Send in the tanks! (Chavez)

[DC]

Today, The Guardian is running a piece about Chávez trying to push for indefinite re-election, which certainly sounds worrisome.

Not for me.
Aslong he has to be elected and aslong the Votes stay fair, i see no problem with that.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

I like his nationalisation of the oil. I think that this should be mandate in all oil producing nations, but that's my Socialism.

I do NOT like his rule by absolute decree. Chavez is a quasi-dictator who is running on his (reduced) levels of support. The moment he starts to drop it really fast? I'm not sure if he will cut and run or try to take total control, but I am erring on the side of "total control".

 

[lupus_in_fabula]

Not for me.
Aslong he has to be elected and aslong the Votes stay fair, i see no problem with that.

Well, a little under a year ago the people already voted no.


He's basically trying to make himself indispensable which undermines the general notion of democracy. Practically he's sending a clear message to the electorate that he won't accept the result until they vote as he wants them to. Now, if the people vote against his proposal once again, what will he do next? Have them vote again, and again?

 

[DC]

Do the JREF Chavez supporters think it is acceptable for your name to made public on a list that shows all those that voted against the govt and then that list stops you getting credit at the bank or leads to you being discriminated against for employment?
......

So the Venezuelan Banks are all under Chavez Controll? or is this a new law?
Are the Banks in Venezuela pro Government?

And how come, that most that have a bussines and employes are against Chavez, but somehow they do discriminate those on that list? Why do they act pro Chavez but vote against Chavez?

 

[DC]

Well, a little under a year ago the people already voted no.


He's basically trying to make himself indispensable which undermines the general notion of democracy. Practically he's sending a clear message to the electorate that he won't accept the result until they vote as he wants them to. Now, if the people vote against his proposal once again, what will he do next? Have them vote again, and again?

actually the Article you link to attemted to explain it. After the good results for Chavez in the last elections, he thinks that maybe the people will vote yes for it.

Because the No vote was for the new Constitution. And removing the limited terms one can run as president was part of it. Now he is trying to remove the term limit without a new Constitution. But the most important point is, he still needs to be elected. that will not change.

 

[funk de fino]

I also know a Familiy in Venezuela there they hate Chavez, oc they do, they belong to the upper class.

The people I know are not upper class.

I note you avoided a question or two.

btw, you got evidence about that list? Or is it such a urban legend or a story from a chainmail ?

You telling me you do not know about the naming of people who signed a petition against the govt? Look up Tascons list. He has even admitted the list existed and was used for some of what I claim.

Do you think it is fair that this list was used to deny people credit and jobs and in some cases get them fired from jobs?

Yes or no.

 

[funk de fino]

So the Venezuelan Banks are all under Chavez Controll? or is this a new law?
Are the Banks in Venezuela pro Government?

And how come, that most that have a bussines and employes are against Chavez, but somehow they do discriminate those on that list? Why do they act pro Chavez but vote against Chavez?

You see, it works this way, and I know you do not like it but thats the way it is, you answer my questions and I will answer yours.

This was my other question.

Do you think it is fair that if you work hard all your life to provide a house and land for your family and future generations that Chavez can come and take half of it and move in people from the slums?

Yes or no.

 

[lupus_in_fabula]

actually the Article you link to attemted to explain it. After the good results for Chavez in the last elections, he thinks that maybe the people will vote yes for it.

Because the No vote was for the new Constitution. And removing the limited terms one can run as president was part of it. Now he is trying to remove the term limit without a new Constitution. But the most important point is, he still needs to be elected. that will not change.

Unrestricted term limits can easily turn into a system of dictatorship, especially in a system where the president plays a pivotal role in national policy-making.

It's easier for an incumbent to manipulate the political atmosphere to his favor and practically manufacture consent for him and his policies. The possibility for indefinite re-election can also keep authentic opposition at bay when fear of loosing and consequential retaliation is perceived as a real possibility amongst the opposition at election time.

Term limits, on the other hand, is not without problems either: For example, just look a the Bush administration's last-minute push for changes in environmental policies (or the Endangered Species Act) before leaving office. He's not the first president to engage in that kind of departure, but it's a disgusting habit nonetheless.

I still think term limits is a better choice, also for Venezuela. Cháves stepping down does not automatically mean that no one else would be capable of running according to a similar political platform, if that is what the people really want. In a way, it could actually elevate and diversify political participation on the grass-root level in the longer run.

 

[DC]

The people I know are not upper class.

I note you avoided a question or two.



You telling me you do not know about the naming of people who signed a petition against the govt? Look up Tascons list. He has even admitted the list existed and was used for some of what I claim.

Do you think it is fair that this list was used to deny people credit and jobs and in some cases get them fired from jobs?

Yes or no.

The use of such a list is not fair.

 

[DC]

You see, it works this way, and I know you do not like it but thats the way it is, you answer my questions and I will answer yours.

This was my other question.

Do you think it is fair that if you work hard all your life to provide a house and land for your family and future generations that Chavez can come and take half of it and move in people from the slums?

Yes or no.

I am not able to answer this with a simple yes or no.

It depends on the situation.

When is the Venezuelan Government able to do this? What are the exact conditions? What are the details of that law.

It can be fair.
the huge cap between the rich and the poor in Venezuela is not fair at all.


so now my questions

Do you find it fair that Chavez is using the oil money to provide free education in the Slums?

Do you find it fair that Chavez is using the oil money to provide health care in the Slums?

 

[DC]

Unrestricted term limits can easily turn into a system of dictatorship, especially in a system where the president plays a pivotal role in national policy-making.

It's easier for an incumbent to manipulate the political atmosphere to his favor and practically manufacture consent for him and his policies. The possibility for indefinite re-election can also keep authentic opposition at bay when fear of loosing and consequential retaliation is perceived as a real possibility amongst the opposition at election time.

Term limits, on the other hand, is not without problems either: For example, just look a the Bush administration's last-minute push for changes in environmental policies (or the Endangered Species Act) before leaving office. He's not the first president to engage in that kind of departure, but it's a disgusting habit nonetheless.

I still think term limits is a better choice, also for Venezuela. Cháves stepping down does not automatically mean that no one else would be capable of running according to a similar political platform, if that is what the people really want. In a way, it could actually elevate and diversify political participation on the grass-root level in the longer run.

I dont think term limits is something usefull. Aslong the people can vote.

But its the decision of the Venezuelan people.

 

[lupus_in_fabula]

The elections were free and fair.
Chavez has won them.

That is the only point that matters, IMHO

Given that he threatened people that if they voted against him he would send the army in against them the election was hardly free or fair.

I do not know if Chavez`s words were really reported accurately.

I did some searching in order to find the context for the quote and found this article by a Ph.D. candidate (UC Berkeley). Here's his take on it:

George Ciccariello-Maher: For a Venezuelan opposition still not entirely comfortable with the notion of democracy, elections have much more to do with media maneuvering than the actual vote, and they would find in Simon Romero of the New York Times a convenient mouthpiece. Either through trademark laziness or unprecedented effort to distort the truth, Romero took aim at Chávez's recent statements regarding the election in the state of Carabobo, suggesting that the president was threatening to refuse to recognize an opposition victory in the state, instead sending tanks to quell the opposition. Unsurprisingly, what Chávez had actually said was quite different: he had noted that the opposition candidate for the state governorship, Enrique Salas Feo, had been an active participant in the 2002 coup, suggesting that an opposition victory in Carabobo might provide a staging ground for another effort at his ouster. "I won't let them overthrow me," Chávez insisted, "and I might have to bring out the tanks to defend this revolutionary government."

 

[gtc]

George Ciccariello-Maher: For a Venezuelan opposition still not entirely comfortable with the notion of democracy, elections have much more to do with media maneuvering than the actual vote, and they would find in Simon Romero of the New York Times a convenient mouthpiece. Either through trademark laziness or unprecedented effort to distort the truth, Romero took aim at Chávez's recent statements regarding the election in the state of Carabobo, suggesting that the president was threatening to refuse to recognize an opposition victory in the state, instead sending tanks to quell the opposition. Unsurprisingly, what Chávez had actually said was quite different: he had noted that the opposition candidate for the state governorship, Enrique Salas Feo, had been an active participant in the 2002 coup, suggesting that an opposition victory in Carabobo might provide a staging ground for another effort at his ouster. "I won't let them overthrow me," Chávez insisted, "and I might have to bring out the tanks to defend this revolutionary government."

The author is obviously highly biased. Can anyone read Spanish enough to see what this article is saying (linked above)? http://nuevaprensa.com.ve/content/view/10006/2

 

[WildCat]

Here's another little trick Chavez uses to keep opposition candidates off the ballot: Simply have his cronies accuse the candidate of corription, and they are removed from the ballot. No need for a trial, or even charges. Accusation are enough in Venezuela, and of course this was upheld by the Supreme Court which is in Chavez's pocket. Story here: http://www.newsvine.com/_news/2008/05/23/1508632-chavez-opponents-face-election-blacklist

For anyone who thinks this is OK, would you feel the same way if all Bush had to do to keep a Dem off the ballot was have his AG declare they are corrupt, and then never even bring charges?

 

[funk de fino]

I am not able to answer this with a simple yes or no.

It depends on the situation.

When is the Venezuelan Government able to do this? What are the exact conditions? What are the details of that law.

Its a simple question. Yes or no.

It can be fair.
the huge cap between the rich and the poor in Venezuela is not fair at all.

So grabbing people land from not rich people and giving it to the the poor is fair?

so now my questions

Do you find it fair that Chavez is using the oil money to provide free education in the Slums?

Do you find it fair that Chavez is using the oil money to provide health care in the Slums?

Yes and yes. I do not think it is good for him to rely so heavily on oil as the recent prices drop shows. Also he has let the oil production fall in thelast few years by meddling in the oil industry there.

Heres another. You very hypocritically have a usernmame that calls Cheney a dictator yet cry in here like the other JREF chavistas when Chavez is compared to a dictator.

Is Bush and Cheney seeking to extend their terms? If they did what would the chavistas in here say?

Was Mr Chavez attempted coup when he was in the military acceptable and is this the hypocrisy when he rails against the failed coup against him?

Should he be held responsible for the deaths caused by his attempted coup?

 

[funk de fino]

I dont think term limits is something usefull. Aslong the people can vote.

But its the decision of the Venezuelan people.

After the vote against his constitution he said he would step down. Now he has changed again and said he wants to stay on. This rings alarm bells with me I'm afraid.

What would be the reaction in here DC if Bush and Cheney did the same?

How about Putin?

As for the banks mentioned earlier, you do know that he is going to try and nationalise one of the biggest ones? There was also more than one blacklist as well. These are the sorts of things going on in the country that worry me. Along with the massive violence and crime.

 

[DC]

Here's another little trick Chavez uses to keep opposition candidates off the ballot: Simply have his cronies accuse the candidate of corription, and they are removed from the ballot. No need for a trial, or even charges. Accusation are enough in Venezuela, and of course this was upheld by the Supreme Court which is in Chavez's pocket. Story here: http://www.newsvine.com/_news/2008/05/23/1508632-chavez-opponents-face-election-blacklist

For anyone who thinks this is OK, would you feel the same way if all Bush had to do to keep a Dem off the ballot was have his AG declare they are corrupt, and then never even bring charges?

actually under Bush, accusation of beeing a terrorist from a Afghan Warlord is enough to get tortured in Gitmo for some years.

But when the story is true, that is indeed not democratic, unless the accusations are correct.

 

[geni]

After the vote against his constitution he said he would step down. Now he has changed again and said he wants to stay on. This rings alarm bells with me I'm afraid.

Yes. But why? He lost last time he cannot seriously think he can win this time and going into violent opression mode before you have to is not a great move.

 

[DC]

Its a simple question. Yes or no.



So grabbing people land from not rich people and giving it to the the poor is fair?



Yes and yes. I do not think it is good for him to rely so heavily on oil as the recent prices drop shows. Also he has let the oil production fall in thelast few years by meddling in the oil industry there.

Heres another. You very hypocritically have a usernmame that calls Cheney a dictator yet cry in here like the other JREF chavistas when Chavez is compared to a dictator.

Is Bush and Cheney seeking to extend their terms? If they did what would the chavistas in here say?

Was Mr Chavez attempted coup when he was in the military acceptable and is this the hypocrisy when he rails against the failed coup against him?

Should he be held responsible for the deaths caused by his attempted coup?

What are the details od that law?
before i dont now those i cant tell if it is fair or not.

I would like to see if the US people are dumb enough to vote for Bush again.

aslong they have to be elected, i have no problem with it.

A violent coup, like Chavez attempt in the 90s is not acceptable i think.

 

[DC]

After the vote against his constitution he said he would step down. Now he has changed again and said he wants to stay on. This rings alarm bells with me I'm afraid.

What would be the reaction in here DC if Bush and Cheney did the same?

How about Putin?

As for the banks mentioned earlier, you do know that he is going to try and nationalise one of the biggest ones? There was also more than one blacklist as well. These are the sorts of things going on in the country that worry me. Along with the massive violence and crime.

Lucky he did change his mind and did not resign.
the last elections showed that this is also what the majority of Venezuelans want. omly 55% of the people voted against the new constitution.
I see that not as a reason to resign.

Bushs poll numbers was never reasson for bush to step down.

aslong the Venezuelans mostly vote for Chavez, i thiink i can stay president so many terms the venezuelans vote him into office.

Eehm Putin is a special case.