Chavez wins elections, we are screwed!

[Iznogud]

Now, now, Phil. Just be a nice boy and at least learn to spell Guevara properly.

Isn't what you're doing with my screen name just childish? I would have thought it's beneath you, but it's obviously not.

It is a pleasure and an intellectual excercise to have a debate or discussion with an educated person with opposing views but you are not fitting the bill.

 

[nicoenarg]

Look harder for what? Considered, objective reporting?

"Venezuela's authoritarian president Hugo Chavez is a villain out of a Batman movie: buffoonish and sinister in equal measure."

Next time you want to back up your argument, just post up a link to a cartoon.

The article I provided is of the same caliber as the joke of an article provided in favor of Chavez.

Both are trying to court their own views and present them as universal truth. Both are equally wrong. I just presented the article because Quantum said he/she couldn't find anything to back the claim of some earlier posters that the elections were manipulated.

 

[PhilinBSAS]

There's no "we". Don't fall for his delusiomal fantasies.
You are discussing some particulars with him while I just made completely unrelated observations.

Here, it''s just me and the voices in my head.

Fantasies are no good thing and as for the ones seemingly you ascribe to me?

Well especially so.

This may help if not too late:

http://www.mentalhealth.org.uk/help-information/mental-health-a-z/H/hearing-voices/

Or as you are a frequent you-tube dipper - do you think that this will help Nico and his Moomy fixation?

Schizophrenia Recovery without Medication—Hearing Voices

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wyL0jjI93OI&feature=related

 

[Quantum Sparkplug]

The article I provided is of the same caliber as the joke of an article provided in favor of Chavez.

Both are trying to court their own views and present them as universal truth. Both are equally wrong. I just presented the article because Quantum said he/she couldn't find anything to back the claim of some earlier posters that the elections were manipulated.

Technically speaking, I was genuinely curious about govt control of media, in terms of manipulation. The article in the Independent states that private media enjoy a 90% audience share. I would like to examine this further. Are the private media controlled somehow, or barred from political reporting? Are they limited to soap operas, sit-coms, etc? I understand that Venezuela is neither a Paradise or something out of Dante's vision of Hell.

Like Argentina, (though apparently much worse) rising crime and corruption are very real, immediate problems that will eventually sink any kind of Bolivaran revolution, if they are not somehow brought under control. The poor and disenfranchised will eventually become equally horrified by it, en masse. Popular sentiment can shift on a dime when the majority start to feel that the dangers outweigh the benefits. Both Chavez and Kirchner have their work cut out for them.

 

[PhilinBSAS]

Which Iznogud is talking? I'm getting two of them coming at me at the same time.

Im thinking the video link I sent is maybe too late.

So you are not a long term ex-pat. That causes offence?

I talk about Chavez and housing you talk about Chavez and housing. Silly boy inexplicable one liners are an invitation for "an intellectual exercise in debate with an educated person with opposing views" No I think not.

I think both of you both named Iznogud or whatever are hilarious and the one liners are obviously distillations of immense wit that by common consent deserve to be aired? Not!

Yep I agree after all who would think of a name like Iznogud and want to be taken seriously.

You cant pick and choose on a public board like this who you want to talk to and who not. Anything you write on here can be commented upon by anyone else. That's the way it works.

Unless you and your alter-ego want to set up something entirely new and warn everyone beforehand this is just you and your voices.

To explain more simply in your own words - this is not your tree and up it anyone can climb whether you like it or not.

Confusion? You got up the tree on that one well before me Chummy.

There isnt even an Ignore button on here is there!

 

[jp]

The article I provided is of the same caliber as the joke of an article provided in favor of Chavez.

Based on what criteria? The CNN piece is sensationalist drivel (which thoughtfully includes a plug to buy the author's book "patriots")

Its also factually incorrect on a number of points. For starters, there were plenty of independent election monitors. Here's an article by one of them - my local London MP: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/diane-abbott/the-poor-venezuela-saw-ch_b_1947515.html?utm_hp_ref=uk

Did you even read the Independent piece? Or are you just dismissing it because its includes facts which trouble you?

 

[nicoenarg]

Technically speaking, I was genuinely curious about govt control of media, in terms of manipulation. The article in the Independent states that private media enjoy a 90% audience share. I would like to examine this further. Are the private media controlled somehow, or barred from political reporting? Are they limited to soap operas, sit-coms, etc? I understand that Venezuela is neither a Paradise or something out of Dante's vision of Hell.

Like Argentina, (though apparently much worse) rising crime and corruption are very real, immediate problems that will eventually sink any kind of Bolivaran revolution, if they are not somehow brought under control. The poor and disenfranchised will eventually become equally horrified by it, en masse. Popular sentiment can shift on a dime when the majority start to feel that the dangers outweigh the benefits. Both Chavez and Kirchner have their work cut out for them.

Okay, you seem serious about this so I'm not going to joke around or anything.

Firstly, I personally only care about Venezuela's elections because it affects us directly down here in Argentina. Other than that, it doesn't really matter to me.

The situation with Venezuelan media is kind of like the situation with independent economists here. I am sure you are aware of this but independent economists were threatened with fines if they issued inflation numbers that contradict INDEC's claims right after INDEC staff was replaced by the K administration to issue numbers that would be more favorible to the government.

It is similar with Venezuelan media where stations are either threatened with fines or with non renewal of license if they are considered out of line.

There are a lot of articles here http://en.rsf.org/venezuela.html about the status of Venezuelan media and journalists. I haven't gone through every article so don't expect me to know every detail written in there like the back of my hand.

Hope this helps.

 

[nicoenarg]

Based on what criteria? The CNN piece is sensationalist drivel (which thoughtfully includes a plug to buy the author's book "patriots")

Its also factually incorrect on a number of points. For starters, there were plenty of independent election monitors. Here's an article by one of them - my local London MP: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/diane-abbott/the-poor-venezuela-saw-ch_b_1947515.html?utm_hp_ref=uk

Did you even read the Independent piece? Or are you just dismissing it because its includes facts which trouble you?

Yes jp, I am just so burdened with the amount of factual information the article provided.

And yes, Diane Abbott, I mean why wouldn't I believe her. I learned a lot from her like the fact that the "British invented racism." And other valuable lessons like "white people love playing 'divide and rule'..."

I mean, yes, her opinion matters to me A LOT.

 

[Matt84]

Hurrah! Beastly Belgiums



Definitely no Cycling and Hoegaarden - hurrah hurrah!

Definitely no cycling in the Belgian Congo, those natives had to carry the ivory by foot or either lose their right hand.

whoa just a minute please we seem to have moved just a little away from Venezuela or anywhere resembling

Ponder this awhile ...


"1. Democracy cannot consist solely of elections that are nearly always fictitious and managed by rich landowners and professional politicians".


2. "Where a government has come into power through some form of popular vote, fraudulent or not, and maintains at least an appearance of constitutional legality, the guerilla outbreak cannot be promoted, since the possibilities of peaceful struggle have not yet been exhausted".

1.Sure but democracy only works under a strict Republic with separate powers (I grant, a foreign concept to you) not the unlimited will of 'the people' as represented by a leader or a party or clique, and not Guatemala style either with one landed family controlling everything. I don't defend that either just in case

2. Didn't Fulgencio Batista maintain an impeccable semblance of constitutional legality? Top notch appearances and still that great thinker of the Argentine landed aristocracy, and social reformer (is that a euphemism, as in I'm gonna reform the shape out of you?) went up in arms, made war and rounded up people. And after that, of course Democracy in Cuba never again consisted of elections where the ignorant masses could be manipulated by competing interests. Now they would be manipulated by just one.

To me at least that seems just a bit nearer the OP than the "natural law of paradox"?

btw my Dad and Grandfather and many other men and women who took part in the quote 50 mill toll war unquote held out against Fascism with the support of North Americans (Canadians followed somewhat later by others) plus many other countries including a RAF squadron of Argentine Ex Pats. Afterwards they had a democratic election and the majority voted for a Socialist Government and since then have kept the democracy thing going more or less on a social democrat consensus. No "natural law of paradox" there chummy!

You're only betraying the fact that I often rant off topic. My respects to your father and grand father. Perhaps they saved some of my distant relatives while killing other equally distant relatives.
Maybe the fact that all nations in the world were gangpressed into a war against three, or technically five small countries, leaving almost no room for Neutrality, should have betrayed the identity of the real aggressor(s) in all that mess. (I'll give you a hint, even though it was the UK that technically started the war in Europe, it was neither the UK or Germany who were standing to profit the most of it).
Or if you compared Britain's standing in 1914 and 1950 (in a map!) you might see maybe Britain and the USA were not on the same side for the long run (just as the USSR and the USA weren't)
But that's besides the point, which is that I'm a chum because I think that a huge war against the unholy union of Nationalism and Socialism, was just what it was needed to marry the concepts at home.. to 'legitimize' them if you will and implement 'Social Democracy' as you accurately described it happened. And yes, I see it as a paradox, and for some reason I believe it's natural, not orchestrated.

Back to Venezuela (I hope)

Let's see if the promises Chavez made about social improvement through more new low cost housing gets to deal with matters. Cristina has picked up on that potential election theme already so should be watched with interest.

Let's see, how have they worked in the past ten years?
Cristina doesn't have a full tank of crude to finance her constant struggle against reality.

At least there is nothing like Torre de David in Buenos Aires (was Torre Confinanzas - ironic somehow)

I love tall buildings, thank you for the links, and Ryugyong hotel to you! too far? Ok let's see you recommending the Bauen over any other accommodation arrangement in Buenos Aires.

@Quantum re Venezuela GDP, Chavez is simply using Venezuela's oil reserves, how hard is it to understand? America's doing it on a vaster scale but with more efficiency. Venezuela should have profited from that in the way Canada and Mexico have.
When Argentina last spent its gold reserves during the first or second Peron presidency, Argentina's economy also experienced a boost, it's like receiving a one time gift, or a first shot of amphetamine. After the high, and despite all the billions funneled to education (propaganda) programs, the population becomes more stupid: having only learned how to deal with gov bureaucracy to feed themselves they are not prepared for the inevitable low; and thanks to the improved healthcare programs, maybe they are in disproportionate bigger numbers unprepared to deal with an existence that's not subsidized by a natural resource.

 

[jp]

Yes jp, I am just so burdened with the amount of factual information the article provided.

I guess the fact that Venezuelan media is overwhelmingly in private hands is a little troubling when you're trying to claim that Chavez owns the airwaves. Pesky facts like that get in the way of a perfectly good fantasy.

And yes, Diane Abbott, I mean why wouldn't I believe her.

Solid argument. She probably just made up the fact that she attended the Venezuelan election as an independent monitor. After all, she did make comments on British race relations. Guess that CNN article was fair and balanced after all.