Send in the tanks! (Chavez)

[DC]

We are now living in Utopia, we best find a way out, before it collapses.

 

[Childlike Empress]

I'm not a Marxist and I don't mean to speak for CE but it would seem that the timing was simply wrong. It's not very compelling though.

What Marx did was presenting an analysis of the forces active in the society he lived in, in the society of early industrialisation. That analysis is still valid and relevant, because not much has changed.

That said, i wouldn't consider myself to be an orthodox marxist or even a communist. I am a free thinker and i agree with you that "-isms" are always dangerous and should be avoided.

 

[marksman]

I am a free thinker and i agree with you that "-isms" are always dangerous and should be avoided.

Out of curiosity, what's your position on Chavismo?

 

[Childlike Empress]

Well, there certainly is a personality cult surrounding Chavez, but i think that there is much more to the development in Venezuela. I applaud what is happening there and, personality cult yes or no, i like Chavez alot and think he is honest. That doesn't mean he is flawless and shouldn't be criticized, but please stick to a realistic level and cut the "dictator" crap.

 

[RandFan]

Well, there certainly is a personality cult surrounding Chavez, but i think that there is much more to the development in Venezuela. I applaud what is happening there and, personality cult yes or no, i like Chavez alot and think he is honest. That doesn't mean he is flawless and shouldn't be criticized, but please stick to a realistic level and cut the "dictator" crap.

It would be great if Chavez could cut the crap. I hate to be redundant but as I said before, Bush was roundly criticized for demonizing nations like Iran and North Korea. It doesn't help. Demonizing America on a weekly basis isn't going to breed a lot of good will. Contrary to his rhetoric America isn't simply an evil empire. We were behind the league of nations and the UN. We didn't annex West Germany or any other nations following WWII. On the contrary we helped Japan, West Germany and other European nations get on their feet and we didn't dictate to them that they couldn't be socialist. Europe is far more socialist than America is. It's true that we were worried about Latin America becoming communist and I think there was some serious miss calculations made and some horrible decisions. It's truly unfortunate but only seeing the worst in America isn't helping anything.

My problem with Chavez is that his rhetoric is so stark and belittling. On top of that he often acts in ways contrary to democracy. Chavez has pulled stunts that Bush couldn't possibly get away with.

As I keep saying, power corrupts and no person is guaranteed immune to it. Given that Chavez has so much power at his disposal and given that close insiders have left him I think there is good reason to be concerned.

 

[marksman]

Well, there certainly is a personality cult surrounding Chavez

Chavez is the one who coined "Chavismo", not the personality cult surrounding him (which he also cultivated, mind you). I'm just wondering how firmly against -isms you in fact are.

please stick to a realistic level and cut the "dictator" crap.

When did I call him a "dictator". It's really annoying, CE, when you presume positions about the people with whom you are conversing. We end up spending half our posts addressing your assumptions about people.

 

[DC]

Chavez is the one who coined "Chavismo", not the personality cult surrounding him (which he also cultivated, mind you). I'm just wondering how firmly against -isms you in fact are.


When did I call him a "dictator". It's really annoying, CE, when you presume positions about the people with whom you are conversing. We end up spending half our posts addressing your assumptions about people.

Not much Skepticism
where did you learn that Chavez coined that?

 

[marksman]

In April 11, 2002, Chavez was asked his personal philosophy by a reporter during his failed coup attempt (before it failed). In it, he first used the word Chavismo to describe his brand of Bolivaran socialism. His proponents have been using it ever since. (His opponents tend to use the term "Chavista".)

 

[DC]

In April 11, 2002, Chavez was asked his personal philosophy by a reporter during his failed coup attempt (before it failed). In it, he first used the word Chavismo to describe his brand of Bolivaran socialism. His proponents have been using it ever since. (His opponents tend to use the term "Chavista".)

it was not his failed coup attempt, it was Washingtons failed coup attempt.

and in 2001, this document already used the term Chavismo.
So your storry cant be the point where it was coined.

http://www.jstor.org/pss/3185012

 

[DC]

I thought you ment maybe the failed Coup attempt in 1992, which was led by Chavez. But i found nothing there, back then his movement was called Movimiento Bolivariano Revolucionario 200. And it was all about Simon Bolivar and back then Chavez said that he was just a voice of the poor people. And was alot lot more decent.

 

[marksman]

it was not his failed coup attempt, it was Washingtons failed coup attempt.

Oops. It was the failed coup attempt against Chavez. (I'm not going to call it "Washington's failed coup attempt" as that is inaccurate.)

You're right. He didn't coin it. I withdraw the statement that he coined it. I was unaware of its use before then. However, he has adopted it and uses it frequently.

edit: Apparently, according to Cristobal Valencia Ramirez of the University of Texas, in an article called "Venezuela's Bolivarian Revolution", published in Latin American Perspectives, the term was first used by Hugo Chavez' campaign in 1998 in his first election to the Presidency. So he may have coined it after all. I suppose it's best to say the actual origin of the term is muddy, but Chavez has certainly embraced the term.

However, that has nothing to do with the point, which is that Chavez doesn't shy away from -isms. He completely believes Chavismo to be a good and honest movement. And since Childlike Empress seems to support Chavez' policies of the moment, she too seems to be sympathetic to Chavismo. I seem no reason why she should shy away from the word where it is an apt description.

I think Childlike Empress' statement that she eschews "isms" is, well, childish. "-ism" is simply a suffix to indicate a personal philosophy. Pragmatism, skepticism, socialism, capitalism. There's nothing inherently wrong with acknowledging that groups of people share common ideologies and that you (or I) might share some of those idologies.

 

[DC]

Oops. It was the failed coup attempt against Chavez. (I'm not going to call it "Washington's failed coup attempt" as that is inaccurate.)

You're right. He didn't coin it. I withdraw the statement that he coined it. I was unaware of its use before then. However, he has adopted it and uses it frequently.

edit: Apparently, according to Cristobal Valencia Ramirez of the University of Texas, in an article called "Venezuela's Bolivarian Revolution", published in Latin American Perspectives, the term was first used by Hugo Chavez' campaign in 1998 in his first election to the Presidency. So he may have coined it after all. I suppose it's best to say the actual origin of the term is muddy, but Chavez has certainly embraced the term.

However, that has nothing to do with the point, which is that Chavez doesn't shy away from -isms. He completely believes Chavismo to be a good and honest movement. And since Childlike Empress seems to support Chavez' policies of the moment, she too seems to be sympathetic to Chavismo. I seem no reason why she should shy away from the word where it is an apt description.

I think Childlike Empress' statement that she eschews "isms" is, well, childish. "-ism" is simply a suffix to indicate a personal philosophy. Pragmatism, skepticism, socialism, capitalism. There's nothing inherently wrong with acknowledging that groups of people share common ideologies and that you (or I) might share some of those idologies.

I dont know where it was coined and by whom, that it is coming from the 1998 campaign is very good possble.
it wasnt the old failed socialism, it wasnt just a few reforms. It was reshaping the country.

And thanks to constant atacks from oppossition and fom the free marketism it turned into a sort cult.

About who was behind the coup. it was sure not only washington, but the helped and knew before that there is a group in the army that will try a coup, details are still classified.

http://venezuelafoia.info/english.html

when reading the CIA and NED and USAID documents, it is pretty clear we can call it Washington's failed coup attempt.

 

[WildCat]

it was Washingtons failed coup attempt.

Say what now?

 

[marksman]

thanks to constant atacks from oppossition and fom the free marketism [Chavismo] turned into a sort cult.

What? Chavismo has been a cult of personality since his first presidential run, four years before the coup attempt.

About who was behind the coup. it was sure not only washington, but the helped and knew before that there is a group in the army that will try a coup, details are still classified.

Foreknowledge doesn't make it their coup. The evidence of active participation is a conspiracy theory that would make Truthers blush. The most I've seen is that the CIA may have sent advisors to advise the coup plotters after the coup had begun. And that allegation is utterly lacking in any factual basis. It's just rank hearsay and speculation.

(And your website doesn't provide any evidence of the CIA directing the coup.)

So let's leave the nutty conspiracy theories to the CT forum, okay?

http://venezuelafoia.info/english.html

when reading the CIA and NED and USAID documents, it is pretty clear we can call it Washington's failed coup attempt.

Having read the documents, it's actually quite clear doing so would be grossly irresponsible.

 

[DC]

What? Chavismo has been a cult of personality since his first presidential run, four years before the coup attempt.


Foreknowledge doesn't make it their coup. The evidence of active participation is a conspiracy theory that would make Truthers blush. The most I've seen is that the CIA may have sent advisors to advise the coup plotters after the coup had begun. And that allegation is utterly lacking in any factual basis. It's just rank hearsay and speculation.

(And your website doesn't provide any evidence of the CIA directing the coup.)

So let's leave the nutty conspiracy theories to the CT forum, okay?

http://venezuelafoia.info/english.html


Having read the documents, it's actually quite clear doing so would be grossly irresponsible.

Would it be Venezuelan Documents and about a coup against Bush, you would see it as evidence.

the old game is still going on.

 

[marksman]

Would it be Venezuelan Documents and about a coup against Bush, you would see it as evidence.

If they said the same things as the documents to which you linked, no, I would not.

Again, I don't know why you and Childlike Empress are so quick to assume that those who disagree with you are Bush supporters, Chicago Boys or neocons. I stated exactly why I believed what I believe. You even quoted it. Instead of responding to it, you engage din a personal attack.

Do you think anybody reading a thread on a critical thinking forum is going to find that to be persuasive?

 

[Childlike Empress]

Do you think anybody reading a thread on a critical thinking forum is going to find that to be persuasive?

Well, let's look at your record in this thread. Your criticism of the data by the Venezuelan National Instute of Statistics was based on pre-debunked hearsay, you ignore the report by CEPR, you have no clue about the history of US meddeling with the economics of Latin America - proven by not understanding or even looking up the term Chicago Boys -, you want to tell us about Chavismo without knowing the origin of the term, you dismiss the FOIA documents obtained by Eva Gollinger - all while the style of your posts is anything but friendly. At least you didn't call anyone a liar by now and didn't invent imaginary friends.

So, your criticism is noted and i will try to stop assuming things people didn't say. Please do the same and re-think your attitude.

btw, yesterday was big party in Caracas, tenth anniversary of Chavez' first election. Congratulations, Presidente!

 

[marksman]

Well, let's look at your record in this thread. Your criticism of the data by the Venezuelan National Instute of Statistics was based on pre-debunked hearsay

It was not pre-debunked. A link to a disagreeing article is not "debunked".

you ignore the report by CEPR

I didn't ignore it. In fact, I specifically stated what it said and why it didn't debunk the underlying article.

you have no clue about the history of US meddeling with the economics of Latin America

I'm actually quite aware of the history of American meddling in Latin America. But that long and shameful history has nothign to do with whether Venezuela's own economic data is trustworthy.

proven by not understanding or even looking up the term Chicago Boys

??? How is not knowing a term for University of Chicago economists evidence of an ignorance of Latin America?!

you want to tell us about Chavismo without knowing the origin of the term

What?! I'm the one who denied that Chevez was involved in the origin of the term -- you were.

you dismiss the FOIA documents obtained by Eva Gollinger

I didn't dismiss them. They just don't say what Dictator Cheney claimed they did.

At least you didn't call anyone a liar by now and didn't invent imaginary friends.

No, the only one calling names so far has been you and Dictator Cheney. And here you've done it again, ignoring any substantive discussion of Chavez or whether the Financial TImes article is accurate, and instead are trying to paint me as some sort of partisan. And you apologized for that very same behavior not 24 hours ago!

Please do the same and re-think your attitude.

I haven't assumed anything. I have taken everyone's statements at face value.

btw, yesterday was big party in Caracas, tenth anniversary of Chavez' first election. Congratulations, Presidente!

And yet you still won't identify yourself as a Chavisma?

 

[Pardalis]

btw, yesterday was big party in Caracas, tenth anniversary of Chavez' first election. Congratulations, Presidente!

Would you have voted yes to his referendum about amending the constitution to allow him to get indefinitely re-elected?
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/americas/11/30/venezuela.chavez.vote/index.html?iref=newssearch

If Bush or any US president had proposed such a thing we would never have heard the end of it, so why are you silent about that?

And what about his links to the militia? You don't seem to have a problem with that either.

 

[funk de fino]

would RCTV hire a journalist that is not on the tascon list?

How should I know?

such a list can be used by everyone.

The point is, there should not be a list.

I asked a direct question, hoped for a direct answer. So forget about it.

All you had to do was bring an unbiased news source I could look at and see. Having trouble finding one?