Hugo Chavez gains unprecedented Power - Move to Dictatorship?

[BUDDY]

Boston Globe

"CARACAS -- President Hugo Chávez was granted free rein yesterday to accelerate changes in broad areas of society by presidential decree -- a move critics said propels Venezuela toward dictatorship.

Convening in a downtown plaza in a session that resembled a political rally, lawmakers unanimously gave Chávez sweeping powers to legislate by decree and impose his radical vision of a more egalitarian socialist state.

"Long live the sovereign people! Long live President Hugo Chávez! Long live socialism!" said National Assembly President Cilia Flores as she proclaimed the "enabling law" approved by a show of hands. "Fatherland, socialism or death! We will prevail!"

The law gives Chávez, who is beginning a six-year term, more power than he has had in eight years as president, and he plans to use it over the next 18 months to transform broad areas of public life, from the economy and the oil industry in particular, to "social matters" and the very structure of the state."

I would like to know what you think of this. Especially those of you who are Hugo Chavez fans. Personally, I think that this will eventually propel the South American country into a civil war, as Hugo becomes more of a dictator and enforces his socialist doctrine on the Venezuelan people. I wonder if Harry Belafonte will be in a hurry to walk around with him then? Actually, Harry will probably become the Minister of Film and shoot propaganda that show Bush as the greatest threat to freedom, all while working for the man who has now been given power without oversight.

 

[capslockf9]

The fact is the iraqi government is a puppet of multinational corporation and Hugo Chavez is of the people. The landless and homeless voted their hopes, knowing that their man may not, against the armed axis of local oligarchs and Dick Cheney, succeed for them. But they are convinced he will never forget them.

 

[Joe_Stocks]

Hi capsflock9,

The fact is the iraqi government is a puppet of multinational corporation and Hugo Chavez is of the people. The landless and homeless voted their hopes, knowing that their man may not, against the armed axis of local oligarchs and Dick Cheney, succeed for them. But they are convinced he will never forget them.

Ah, a soft spot for dictators. How nice.

 

[Mathematician]

I'd like to see what powers he now has instead of letting the corporate, capitalist media tell me it's bad. If I'm not mistaken our own Congress and Supreme Court handed the Executive Branch unprecedented powers that border unconstitutional. I've been watching to see if Chavez, who enjoys a high approval rating despite pulling everyone's favorite soap opera off air, is a socialist or just anti-"free" market capitalist. I have my concerns, but they stem from crime and lack of recent reform, not his hostility towards capitalism.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

I do not like any one to have the power of a dictator.
I would like to see what checks and balances ore in place to eventually end these powers.

I would rather be ruled by Chavez than bush as a dictator.
Venezuela trusts him, and so far he has had the peoples interests at heart.
In the short term anyway he could do a great deal of good.
He generally gets a good press in the EU.

 

[capslockf9]

Hi capsflock9,



Ah, a soft spot for dictators. How nice.

We now have a dictator "Troop pullout will not be allowed" says VP Cheney to Republican Jewish Coalition on march 12, 2007.
Mohammed Reza Pahleva was a darling puppet.
General Pervez Musharraf is another dictator that the US has a soft spot for.
King Abdullah II of Jordan is a favorite of the US.
Saudi Arabia, and Syria are monarchies who receive support to quash dessidents.
American helicopters rescued Haitian strongman Jean-Claude "Baby Doc" Duvalier.
Philippines' Ferdinand Marcos retired to Florida.
These brown-nose dictators oppress the people , while Chavez redistributes land to the poor(indigeneous mostly), and nationalizes resources.

 

[greatcalgarian]

Any political leader not favored by the American government will be called a dictator and the west MSM will ensure that the message is sunk into the brain of the gullible public.

Any puppet government set up by the US will be known as democratically elected, and should be a model for everyone to follow.

 

[Mathematician]

It's interesting to see the word "enforced" used when most of the population supports Chavez and his "socialism" [right now it's still social democracy]. Anyone who reads up on the history of Venezuala would see Chavez is no threat to America. In fact, he even said his problem was with US imperialism, not the United States. He, like other countries which apparently *hate* democracy and liberty, donated resources during Hurricane Katrina voluntarily.

If you want a punching bag, pick the former capitalist president Carlos Andres Perez, who executed thousands of his own people and employed US-backed torture. Chavez tried to take his brutal government down.

I suspect the capitalist media will paint him evil until he's assassinated. Viva la revolucion is not profit-friendly.

 

[Quiddity]

Gene,
Most of the population supported Castro as well. It's a common characteristic of communism/socialism. What's to come is what needs to worry you.

People don't flee those countries because they are socialistic utopia's, but because the quality of living goes down over time.

 

[Mathematician]

Gene,
Most of the population supported Castro as well. It's a common characteristic of communism/socialism. What's to come is what needs to worry you.

People don't flee those countries because they are socialistic utopia's, but because the quality of living goes down over time.

If Chavez were to eliminate the democratic system currently in place in Venezuala, he is no true socialist and setting himself up with the same capitalists who tried to steal power. Us on the real Left have been watching Chavez more keenly than most Americans without the assistance of the capitalist media telling us he's *bad.* There are fears on the Left, but for different reasons than the corporate world would like to tell us. Chavez said his *socialism* will, right now, allow for private property. We socialists and communists fear he will become just another social democrat. He's done a good job at standing up to American imperalism, but there's more to socialism than that. Any true socialist must put the workers first and see himself as one comrade in a long line of millions.

The funny thing is, the criticisms everyone has of Chavez actually describe the capitalists in Venezuala quite well. At the height of Chavez's support they tried to undermine the democratic government with a coup. When the criminals were tried and found guilty in courts, the prosecutor was assassinated in an act of terrorism. And then when Chavez closes down the TV station that co-conspired the coup after letting its contract up, he's called a *dictator* and the corporate media siezes on the protests -- which, as CNN and FOX would like you to not know, most participants showed up to just because their favorite TV show wouldn't be on anymore. It wasn't about *dictatorship*.

He's criticized for calling Bush el diablo, even though the American government refused to provide him assistance during the undemocratic coup and is believed to have actually been aware of it before the event happened. He's attacked for pulling out of the World Bank because of its policies towards poor third world countries, but when he offered assistance to the USA during Katrina and 9/11 the media was silent.

Under Chavez, public health and education have increased, and the poverty that is a result of American-exported capitalism has fallen. Quality of living has never been a problem with socialism, even social democrats can achieve better for their people. The Latin American continent is sick of American imperalism, sick of capitalism, sick of having their leaders bullied by the CIA. Chavez is their voice.

It's also funny you mention Castro. While socialist revolutionaries like Che participated in the revolution, it wasn't declared socialist until after Castro had secured himself as the leader and the socialists were gone. Even now the American media and government grossly exaggerates the conditions in Cuba to use Castro as a punching bag while our "friends" in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Russia, and China get away with far worse. Even with the economic hardships America has put on Cuba, the little island country has a health system that is as good as ours, with more doctors per person than any other Latin American country. Despite what talking heads like O'Reilly say, political dissent is allowed in Cuba. Several statesmen in local districts are not part of the official communist party. The problem [and yes it is a problem] is that if you are a dissenter you better have a squeaky clean history.

Dictatorships are contrary to socialism, but I'm not going to let the corporate media tell me what's bad with the world.

 

[athanasius]

Where is John Wilkes Booth when you need him most???

 

[capslockf9]

see: National Endowment for Democracy (NED).
The american government has been hi-jacked from the american people. and the people are puzzled. The system used to steal the government is called lobby money.
In Iran, the Parliamentary government nationalized a British oil company, the only oil company in Iran. The United States sent military aid and money to military officers who overthrew the government. In 1954, the Shah of Iran (a king) was installed by the U.S. and the corporations got their oil back.

9/11 of 1978 U.S.-supported military coup kills Allende and brings Augusto Pinochet Ugarte to power. Pinochet imprisons well over a hundred thousand Chileans (torture and rape are the usual methods of interrogation), terminates civil liberties, abolishes unions, extends the work week to 48 hours, and reverses Allende's land reforms. Copper mines that had been nationalized were returned to the corporations

Saddam Hussein,was another creature of the corporate hegemeny. With U.S. encouragement, Hussein invaded Iran in 1980. During this costly eight-year war, the CIA built up Hussein’s forces with sophisticated arms, intelligence, training and financial backing. This cemented Hussein’s power at home, allowing him to crush the many internal rebellions that erupted from time to time, sometimes with poison gas. It also gave him all the military might he needed to conduct further adventurism — in Kuwait, for example.

puzzled Americans have been asking, "Why do they hate us?"

 

[Quiddity]

If Chavez were to eliminate the democratic system currently in place in Venezuala, he is no true socialist and setting himself up with the same capitalists who tried to steal power. Us on the real Left have been watching Chavez more keenly than most Americans without the assistance of the capitalist media telling us he's *bad.* There are fears on the Left, but for different reasons than the corporate world would like to tell us. Chavez said his *socialism* will, right now, allow for private property. We socialists and communists fear he will become just another social democrat. He's done a good job at standing up to American imperalism, but there's more to socialism than that. Any true socialist must put the workers first and see himself as one comrade in a long line of millions.

The funny thing is, the criticisms everyone has of Chavez actually describe the capitalists in Venezuala quite well. At the height of Chavez's support they tried to undermine the democratic government with a coup. When the criminals were tried and found guilty in courts, the prosecutor was assassinated in an act of terrorism. And then when Chavez closes down the TV station that co-conspired the coup after letting its contract up, he's called a *dictator* and the corporate media siezes on the protests -- which, as CNN and FOX would like you to not know, most participants showed up to just because their favorite TV show wouldn't be on anymore. It wasn't about *dictatorship*.

He's criticized for calling Bush el diablo, even though the American government refused to provide him assistance during the undemocratic coup and is believed to have actually been aware of it before the event happened. He's attacked for pulling out of the World Bank because of its policies towards poor third world countries, but when he offered assistance to the USA during Katrina and 9/11 the media was silent.

He did that because he’s a nice guy right?

Under Chavez, public health and education have increased, and the poverty that is a result of American-exported capitalism has fallen. Quality of living has never been a problem with socialism, even social democrats can achieve better for their people. The Latin American continent is sick of American imperalism, sick of capitalism, sick of having their leaders bullied by the CIA. Chavez is their voice.

Rrrrrrrright. This is why most Latin American countries are begging the US to open up the US markets to them. Most of the countries in Latin America are social democracies and the ones that do move toward capitalism do better then the ones that move toward a more democratic socialism.

It's also funny you mention Castro. While socialist revolutionaries like Che participated in the revolution, it wasn't declared socialist until after Castro had secured himself as the leader and the socialists were gone. Even now the American media and government grossly exaggerates the conditions in Cuba to use Castro as a punching bag while our "friends" in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Russia, and China get away with far worse. Even with the economic hardships America has put on Cuba, the little island country has a health system that is as good as ours, with more doctors per person than any other Latin American country.

Please don’t tell me you think Cuba has a better quality of living then the US? All my Cuban friends and there families in Cuba wouldn't even take you serious.

Despite what talking heads like O'Reilly say, political dissent is allowed in Cuba. Several statesmen in local districts are not part of the official communist party. The problem [and yes it is a problem] is that if you are a dissenter you better have a squeaky clean history.

It’s allowed alright, but it’s political and social suicide.

Dictatorships are contrary to socialism, but I'm not going to let the corporate media tell me what's bad with the world.

That may be true, but the system seems to do a wonderful job at producing them. Especially the more communist leaninging ones.

BTW, can you tell me where you got the idea that Chavez actually lowered poverty?

The following article is from a Venezuelan who is familiar with the government and socialism in practice.
He did his homework, so I’d recommend you read it.

http://www.vcrisis.com/index.php?content=letters/200601180629

 

[Mathematician]

Rrrrrrrright. This is why most Latin American countries are begging the US to open up the US markets to them. Most of the countries in Latin America are social democracies and the ones that do move toward capitalism do better then the ones that move toward a more democratic socialism.

Asserting a claim doesn't make it true. I'd like to see what countries you're talking about that are social democracies, capitalist leaning, and socialist-leaning. The only nations moving towards socialism is Venezuala and they are still going through the stage of social democracy. Confusing the two would be a big mistake. Social democracies do not lean left; they are center-right.

That claim has no leg to stand on. Although Mexico tops other countries, Chile and Venezuela come up second and third in GDP, hardly puppets to the American machines when considering the other Latin American countries.

Trade is not reserved for capitalism.

Please don’t tell me you think Cuba has a better quality of living then the US? All my Cuban friends and there families in Cuba wouldn't even take you serious.

I'm not talking about possessions. We have blatantly starved the resource-less island of its potential. But health quality-wise, yeah. The UN studies show the highest literacy rate in Latin America, with health that's comparable to the United States, and at least everyone has a home. Let's see capitalism do that to a Latin American country.

That may be true, but the system seems to do a wonderful job at producing them. Especially the more communist leaninging ones.

On the contrary, capitalism produces individuals who believe it's their duty to lead others without their democratic consent. Hitler was a capitalist despite the NAZI platform. Stalin eventually abolished the soviets and made the USSR state capitalist. WW1 was fought over capitalist and imperalist interests.

There has never been a socialist country, and certainly not a communist "leaning" one. That's an oxymoron.

I got my numbers here.

 

[mcteethinator]

Asserting a claim doesn't make it true. I'd like to see what countries you're talking about that are social democracies, capitalist leaning, and socialist-leaning. The only nations moving towards socialism is Venezuala and they are still going through the stage of social democracy. Confusing the two would be a big mistake. Social democracies do not lean left; they are center-right.

That claim has no leg to stand on. Although Mexico tops other countries, Chile and Venezuela come up second and third in GDP, hardly puppets to the American machines when considering the other Latin American countries.

Trade is not reserved for capitalism.



I'm not talking about possessions. We have blatantly starved the resource-less island of its potential. But health quality-wise, yeah. The UN studies show the highest literacy rate in Latin America, with health that's comparable to the United States, and at least everyone has a home. Let's see capitalism do that to a Latin American country.



On the contrary, capitalism produces individuals who believe it's their duty to lead others without their democratic consent. Hitler was a capitalist despite the NAZI platform. Stalin eventually abolished the soviets and made the USSR state capitalist. WW1 was fought over capitalist and imperalist interests.

There has never been a socialist country, and certainly not a communist "leaning" one. That's an oxymoron.

I got my numbers here.

Very good. I agree. Hugo Chavez is one of my heroes at the moment. Where exactly is the proof that he's a dictator? As GeneCosta already pointed out, noone in America seemed to mind that little pro-business coup that happened a few years back. Noone seems to mind when America sets up dictators, but when it's someone who doesn't like America (who has a higher popularity rating then their president), he's called a "dictator".

A good documentary to watch on the failed coup is "The Revolution Will Not be Televised".

 

[greatcalgarian]

You may be very happy that assasinating a leader (Kennedy) is a beautiful thing to be done, and that is the culture of USA.
However, do not spread this culture to other countries.
In addition, do not assasinate the leaders of another country as that is against the current International law.

Keep the culture of gunning someone else down if in disagreement to the US, please do not spread this culture.

 

[mcteethinator]

Keep the culture of gunning someone else down if in disagreement to the US, please do not spread this culture.

Yeah like that culture hasn't already spread. Fidel Castro, Allende, etc. Guatamalan death squads much?