You'll Never Guess Whose Side Hugo Is On


Fresh from lending support to his comrade and ally Muammar Qaddafi, beloved Venezuelan autocrat Hugo Chavez is now throwing his weight behind the murderous dictatorship of Bashar al-Assad. While the body count in Syria expands—human rights groups claim over 400 people have been killed during recent anti-government protests—Chavez is denouncing unnamed imperialists for always assuming the worst of Assad.

"From here we greet president Bashar al-Assad," Chavez said, after witnesses reported that Syrian troops backed by tanks had rolled into the town of Daraa, the epicenter of recent anti-regime protests, killing at least 25 people.

"Terrorists are being infiltrated into Syria and producing violence and death—and once again, the guilty one is the (Syrian) president, without anyone investigating anything," said Chavez.

He gave no further details to support his claims.

Chavez, a close Assad ally in Latin America, criticized the "imperial madness" of the international community which, according to him, seeks to attack Syria under the pretext of defending its people.

"They're starting to say: 'Let's see if we sanction the government, we're going to freeze their assets, we'll blockade them, throw bombs on them, in order to defend the people.'

"Wow, what cynicism. But that's the empire, it's imperial madness," he said.

I've written quite a bit about the Venezuelan caudillo over the years.

NEXT: We Are Out of Money: State Pensions Edition

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Guess who is next, President Woodtick.

  2. Give me your poor, s,ick your Medicaid eligible, your huddled masses yearning to eat free school lunches….

  3. I bet joe still loves him with all his XXS heart.

    1. Joe didn’t “love” him, he just kept reiterating that everything that happened in Chavez’s Venezuela was a result of fair and open democratic proceses. And everyone else were just haters.

      1. And processes. Damned Kochsusses.

      2. IIRC, there is a Presidential Election due next year in Venezuela.

        I wonder how ‘fair and democratic’ it will be.

        1. If the process of disabling democratic institutions was… democratic, then it could be argued by those so inclined that it will be “fair and democratic”.

  4. Ah, good to see that ol’ Hugo is consistent to the last, always defending the autocrat against the people.

  5. It looks like Hugo agrees with Ron Paul, at least on the issue of the imperial madness of the empire, ie USA.

    1. While I hope that the protesters win, I gotta agree that Western Governments should STFU and stay out of this mess. It is imperial madness to feel we MUST meddle.

      1. I have to say, Aresen your initial statement about Assad being the most brutal are unfortunately, looking spott-er and spott-er on.

      2. Not in this case. Assad is an enemy of America so it’s our government’s duty to covertly back those protesters.

    2. Intervening on the side of the protestors would be like geopolitical welfare. Shouldn’t they learn to murder their tyrants by their own bootstraps and gumption?

      1. +100

  6. I can’t help but root for the protestors here. Watchin’ ’em get shot and then take the streets again?

    I watch that, and think to myself, what kind of person wouldn’t root for peaceful protestors getting shot at?

    Now I know! A vicious bastard like Hugo Chavez, of course!

    By the way, over the last five years or so, I’m sure I’ve read in comments here at Hit & Run dozens of times about why there’s never been a Gandhi/MLK type protest movement in the Arab/Muslim worlds…

    Nobody should ever say that again!

    We’ve seen peaceful Muslim and Arab protestors get shot at from Tunisia to Libya and Syria–looks like the cops, etc using firehoses and dogs on kids in the South demanding equal rights during the civil rights movement to me.

    The implication behind those comments about there not being a peaceful protest movement often seemed to be suggesting that there was something inherently inferior somehow in Muslim or Arab culture–nobody should ever say that again.

    After everything Bashar al-Assad has done this week, if the protestors show up again come Friday? Hopefully the military will start to break with the regime.

    I don’t know if the Syrian people will show up this Friday, but here’s hoping they do.

    I don’t know if I’d be that brave. There may be many among them who wish America harm, but for the time being? I got nothin’ but admiration for peaceful protestors who show up to demand their rights–under threat of death.

    1. I’m sure I’ve read in comments here at Hit & Run dozens of times about why there’s never been a Gandhi/MLK type protest movement in the Arab/Muslim worlds

      In order for a Gandhi/MLK type protest movement to work, the people being protested have to feel some measure of shame for shooting, beating, or abusing the unarmed.

      Ever wonder why the Tiananmen Square incident never got much traction inside of China? The Party simply doesn’t give a fuck. They’ll happily kill protesters, the less armed, the better.

      1. There was a long time between when MLK and Gandhi suffered their initial abuse and when all that abuse started making a difference.

        The authoritarians didn’t cave in to MLK or Gandhi right away either. But once enough people start disobeying the authoritarians, it’s really hard for the authoritarians to reestablish any kind of legitimacy.

        I don’t think the intended audience was the authoritarians for MLK or Gandhi anyway. I think they were trying to influence the swing vote, for want of a better term.

        The protestors don’t need to convince Bashar al-Assad to step down at this point–they just need to convince their fellow Syrians to join them in the streets this Friday.

        I don’t think Assad is afraid of the peaceful protestors so much either–not as much as he’s afraid that everyone who’s been staying home on Fridays will suddenly show up and join the protestors.

    2. So do you think we should intervene in Syria too, Ken?

  7. I don’t see what the issue is here.

    1. If I get to relentlessly tap-tap Scarlett Johansson when I’m an old man, I’ll be a socialist too…

      Please make me a socialist Scarlett! I’ll wear a Che shirt and get shit-faced with Oliver Stone I swear!

  8. You know who else allied himself with brutal dictators?

    1. Barack Obama?

      1. Are you any relation to Lady Gaga?

        If so, I’m sorry.

        1. She sleeps in my ass at night. The little pearlfish.

            1. I thought I had been afflicted by the candiru once, but it turned out to be testicular torsion.

    2. Sean Penn?

      1. Jimmy Peanut is apparently in North Korea right now, once again asking them to be nice.

        1. Why doesn’t he fly to Syria and ask them to be nice?

          1. Maybe they aren’t quite depraved enough for Jimmeh yet.

        2. Oh, and someone skilled in international diplomacy needs to hip me to what someone like Jimmy Carter (or any foreign president or luminary such as Jesse Jackson) can offer in return during negotiations? Serious question.

          1. “foreign” should have read “former”.

    3. Every American president since Teddy Roosevelt?

    4. Every American president going back to Theodore Roosevelt?

  9. Can’t wait to hear the batshit screams from the left when President Palin sends in airstrikes against Chavez without a congressional authorization.

    1. Then just imagine how loud they’ll scream when she sends them with a Congressional authorization.

  10. We should take up a collection to get Hugo a neck.

    Then put a rope around it.

  11. The silence of all the socialists on this site is deafening when it comes to Chavez. He does all the things they support, nationalize important industries, builds up social safety nets for his citizens, takes over the education system. This guy should be their hero, the country should be booming.

    1. Our club supports everything Chavez does. Assad and Kaddafi must be good leaders if Chavez likes them. So there! The two of us are silent no longer.

    2. I’ve noticed a lot of the left more or less ignore Chavez now. Several years ago he still had enough in common with other and better Latin American leaders; but he was also more radical, so he seemed like some kind of real revolutionary alternative to liberalism.

      Well, that turned out wrong. He’s actually a lot worse. And to play devil’s advocate, I think you can make a real left-socialist critique of him. The industries haven’t really been nationalized, the state just takes a slightly bigger slice of the pie, while the multinational corporations are guaranteed profits:…..040048.htm

      In this sense, he’s less of a leftist than an old-style South American caudillo figure, which is the term Moynihan used too. There’s the populist bread crumbs, but no real workers control, no real trade unionist movement (they’ve been crushed), while business as usual continues.

      1. So essentially he’s just a more buffoonish version of Peron? God, ho shitty is this century when you can’t even get a suave South American dictator anymore.

  12. Born-Again Barry apart.

  13. I can’ be bothered with trivial shit like this… I’m too busy espousing socialism on MSNBC.

    1. Hey! That’s MY job!

      1. *crickets*

        1. But… but… America is worser!

  14. lol, is anyone actually surprised?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.