Chavez wins elections, we are screwed!

[PhilinBSAS]

I was not numbering my paragraphs I was replying to your quoting of Che Guevara, the great thinker, which you marked as 1. and 2. probably in honor of what that man did all over the richest island in the Caribbean.

When did I ever defend Kissinger in this forum? Are you comparing him with Che Guevara? Shouldn't you compare Kissinger with some high brow Soviet official history doesn't know about because there was no free press in the USSR but a lot in the USA?

No I'm comparing Kissinger who hails from your vaunted "special version of democracy" with the subject of Guevara as it is he who had some relevance and it is he who has provoked something of a leap into irrationality on here when talking about left wing success through the ballot box in south and central america.

Who has more blood on their hands?

I guess I'd like to be a bit clearer about what exactly it is with Guevara you don't like. I tried asking that to another poster on here who ended spouting out foul mouthed abuse and another just ended up worrying about the voices in his head.

Not that I'm accusing you for a moment of either of these you understand.

Seems to me that Chavez won the election and it was tight and there was much the usual sort of election crap going on although possibly less. But so called and self defined democrats from what they seem to say is the only free nation on earth dont like it. Seemingly because it may further rock their little boat in Argentina - as well as elsewhere. One USA inspired coup d'etat didn't work against Chavez (who originally gained power himself through the force of arms somewhat ironic is that) and this used to be the way to get things realigned but the chances of that happening again are slim. Venezuela is one big thorn in the side of hemispheric dominance.

Is this in fact a sign of a seismic reduction in political influence as well as a dent to military and economic clout and that is what is really getting up some peoples' noses who like to believe in one possibly divinely appointed "top nation" now having a reality check and oops feeling less dominant?

As for Cuba let's be clear on why this is relevant to the topic. This was a USA colony that fought a war of liberation against a corrupt and cruel puppet dictatorship of the type replicated with USA support over large parts of central and southern America. Before the revolution the puppet regime was committed to facilitate the economic exploitation and transfer of wealth out of the country. Against the odds Cuba survived on a siege basis. Not what I understand Guavara strove for and in the end he fell out about it - and I'm no expert on the subject. Have you been there? Well I have twice and I didn't like it - not a nice place to be and certainly not Argentina. At least Canada and now the EU broke rank and gave Cuba some succour and Cuba needs to reciprocate and reform its act a lot more quickly.

I do not like the ongoing policies of oppression and impoverishment coming from the USA and the repression internally which arguably it has engendered. I have sympathy for a small island nation off the coast of a much larger federation which is determined to use every means to undermine and crush it as I can see historic parallels too!

Venezuela however is in a much stronger economic position and cannot be contained in the same way. This is clearly why Cristina and others like Dianne Abbot talk about a victory for all of south america. Let's spell it out - a victory against the long term entrenched policies of successive USA governments is what they mean. Time for people who see the USA at the pinnacle to be further worried hence the angst on here which is clear.

I didn't want to be propelled into taking sides on this but after reading some of the vitriol thrown my way and on others clearly reasoned debate is being tugged by perceptions of self interest and the middle ground is no comfortable place to be.

So to give an answer to the OP yes! Chavez won the election! and yes! some of you are - not straight away - but you see it coming - if not marginalised then indeed screwed!!

And you lost my sympathy.

The question whether Argentina will obtain benefit is entirely different.

 

[jp]

Jp, I am just amazed at how much you know me. At how much you can speak for me and know my behavior and practices.

I don't pretend to know you, but it's painfully obvious when you have little to no idea what you are talking about.

 

[pauper]

EDIT: Oh and I would love for you to quote me where I said Chevez owned the airwaves. Or do you and your kind (aka PhilinBsAs) not know how to tell individuals apart?

Yes, jp, a little confused perhaps??

He never said the Venezuelan government had a monopoly on the airwaves, he said the Argentine government did -

Its pretty obvious clarin don't have a monopoly over the local tv stations when you see the coverage of the recent protests.

...

Yeah I agree that that is obvious. Clarin does not have a monopoly, the government does.

Which, I'm sure you'll agree, is obvious. And you accuse him of not understanding what a monopoly is? I think an apology is in order, don't you?

 

[Matt84]

Who has more blood on their hands?

I guess I'd like to be a bit clearer about what exactly it is with Guevara you don't like.

One had more turf to hold than the other, I mean Guevara threw the towel in Africa pretty soon, he could have killed a lot more people.
What exactly it is I dislike about a rich white boy who threw himself to murderous adventure for a cause that is already obsolete? Probably what I dislike the most is how misinterpreted he was on his adoptive Northern Hemisphere. People both in Cuba and the US might still think to this day that el Che was in his childhood ever a victim of American supremacy instead of a beneficiary of it.

So to give an answer to the OP yes! Chavez won the election! and yes! some of you are - not straight away - but you see it coming - if not marginalised then indeed screwed!!

And you lost my sympathy.

The question whether Argentina will obtain benefit is entirely different.

You could go back to that middle ground if you re read several times El Queso's last post and paid particular attention that that last sentence.

Venezuela is one big thorn in the side of hemispheric dominance.

You are right. I am mesmerized as to why would you celebrate this.
Venezuelans are not fodder to be used for geopolitical playing, much like the Cubans you described suffering by the embargo, they are human beings. Why would a Cuba scenario be better than a Puerto Rico scenario? Only for lefties around the world, never for Cubans or Porto Ricans

 

[PhilinBSAS]

A kingdom with parliament is fine too, but I wouldn't call it democracy. The USA is not meant to be a Democracy, it's meant to be a Republic, as trite as that phrase may sound try and grasp its meaning.
​

Yes you are trite and yes you have the opportunity to elucidate and you don't. Sounds like a convenient excuse and distraction to ignore the results of elections.

Go on tell me what the USA is meant to be in this context I really want to know.

And then tell me what was the Cold War about in your opinion? Having survived being born during it and for enduring a long part of my life I heard democracy democracy democracy being used as the pretext of all sorts of mischief and worse still and yes coming from where? you guessed it!!

Wasn't the proud boast for the invasion and re-invasion of Iraq justified in part at least by the liberal sprinkling of the D word? And the USA was there too I recall!

Hasn't in fact this democracy thing been perhaps the main justification prayed in aid as support for every intervention under USA foreign policy since at least Teddy Roosevelt?

For your information democracy exists imperfectly in many places including western europe and it is not contingent on republics. As for "natural laws" that you cite conflating nationalism and socialism these are a construct of yours that is way way off anything recognisable as this planet.

 

[Matt84]

Phil, I'm sorry politicians lied to you using a half lie or half truth, but it's not my fault.
You can check for yourself the standard meanings of the concepts of democracy, republic, state, federation, and re examine history. Bear in mind that a concept is never applied perfectly or fully. I'm not even saying 19th century America was more of a Republic than it is today. Maybe (obviously) the Frontier has been replaced by the 'abroad' World, passport-less Americans are so famous and reviled for knowing so little about. That, or any other breach, doesn't invalidate the concept of Republic as the separation of powers.

I fully agree with El Queso's last post at the time I'm writing this, he seems to reply to some of my observations with more clarity than I could ever muster.

 

[Matt84]

For your information democracy exists imperfectly in many places and it is not contingent on republics. .

Of course not, it is rather the other way around. After all Democracy predates Republic, in the same way that Rule of the Majority, or rule of any amount of people, predates Rule of Law.
It takes a leap to abstract thinking.
It is ironic (or what I call a natural paradox) that that leap from Democracy to Republic occurred in Rome, a militaristic, expansionist for everyone's /most's good state, model for coming empires, in contrast to relatively isolationist Greece.

 

[PhilinBSAS]

One had more turf to hold than the other, I mean Guevara threw the towel in Africa pretty soon, he could have killed a lot more people.
What exactly it is I dislike about a rich white boy who threw himself to murderous adventure for a cause that is already obsolete? Probably what I dislike the most is how misinterpreted he was on his adoptive Northern Hemisphere. People both in Cuba and the US might still think to this day that el Che was in his childhood ever a victim of American supremacy instead of a beneficiary of it.

Ah thank you for clarifying it is mainly because El Che didnt kill enough people when he had a chance that you so dislike him being mentioned. The rest is incoherent but seems to infer being a class traitor, a skin hue traitor and a hemisphere traitor? A strangely Marxist interpretation in some of that and the racial connotation seems overtly sinister.

You could go back to that middle ground if you re read several times El Queso's last post and paid particular attention that that last sentence.

I havnt even read it even once cos my little fingers have been tap tap tapping away addressing your output but Ill toodle off and give it a shuffty now you pointed this out

You are right. I am mesmerized as to why would you celebrate this.
Venezuelans are not fodder to be used for geopolitical playing, much like the Cubans you described suffering by the embargo, they are human beings. Why would a Cuba scenario be better than a Puerto Rico scenario? Only for lefties around the world, never for Cubans or Porto Ricans

Ummm. Who is celebrating? Venezuelans yes. I'm just glad that there weren't more killings or violence. And who are playing "great games" with ordinary people as pawns? Not I and surely you can read what I say and understand that I'm no apologist for geopolitics. No it is governments and I just happen to say who is the biggest culprit in the area under discussion - as you point out they who feel they "own" all the "turf".

Puerto Rico I know nothing about.

Seems that mentioning El Che sure does wind some people up but can they say why? Not that he is a hero in my book. People like Mandela yes. But still an interesting case who had some cogent thoughts and then went out and acted on them and not out of self interest either. He was clearly motivated by a desire to see an improvement in the life of his fellow man so not all bad i'd say. Had he lived longer or been imprisoned on an Island etc (not Guantanamo haha) he might have been well regarded by more but then he was killed off early by CIA Assassins wasn't he precisely to avoid anything like that happening.

 

[mrporoto]

cristina like the juice de hugo,so I'm told.

 

[nicoenarg]

Yes, jp, a little confused perhaps??

He never said the Venezuelan government had a monopoly on the airwaves, he said the Argentine government did -

...

Which, I'm sure you'll agree, is obvious. And you accuse him of not understanding what a monopoly is? I think an apology is in order, don't you?

And all the minions say Amen!

So now Venezuela and Argentina are one and the same country.

Jp confuses different people and thinks they're the same. Pauper thinks Argentina and Venezuela are one and the same. Haha, this is hilarious!