Merged Hugo Chavez Esta Muerto

[McHrozni]

Stalin ordered the deaths of millions, so yes he did murder people. To claim that Stalin was not a murderer is a lie. To claim that Chavez is not a murderer is not.

Both men have ordered policies which directly resulted in deaths of tens of thousands (or more, in the case of Stalin). The sole difference is that Stalin called them for what they were.

Chavez isn't as bad because the numbers aren't as bad, not because of some significant difference in policies.

The deaths you are pointing to are from violent crime. You may as well look at violent crime figures in the US and say that the victims were killed by the president of the US.

You could, but you would also have to completely ignore the facts about Venezuelan crime rates, including the article I quoted for your convenience. You don't get to ignore evidence and pretend it never existed.

McHrozni

 

[angrysoba]

Both men have ordered policies which directly resulted in deaths of tens of thousands (or more, in the case of Stalin). The sole difference is that Stalin called them for what they were.

Chavez isn't as bad because the numbers aren't as bad, not because of some significant difference in policies.

I see, so which policy of Chavez's led directly to the violent deaths of so many Venezuelans that is significantly similar to the slave labour policies of Stalin or the collectivization programs of Stalin, or the Terror, the show trials and the purges?

You could, but you would also have to completely ignore the facts about Venezuelan crime rates, including the article I quoted for your convenience. You don't get to ignore evidence and pretend it never existed.

McHrozni

So you would say that if a crime wave happened in the US, then it would be as intimately related to which ever pol was in office passing legislation or pursuing policies, as Stalin's victims were intimately related to him?

That is utterly preposterous.

Seriously, I couldn't really give a damn about Chavez, but this kind of bollocks is beyond belief.

 

[angrysoba]

This is interesting, and seems to be fairly recent. A comparison of numbers killed by Hitler and Stalin. Worth bringing up again because of the nature of Stalin's kills. For anyone who may have been confused about the type of person Stalin was, it is worth noting that he wasn't some bumbling, blustering buffoon who had some ill-thought out ideas but a coldly ruthless murderer. He is as much a murderer as the people who pulled the trigger given that he ordered these deaths. For example:

Judging from the Soviet records we now have, the number of people who died in the Gulag between 1933 and 1945, while both Stalin and Hitler were in power, was on the order of a million, perhaps a bit more. The total figure for the entire Stalinist period is likely between two million and three million.

Now, the Gulag system itself was so brutal that you could argue that for many it was a death sentence. But if we were inclined to give Uncle Joe the benefit of the doubt and say that the prisoners had a chance to survive, and that many did, then there is no wiggle room over this:

The Great Terror and other shooting actions killed no more than a million people, probably a bit fewer.

In this case, although it is "no more" than a million, "probably a bit fewer" we are not talking here about violent street crime. It is qualitatively different. These came from orders! This makes Stalin's actions even worse than over the Gulag whether or not the Great Terror took "no more" than a million.

The largest human catastrophe of Stalinism was the famine of 1930–1933, in which more than five million people died.

Of those who starved, the 3.3 million or so inhabitants of Soviet Ukraine who died in 1932 and 1933 were victims of a deliberate killing policy related to nationality.

A deliberate killing policy? If that's the case then how can you say "Chavez isn't as bad because the numbers aren't as bad, not because of some significant difference in policies." There's blatantly a difference in policies! It's not about numbers!

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/arc...r-vs-stalin-who-killed-more/?pagination=false

 

[L.Y.S.]

Except, of course, that all sectors of the economy declined, across the board. The only thing that kept the illusion of prosperity going have been the historically high oil prices. Yes, Venezuelan economy was bad before Hugo, but it's significantly worse now, mainly due to his actions. There is no excuse for that.

McHrozni

No it was worse during the 80s and 90s prior to Chavez getting it. He got in expressly because of the horrible times during the 80s and 90s. Which the cause of the economic crises was both the Christian Democratic party in Venezuela, and the Socialist party. Both of them continued very crappy policies that soured the economy. No one political spectrum was to blame. Again, the problem lay in Venezuela itself. Placing blame doesn't change that.

 

[McHrozni]

I see, so which policy of Chavez's led directly to the violent deaths of so many Venezuelans that is significantly similar to the slave labour policies of Stalin or the collectivization programs of Stalin, or the Terror, the show trials and the purges?

The policy of maintaining the monopoly on power by politicising and subverting existing institutions to serve the goal. It's a policy most similar to feudalism, where landed titles are replaced by institutional titles, instead of being Earl of Norfolk you get Chief of police of Nottingham, same thing with a different name. The only fundamental difference is that feudalism worked better and wasn't a step back from what was already achieved when it was instituted in society.

So you would say that if a crime wave happened in the US, then it would be as intimately related to which ever pol was in office passing legislation or pursuing policies, as Stalin's victims were intimately related to him?

No and if you red what I wrote and quoted you'd know that.

McHrozni

 

[McHrozni]

A deliberate killing policy? If that's the case then how can you say "Chavez isn't as bad because the numbers aren't as bad, not because of some significant difference in policies." There's blatantly a difference in policies! It's not about numbers!

Venezuelan law enforcement can best be described as a deliberate killing policy.

That aside, Holodomor wasn't a killing policy (aka Auschwitz), but rather a man-made famine. Have you been to any Venezuelan supermarkets recently? It's not as bad, yet.

McHrozni

 

[angrysoba]

The policy of maintaining the monopoly on power by politicising and subverting existing institutions to serve the goal.

Errr...yeah! That would be a good description of Stalin's policies, if you were trying to whitewash him to make some fatuous equivalence argument.

No and if you red what I wrote and quoted you'd know that.

You didn't quote anything except what I had written. Other than that you sent me to some Telegraph article which I did indeed read. Essentially you have made no case whatsoever that Chavez had any deliberate killing policies.

Venezuelan law enforcement can best be described as a deliberate killing policy.

You have to give evidence for that. Nothing you have linked to has even suggested that.

That aside, Holodomor wasn't a killing policy,

Oh really? Could you explain why it is recognized by the United States as an act of genocide? Or Australia, Brazil, numerous other countries too? Ironically, one of the few places in the Americas which doesn't officially recognize it as such is Venezuela.

but rather a man-made famine. ,

Again, a good-rule of thumb is that when you consistently have to give Stalin the benefit of the doubt (a "man-made famine" that presumably isn't deliberate, right?) to score political points, it's really time to ask yourself if maybe you're just making things up as you go along.

Besides, plenty of historians and scholars on the subject such as Robert Conquest and Timothy Snyder, who I quoted earlier have seen the Ukranian famines as being deliberate mass murder. You coulld always write a paper putting forward your exotic theory that Chavez was pretty much like Stalin in everything but numbers - I think you'd end up looking foolish by quibbling over the Ukranian famine, ignoring the Terror, forgetting about the Kulak murders and the public trials of the Politburo who all presumably accidentally found themselves getting too well acquainted with bullets in dungeons - be my guest, but I don't recommend it.

Have you been to any Venezuelan supermarkets recently? It's not as bad, yet.

No, I haven't been to any Venezuelan supermarkets. Are you saying that they only differ from the scenes during the Ukranian famine by a matter of degrees? Is that really what you are trying to say? Are the customers resorting to cannibalism? Could I see some photographs of this extraordinary sight, not from any ghoulish urges, I hope you realize but until I see evidence I am going to have to think this is just more bollocks.

Sorry to put it so bluntly.

 

[tyr_13]

No it was worse during the 80s and 90s prior to Chavez getting it. He got in expressly because of the horrible times during the 80s and 90s. Which the cause of the economic crises was both the Christian Democratic party in Venezuela, and the Socialist party. Both of them continued very crappy policies that soured the economy. No one political spectrum was to blame. Again, the problem lay in Venezuela itself. Placing blame doesn't change that.

Do you have a source for this?

 

[balrog666]

But he gave the poor bread, circuses and hope so we must have respect for him!

Hope for what, more extorted bread and 500 channels of free TV?

 

[McHrozni]

No, I haven't been to any Venezuelan supermarkets. Are you saying that they only differ from the scenes during the Ukranian famine by a matter of degrees?

Essentially, yes. Both crises are entirely unnecessary and entirely created by the government. That Venezuelans aren't dying of hunger yet is just a quantitative difference. There is little qualitative difference.

McHrozni

 

[Arcade22]

Venezuelan officials have said they will set up an inquiry to investigate suspicions that President Hugo Chavez was murdered by foreign agencies.

Oil Minister Rafael Ramirez told the BBC the United States and Israel were to blame for Mr Chavez's death.

He said he hoped the special commission would provide evidence.

Mr Chavez himself suggested he might have been injected by "foreign imperialist forces" after discovering he had cancer in 2011.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-21763865

Your time is up America! Soon the world will know the truth about your evil plans!!!11

 

[trustbutverify]

It was actually the Zionists who infected Saint Hugo with the cancer.

In 2010, Chavez dams Israel as a terrorist state responsible for the crimes against a defenceless people _the Palestinians. He points out that Israel funds the opposition in Venezuela and stresses that the Mossad is trying to kill him. There are some who believe that the Mossad was able to infect him with a cancer virus.

 

[trustbutverify]

The Saint Hugo era might not have been so great for Venezuela's small Jewish population.

 

[McHrozni]

It was actually the Zionists who infected Saint Hugo with the cancer.

This super-duper Mossad is a bit odd. On one hand, they can do all these terrible things, like murdering tin-pot dictators who can't harm them from halfway around the world in a manner that ensures a major political crisis. On the other hand, Ahmadinejad, who routinely calls for destruction of Israel and has been trying to develop weapon systems to do it is still in good health.

It's probably because that's what they want us to think

McHrozni

 

[angrysoba]

Could you provide some evidence for these claims, please?

Venezuelan law enforcement can best be described as a deliberate killing policy.

Particularly this idea that the situation in Venezuela is comparable to that of the Ukranian famine under Stalin:

Essentially, yes. Both crises are entirely unnecessary and entirely created by the government. That Venezuelans aren't dying of hunger yet is just a quantitative difference. There is little qualitative difference.

 

[McHrozni]

Could you provide some evidence for these claims, please?

http://www.hrw.org/world-report-2012/world-report-2012-venezuela

Violent crime is rampant in Venezuela, where extrajudicial killings by security agents remain a problem. The minister of the interior and justice has estimated that police commit one of every five crimes. According to the most recent official statistics, law enforcement agents allegedly killed 7,998 people between January 2000 and the first third of 2009.

The rest of the report isn't much kinder.

This is not comparable with Holodomor or Gulags, of course, but you haven't said what the big difference is - other than the sheer numbers, but there we're in an agreement.

McHrozni

 

[angrysoba]

http://www.hrw.org/world-report-2012/world-report-2012-venezuela

Violent crime is rampant in Venezuela, where extrajudicial killings by security agents remain a problem. The minister of the interior and justice has estimated that police commit one of every five crimes. According to the most recent official statistics, law enforcement agents allegedly killed 7,998 people between January 2000 and the first third of 2009.

The rest of the report isn't much kinder.

This is not comparable with Holodomor or Gulags, of course, but you haven't said what the big difference is - other than the sheer numbers, but there we're in an agreement.

McHrozni

The difference should be obvious; that Chavez did not enact policies of murder. Stalin did.

 

[McHrozni]

The difference should be obvious; that Chavez did not enact policies of murder. Stalin did.

So the astronomical rise in murder rate and a disgusting decay of security is just a mere coincidence? No, wait, I know, it's a US conspiracy to smear the hero of the nation

McHrozni

 

[angrysoba]

So the astronomical rise in murder rate and a disgusting decay of security is just a mere coincidence?

I think a good case can be made for incompetence. You prefer conspiracy?

I only ask because I have seen no evidence yet that Chavez set up a deliberate policy of murder which is what you are alleging, must be alleging, to put Chavez in the same ranks as Stalin.

No, wait, I know, it's a US conspiracy to smear the hero of the nation

So it must be one fanciful scenario or another?

No, McHrozni, I haven't even suggested that at all, and these silly little tactics don't substitute for evidence for your own claim. Rolly eye smilies don't count as evidence or argument.

 

[McHrozni]

I think a good case can be made for incompetence. You prefer conspiracy?

No, I perfer the scenario where there is a government plan behind the killings - it reduces population growth and gives the peons extra worries to distract them from abyssimal government performance elsewhere.

Similarily the economic mismanagement of Venezuela isn't random incompetence, but a deliberate incompetence: people who are economically dependent on you, as a large portion of Venezuela now is dependent on the government, don't rebel and they certainly don't fund the opposition.

No big conspiracy here, just old school feudalism.

McHrozni