveaways and
don't have an appreciation for limited government or liberty.
So, on a day when a lot rightist delusions are turning into smoke
and blowing away, let's throw that one on the pile, too.
|12.3.07 @ 1:23PM|#
Because he lost.
He could just be bad at cheating. With no market to determine the
price of a vote, perhaps he underbid with his bribes.
atrevete|12.3.07 @ 1:32PM|#
One of the military men who, along with Chavez, founded the
revolutionary cell that launched Chavez's coup went over to the
opposition" Joe
Joe this was Gen. Raul Baduel, who survived an assassination
attempt yesterday. Chavistas for the past couple weeks have been
chanting "Baduel, traidor! Te toca el paredon" (Baduel, traitor!
Your turn for the firing squad!) Hugo Chavez doesn't need to arrest
and execute anyone himself, he just hints and expects his "Red
Guards" to do so - and never stops them or prosecutes them.
I do think this is the line in the sand, the Midway that Juan
speaks of. As Churchill said "It's not the end. It's not even the
beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the
beginning."
Juan|12.3.07 @ 1:38PM|#
What makes this referendum's defeat so impressive is that it
was larded down with goodies intended to bribe people into
endorsing the grab for executive power, and the public still didn't
buy it.
You know, this might be the best part about all this.
Chavez was probably trying to see what he could get away with. And
when he couldn't get a power grab even when he packed it with
carrots (and probably had some help from his friends at the
CNE).
What this does is open a window of opportunity for the opposition.
Next year we'll have regional elections, and the process for a
potential recall vote can start a year after that. The student
movement seems to be in it for the long haul, and I can imagine a
long-term strategy aimed at defeating the Chavez-backed candidate
in 2012, while keeping him in the defensive until then.
atrevete|12.3.07 @ 1:39PM|#
And Joe, please go ahead and gloat! It's worth it that Venezuela
experiences a sea change.
I give a huge part of the credit to the brave students who
demonstrated, campaigned, spoke out, and VOTED, then monitored the
voting centers. They did so under threats and sometimes very real
bullets from armed thugs.
|12.3.07 @ 1:41PM|#
I don't know if Chavez has the intelligence or character to be chastened and change course in response to this defeat.
|12.3.07 @ 1:43PM|#
IM HAPPY, HAPPY, HAPPY, HAPPY!!!!
Most people didnt go to work today- too tired from celebrating all
night!
I know this is far from over, but this is the first defeat for
Chavez. It was tense for while, because the witnesses for the NO
knew they had won but couldnt proclaim victory (it would have been
illegal) and the National Electoral Council would not announce
Chavez's defeat. In fact, they didnt let the witnesses for the NO
be present at the vote tallying. Very tense fro a few hours. But in
the end, it was too obvious Chavez had been defeated, so he had no
choice but to concede.
IM HAPPY, HAPPY, HAPPY!
|12.3.07 @ 1:46PM|#
"I must admit, I'm pretty surprised at Chavez's calm demeanor
all of a sudden. Just days ago he was calling the 'no' crowd
traitors and dishing out threats left and right about what he was
going to do if there was any "interference" from the U.S. or Spain.
Next thing you know he's thanking the opposition for participating
in such an orderly election. Seems kind of bipolar to me."
Hehehehe. Bipolar. I was just saying these exact words this
morning...
|12.3.07 @ 1:52PM|#
rana,
How low is a 55% turnout in a Venezuelan election? It's usually a
lot higher, no?
|12.3.07 @ 1:57PM|#
rana,
Congratulations! (I was wondering when you were going to show up.
Must have been a long night.)
Mad Max|12.3.07 @ 2:01PM|#
"Seriously, think of[] all the people we've seen Chavez compared
to on these threads over the past few years. Stalin. Mao. Pol Pot.
Saddam. Fidel. Putin. Mugabe.
"Can you even imagine any of them allowing an electoral loss to
happen when they were in full control of the apparatus of
state?"
The fact that Chavez felt the need to beg the people for extra
power tells me that he *isn't* in full control. He wanted to be,
but the voters wouldn't swallow it.
I have no idea what will happen in Venezuela, but it's too early to
be optimistic.
You mentioned Mugabe. I recall that Zimbabwe had a referendum
several years ago on a constitutional amendment to take white-owned
farms without compensation. The voters defeated that amendment, and
now Mugabe has retired and the government is in the hands of the
opposition.
Oops, I mean Mugabe stayed in power, seized the white-owned farms,
and is presiding over an economic disaster.
Hopefully the people of Venezuala will stop Chavez from doing that.
I don't know.
|12.3.07 @ 2:13PM|#
Well, good luck to Venezuela. This is wonderful news.
I'm going out in the snow.
|12.3.07 @ 2:13PM|#
"How low is a 55% turnout in a Venezuelan election? It's usually
a lot higher, no?"
Joe, this is what I found:
Before 1998 (pre-Chavez) absenteeism was never above 50%; during
the 90's it was around 30-40%; there was 77% absenteeism (some
analists say as high as 90%) for the election of the National
Assembly; and the last presidential election had 25%
absenteeism.
Gahan|12.3.07 @ 2:16PM|#
Felicidades, rana! Les deseamos lo mejor.
By the way, this may be just a rumor, but I read that Chavez has
some sort of medical condition involving too much copper in the
blood stream or something that may be to blame for his mood swings.
Is there any truth to this?
|12.3.07 @ 2:20PM|#
Well, good luck to Venezuela. This is wonderful
news.
I'll agree with that.
I just have zero faith that it is the first in a long string of
good news.
|12.3.07 @ 2:21PM|#
"You mentioned Mugabe. I recall that Zimbabwe had a referendum
several years ago on a constitutional amendment to take white-owned
farms without compensation. The voters defeated that amendment, and
now Mugabe has retired and the government is in the hands of the
opposition.
Oops, I mean Mugabe stayed in power, seized the white-owned farms,
and is presiding over an economic disaster."
Buzzkiller.
Still, I´m happy. I was always hopeful but extremely... cautious...
doubtful...concerned. I feel like Venezuela had a communist gun
aimed at its head, and we dodged a bullet.
As far as the high percentage of absenteeism, it was perhaps from
both sides: opposition voters who felt they were going to be
cheated and Chavistas who love Chavez but didnt want to lose their
freedom so, instead of voting "NO", preferred to not vote.
|12.3.07 @ 2:29PM|#
"By the way, this may be just a rumor, but I read that Chavez
has some sort of medical condition involving too much copper in the
blood stream or something that may be to blame for his mood swings.
Is there any truth to this?"
Gahan,
Gracias.
This one I hadn't heard. Interesting.
I have heard many rumors but nothing I could say is true. You know
how people love to make up stories.
But he was calm yesterday. I think they must have heavily sedated
him. ;)
|12.3.07 @ 2:29PM|#
joe, I just finished a smoke break, and as many are aware,
smoking temporarily improves brain functions.
Mr Chavez conceded just after election officials said early
yesterday that the "no" camp had about 51 per cent of the vote and
that the President scored only about 49 per cent
support.
And no
honorable politician would ever
change his stance after that.
Hey, it just popped into my admittedly curious and convoluted
mind.
|12.3.07 @ 2:44PM|#
Geez...since I have been reading American media about what kind of evil dictator Chavez is I assume that he probably sent tanks into the streets after the referendum failed, I am guessing he used indiscriminate violence to attack his adversaries and perhaps infiltrated them with secret police. Oh what? He didn't? So much for the Miami Herald view of the world...of course several of these things occured during the 2002 coup whose first act was to dissolve the courts and the assembly...What? No huge reaction from the Times, Post, or CNN back then? I am starting to sense a double standard.
|12.3.07 @ 2:47PM|#
J sub D: Did I miss something? I thought Chavez's side got less votes than his opponents....
|12.3.07 @ 2:49PM|#
Remember that in the United States we only call democraticaly elected leaders dictators...miliatry leaders are just fine as long as they buy into the plans of the World Bank, IMF, US Treasury view of the world.
|12.3.07 @ 3:01PM|#
Remember that in the United States we only call
democraticaly elected leaders dictators...miliatry leaders are just
fine as long as they buy into the plans of the World Bank, IMF, US
Treasury view of the world.
Yeah, if you're a neocon.
atrevete|12.3.07 @ 3:03PM|#
Plus we have James, from the bizarro galaxy far, far away, who can amuse us endlessly with his fantasies. Too much copper in the blood, maybe?
|12.3.07 @ 3:30PM|#
I'm euphoric. Can't stop grinning.
While people like James defend a thug like Chavez, that's ok... He
may not be a full-fledge dictator (yet) but it's not due to a lack
of trying (and he will continue to try). In fact, the Vz government
made an early announcement to international sources that the "Yes"
had won- something completely untrue and illegal. If it wasnt for
the great effort of the freedom-loving Venezuelans, especially the
students, who stayed outside the voting centers and were vigilant,
we would have certainly awaken this morning in a communist
state.
I think Lamar said it best:
"The guy lost his bid for caudillo status. I have to assume, albeit
with little support, that the results were so overwhelming that he
would have had another putsch on his hands if he didn't concede.
The 51-49 business was merely to save face. That's just a guess,
but not totally unfounded unless latin american elections have all
of the sudden become reliable as a diebold machine."
Sounds like a good guess to me.
|12.3.07 @ 3:38PM|#
Rana...dear o dear...as long as the Venezuelan people actually voted for it than I am absolutely fine with the results, in fact it may in the end improve many of the reforms that are taking place. However people like Rana have the same point of view as the oligarchs do...if Chavez wins it is because of nefarious means and with malicious intent...it Chavez loses(he actually seems to be honoring the results of the elections...can't always say the same for the opposition) than in is because of nefarious means and with malicious intent.
src|12.3.07 @ 3:58PM|#
Can I join Rana in cheering?
Regardless of what the opposition's motives are, it seems like
Venezuelans have staved off the latest attempt to bring the state
closer to dictatorship. Good luck -- I do hope more good news is on
the way.
|12.3.07 @ 4:15PM|#
What are the odds Chavez leaves office at the end of his term? Slim to none, I expect. This Communist farce is not yet over. Hooray for the Venezuelans, standing up to Chavez!
|12.3.07 @ 4:24PM|#
Mr Chavez conceded just after election officials said early
yesterday that the "no" camp had about 51 per cent of the vote and
that the President scored only about 49 per cent support.
And no honorable politician would ever change his stance after
that.
Except the politician that changed their stance was the one with
51%.
|12.3.07 @ 4:24PM|#
I say that Chavez will leave office at the end of the term, he has been one of the few leaders in Venezuelan history to respect the will of the people.
|12.3.07 @ 4:26PM|#
In the even of another coup attempt by the oligarchs or the United States however, I hope he does not leave.
Mad Max|12.3.07 @ 4:26PM|#
James,
Off the top of your head, could you give us a list of previous
Venezuelan leaders (starting with Bolivar)?
Then, for each leader, explain how he disregarded the will of the
people.
Mad Max|12.3.07 @ 4:29PM|#
"In the even[t] of another coup attempt by the oligarchs or the
United States however, I hope he does not leave."
A ready-made excuse if Chavez stays onto power: "I didn't want to
give the Yanqui imperialists the satisfaction of seeing me
quit!"
Mad Max|12.3.07 @ 4:32PM|#
Along the same lines, let's prepare some ready-made excuses if
Chavez commits human-rights abuses (including violations of
property rights) and messes up the economy:
(a) "My plan would have worked, but the Yanqui imperialists and
Trotskyite, uh, I mean oligarchic wreckers sabotaged it!"
(b) "The capitalist media is lying about me!"
(c) "All those emigrants who are leaving this country are
capitalist stooges who couldn't stand all the social justice being
implemented in my socialist paradise."
(d) "Yeah, criticize me, that's just what George W. Bush [or
'Hillary Clinton,' or 'Wall Street'] wants you to do."
|12.3.07 @ 4:38PM|#
James,
It's not just the elections or the calls for socialism.
We (and by "we" I mean humanity) have seen this pattern before.
Someone who is genuinely working "for the people," as you said,
does not:
Intimidate opposition (often violently)
Take control of the media
Take control of the economy
Try to maintain power indefinitely
I assume you're trolling, but fear you aren't. Not that I fear you,
but rather I fear that someone in this day and age can see the
march toward tyranny and dismiss it as it has in the past.
No offense James, but really, go fuck yourself...
|12.3.07 @ 4:38PM|#
Well instead of looking for possible made-up excuses for Chavez
we can look directly at the actions of Chavez and the opposition
during the past 8+ years...we don't have to speculate.
Chavez was democratically elected twice in internationally
monitored elections, he survived an actual (U.S. Backed) coup and
the first thing that the opposition did was disolve the courts and
the assembly(YEA DEMOCRACY!) he then survived a referendum (funded
again mostly by U.S. dollars). What makes these possible excuses
plausible are ACTUAL events.
|12.3.07 @ 4:44PM|#
Taktix...
So you are speaking for humanity now and with such kindness and
decorum no less... I can only tell you that you are really wrong on
a lot of the facts and I can just assume that you really get
incredibly angry(probably can't sleep at night) when you find out
how many real dictators(with no pretense toward elections or rule
of law) your tax dollars have supported during your lifetime and
continue to support right now...
atrevete|12.3.07 @ 4:45PM|#
Rana, you little oligarch! je je! You just HAVE to show me the room where you roll around in your money, like Scrooge McDuck!
|12.3.07 @ 5:34PM|#
I should think as good Libertarians, while you would be against Chavez and his programs we might at least be able to agree to allowing the people of other nations to the right of self determination...
|12.3.07 @ 6:22PM|#
James, I don't think you understand libertarians.
Libertarians hate the right-wing dictators our government has
backed with tax dollars. Most libertarians, anyway.
On the other hand, they don't have the slightest bit of respect for
letting people vote for non-libertarian policies.
|12.3.07 @ 6:42PM|#
joe,
I can't believe that, given the mass of information about the way
things are conducted in Venezuela, people are voting their opinions
in a non-coercive manner.
I am absolutely open to evidence that "free" elections and
referendums take place in said country, but until that
aforementioned evidence is presented, I have no choice but to
assume that, based on the totalitarian nature of Chavez's past
actions, Chavez is a dictator.
No bad nature, joe, as I generally respect many of your opinions,
whether or not I agree, but I fear that you are simply wrong on
this one, and I've seen a lot of evidence to back that up...
|12.3.07 @ 7:54PM|#
Nice vote, Venezuelans.
I guess it means there is only one Caesar Chavez after all.
|12.3.07 @ 7:55PM|#
"We (and by "we" I mean humanity) have seen this pattern before.
Someone who is genuinely working "for the people," as you said,
does not:
Intimidate opposition (often violently)
Take control of the media
Take control of the economy
Try to maintain power indefinitely"
Hmm, how did this become a discussion of Abe Lincoln?
|12.4.07 @ 11:51AM|#
"Rana...dear o dear...as long as the Venezuelan people actually
voted for it than I am absolutely fine with the results, in fact it
may in the end improve many of the reforms that are taking place.
However people like Rana have the same point of view as the
oligarchs do...if Chavez wins it is because of nefarious means and
with malicious intent...it Chavez loses(he actually seems to be
honoring the results of the elections...can't always say the same
for the opposition) than in is because of nefarious means and with
malicious intent."
Yup, James you got me down. And the rest of Venezuelans too.
Its just easier for people like James to categorize people as
"oligarchs" or "oppressed".
|12.4.07 @ 3:25PM|#
Taktix,
I think your analysis would benefit from additng some tick marks in
between "democrat" and "dictator," between "free" and
"coerced."
No one's claiming that Venezuela in 2007 is a model of democracy
that every other country should copy, but didn't you notice the
outcome yesterday? The Venezuela people don't seem to be as coerced
as you assume they are.
rana,
James shouldn't have compared you to an oligarch. Nonetheless, you
completely whiffed on answering the point he made.
|12.10.07 @ 10:57AM|#
Sorry for whiffing (is that a word?). Havent had the time to
answer... Still dont have much time or much desire to be honest but
here goes...
"No one's claiming that Venezuela in 2007 is a model of democracy
that every other country should copy, but didn't you notice the
outcome yesterday? The Venezuela people don't seem to be as coerced
as you assume they are."
If this is the point James was trying to make then I would have to
say I was pleasantly surprised to see Chavez accept his defeat.
BTW, which wasnt easy- in fact it is rumored the delay in CNE
reporting the outcome was because everyone was trying to calm down
an irrate Chavez (pictures of his speech Sunday night show his
right hand swollen and cut from his tantrum- I guess he banged on
walls, etc...). but its rumors, probably true, but rumors
nonetheless.
The funny thing is that the democratic Chavez of Sunday night
dissapeared by Monday morning. He scolded all his followers and
said "they OWED him". Those people who did not get their houses,
scholarships, etc... that HE promised, and voted against HIM should
just go to the opposition's side because the revolucion does not
need people who are self-interested.
Chavez had high-ranking military officials stand up at a press
conference and yell "Patria, Socialismo o Muerte". Pretty scary to
see military men pledging allegiance to Death (nevermind that the
military is NOT supposed to be political).
Chavez went as far as to call the opposition's victory "una
mierda"- breaking his OWN "Ley de Contenido", which he was not
persecuted for.
Also, PDVSA workers who did not vote are being threatened to lose
their jobs and post-retirement benefits.
Chavez may not be a dictator but he is FAR from democratic.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245