devirginizer83-1
I'm going to ignore all your insults because they alone say a lot about your level and the kind of person you are.
Hehe…what kind of person am I? Really I’d like to know. I just stated the truth. I’m not a troll or a 12 year old. Latin American elites fit the definition of “parasites” perfectly: they live at the expense of others. They own most of the land, fill up most of the spots at the Universities, control the electoral process, own all the businesses and natural resources, make up the High Command of the Armed Forces…and for what?
Latin America is just as poverty-ridden today as it was 30 years ago. All the concentration of power in the hands of the upper class only served to make poor people more poor. The elites bend themselves backward to welcome “foreign investment” which is nothing but selling the country’s natural resources to the highest bidder and trying to get American and European corporations to do business in your country because they can pay slavery wages to your countrymen.
And what I said is directed towards the upper class of Venezuela…if you’re not in that class then there’s no need to feel insulted. The fact that you did says a lot about you.
I'm sure you're speaking of an ideal socialist movement like the one Lula seems to be running in Brazil.
Ideal socialist movement? Lula has done almost all of the things Chavez has done. When Lula ran for President in 1989, he was painted by the upper class with the same paint your upper class paints Chavez: he was called a Communist, an illiterate factory hand, an atheist, a potential dictator, etc etc.
This is why I’m not surprised when these hordes of upper-class Venezuelan blue-bloods come to IMDB crying about their lost paradise of exploitation: this has been going in Latin America for 50 years. Every time a reformer gains power, he is labeled hysterically as a Communist, a tyrant and the worst menace to Western civilization since Attila the Hun.
It happened with Juan Bosch in 1963, Joao Goulart in 1964 and Allende in 1970. It’s the same old story.
In Venezuela, it is a completely different story. Please, go to Venezuela for a week, and you will learn that those who oppose Chavez are not ALL RICH.
All those opposing Chavez may not be rich…but all the rich oppose Chavez. And let’s face it…the VAST majority of the vocal opposition to Chavez…the ones who go to the rallies, staff the corporate boards of directors, etc. are upper class. They are the ones who are seeing their power diminish.
Their opposition probably has a lot to do with the face that under the Chavez government the tax agency SENIAT has actually been enforcing the tax laws. The upper social classes in Venezuela avoided much of their tax obligations for many years through simple evasion, bribery or through the inability of SENIAT to collect the data necessary to assess a tax. Under Chavez, SENIAT was tasked with collecting the taxes that are due. The tax laws haven't been changed, but SENIAT is now collecting well over 50% more in taxes. This represents money that the upper classes were not paying prior to the Chavez administration.
Sorry you have to pay taxes.
The elite in Venezuela is less than 15% of the population, if that was the case, then only that much would be against him. Look at the latest polls. Chavez only has about 39% support.
Maybe you should take a simple class on Statistics. Polls like that are always fluctuating. One month a President might have 23% support, the next month 56%, the month after that 44%, etc. Those numbers are ephemeral. If you really want to look at the level of support Chavez is getting you look at the numbers in the presidential elections where he has won OVERWHELMING victories.
But this is exactly where the problem is. Chavez did not perform. Poor people are poorer today. They are the ones most affected by the levels of street violence. They're the ones who suffer the most because their salaries do not come even close to being enough to buy food.
Actually no…Venezuelan’s poor are doing a lot better now than they were before, when your ilk was in power.
Chavez’s Bolivarian Missions have entailed the construction of thousands of free medical clinics for the poor, the institution of educational campaigns that have reportedly made more than one million adult Venezuelans literate, and the enactment of food and housing subsidies
The infant mortality rate fell by 18.2% between 1998 and 2006.The government earmarked 44.6% of the 2007 budget for social investment, with 1999-2007 averaging 12.8% of GDP.
During the Chávez Presidency, poverty and extreme poverty have gone down strongly: poverty fell from 59.4% in 1999 to 30.2% in 2006 and extreme poverty went down from 21.7% to 9.9% in the same period. Even critics like Instituto Real Elcano from Spain acknowledge these achievements.
SOURCE:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/spanish/specials/2009/chavez_10/newsid_783700 0/7837964.stm
Sorry buddy. Looks like Chavez has done more for the poor in 11 years than your fellow moneyed malcontents have done in the last 100 years.
This is after 10 years of Chavez in the government. And that's why Chavez's support numbers keep crumbling
.
He just won a referendum to run for President for a third time with pretty good numbers. I think you should get your head out of the clouds.
All those "poor" people who saw in Chavez hope, the one who cared, are realizing that it was all smoke up in the air and that his only agenda was to create an anti-american revolution he could export to the rest of latin America.
Ah… “anti-American”…why is it anti-American to oppose the massive exploitation of our continent? Why is it anti-american to protect our natural resources through nationalization rather than selling them off to American corporations? Sorry if I don’t sympathize with your neoliberal aspirations, but I happen to think that Latin America needs more, not less, socialism. I hope Chavez spreads his ideas in EVERY country in Latin America so that one day I can go to Honduras or Nicaragua or Brazil and not see children picking through garbage to find food.
How do you think these poor people feel when they see they have no hospitals (the infrastructures are there - it is the supplies and everything else that's missing)and that Chavez keeps on financing new hospitals in Bolivia, Cuba, Ecuador? This is just one small example.
I would love to see hard data of that claim…because I have seen a lot of data that says otherwise.
I repeat to you what I and all other Venezuelans are posting in these "South of the Border" message boards.
PLEASE, COME TO VENEZUELA AND THEN COMMENT, THEN SPEAK.
\
I have to come to Venezuela? Please. The whole world can see what is happening. This isn’t 1809…it’s 2009. Mass communications have made it possible for me to see that what is happening in Venezuela is actually very simple: a President wants to end 100 years of misery and exploitation, and the former ruling classes are bitterly opposing him at every turn. Like I said before…this has all happened before in almost every country in Latin America.
Plus being Brazilian, I see all the similarities. The same lies from the rich, the same fascist-like red baiting, the same bitter opposition with no clear goals, the same insults. One of your fellows in this very discussion board called him a “monkey”. Another one…it might have been you…said the illegal, undemocratic coup d’etat in Honduras was a beautiful thing, etc etc. And then you wonder why the whole world looks at your claims of allegiance to democracy with suspiscion. We saw you cheering in the streets in 2002 when Chavez was taken out by a coup and the National Assembly was shut down.
And please…think before you speak or type. Calling him a “vicious dictator” is just making you look silly. Methinks you should live under a dictatorship to see what they’re really like. Your hero Pinochet certainly wouldn’t allow the kind of public opposition Chavez does. He certainly wouldn’t run in elections. The Somozas ruled Nicaragua like their personal fiefdom for 43 years. Stroessner ruled Paraguay for 33. THOSE are dictators.
Chavez is one of the people trying to make this world a better place. You're just standing on his way so you can keep your beach house and your cheap maids.
reply
share
STANCO
15 years ago
I only started to read your first two paragraphs.
"the VAST majority of the vocal opposition to Chavez…the ones who go to the rallies, staff the corporate boards of directors, etc. are upper class."
Well my friend, then am I GLAD to live in Venezuela, the RICHEST country in the world, because everytime there is a rally against Chavez, the opposition actually counts hundreds of thousands... one time it had almost 3 million people marching against Chavez, so HOORAY!!! In Venezuela, at least in Caracas, almost EVERYONE IS UPPER CLASS... ELITE... RICH.... YEEEEEEI
"Lula has done almost all of the things Chavez has done"
That's all I need to read from your reply to understand that you really, REALLY have no idea, NO CLUE of what is going on in Venezuela.
Seriously, instead of getting your news from Telesur, next time just try to mix it up a bit and watch all the different news channels from Venezuela, this of course, since you don't believe that going to the country makes a difference in knowing what might really be happening. I mean, get a dish and tune into North Korean TV... that place is seriously Heaven on Earth, as it is Cuba, and many other places.
Next time you write something here, just send it straight to Hollywood, maybe to mister Stone, as he seems to love doing works of fiction lately.
Have a good one.
reply
share
15 years ago
[deleted]
devirginizer83-1
15 years ago
I only started to read your first two paragraphs.
Haha Stanco, you're so right it hurts. Don't waste your time with this *beep* who have no idea what they're talking about.
TRANSLATION: I saw that I had no real arguments to counter yours nor had I any real facts and figures I could give you...so instead I'm going to dodge the issue cowardly.
You guys are truly sad. Does it make you ashamed to repeat the same pattern your kind followed 30 years ago? When Joao Goulart, president of Brazil from 1961 to 1964 attempted to nationalize a few key industries in his country he was met with the same kind of venom the upper class reserves to those who try to make the lives of the working class better.
I'm not some naive American liberal sympathizing with David against Goliath. I'm Latin American, born and bred. I have lived in a Latin American country. My whole family lives in a Latin American country. And it's the same thing over and over: the upper class that bleeds Latin American countries EVERY day just cannot accept the fact that working people are human!
It boggles the mind.
Not that I'm saddened. Your apathy towards poverty in your country was what allowed Chavez to gain power in the first place. Enjoy!
reply
share
STANCO
15 years ago
My kind? You mean "Democrats?" yes... and you will keep on hearing me say the same arguments for another 30 years.
but then again, since I do support democracy, you also have the right to go on with your communist arguments for as long as you want.
reply
share
STANCO
15 years ago
by the way, I forgot to add. The reason I am not reading your essays is not for lack of arguments, is for appreciation of precious time. When I read your first three arguments, and see how they are completely unfounded, wrong, and lacking real facts, then I just chose better material to read when I'm looking for fiction, that's all.
reply
share
birthdaynoodle
15 years ago
Hey, you guys, I think this is a great place to discuss people's perception of the situation in Venezuela. Some of you are for and some of you are against Chavez. I think there is some truth in both sides. Whichever the argument, let's try to not get hysterical, as this only hurts the credibility of your message. And let's avoid the insults, as they only cheapen this forum.
I agree that the people close to power during the past decades in Venezuela made a serious mess. Corruption was rampant and there was very little concern for the most needed. The problem grew to the point where someone like Chavez became the only hope for many. Now, as he moves closer to having complete control of all aspects of society, part of the world doesn't sympathize as much with the opposition.
What those who are experiencing the Bolivarian Revolution online or on TV from developed countries may not know is that corruption is still rampant in Venezuela and that the same vices that ruined the country continue today -- with the difference that now Chavez's party face no obstacles for their illegal maneuvers, as they control all branches of the government. Corruption is a culture in Venezuela. It's not something that was only practiced by people from the old parties. Everyone who can is still trying to get their hands on oil money. I'm not specifically accusing Chavez of stealing, but a whole lot of the people who are running the country for him are doing it. It's naive to think that less accountability in the system is going to stop the problems... They're only getting worse.
Oil prices reached a record high when Chavez came to power, but there's been very little progress. Yes, there are some social programs, which have been useful to a certain extent; but it's peanuts, considering the amount of money that poured into the country in the last decade. Now the prices went down again; a golden opportunity was missed. And also, more often than not, people who want to benefit from these social programs are maniupulated into first having to join the party. It's not all as nice and innocent as it sounds.
Crime is worse than ever. Caracas is the murder capital of the world. The police are delinquents, even more dangerous than thiefs themselves... These realities cannot be easily perceived from someone in the US or Europe.
It's no surprise that, despite having won in general numbers during the last elections, Chavez's party lost in all the most populated cities of the country, including the poorest areas of Caracas. (Not everyone in the opposition is responsible for the corruption of previous decades.) But through trickery, Chavez bypassed the candidates of the opposition who were chosen by the people and put his own politicians in charge. You see, it starts getting dangerous when someone pretends to represent the will of the people, even more so than the people themselves.
reply
share
devirginizer83-1
15 years ago
Yes, there have been some social programs, which is better than nothing; but it's very little, considering the amount of money that poured into the country in the last decade
According to official sources, the percentage of people below the national poverty line has decreased significantly during the presidency of Hugo Chavez, from 48.1% in 2002 to 30.2% in 2006
Show me numbers that tell me the previous administrations did better.
Caracas is the murder capital of the world
New Orleans' murder per capita is almost as high as Caracas. I don't see anyone here blaming Obama or Bush for that. Crime is a problem that in many ways is independent of administration. It's a problem in socialist countries and in capitalist countries.
But through trickery, Chavez bypassed the candidates of the opposition who were chosen by the people and put his own politicians in charge.
What trickery? He won 61% of the popular vote in the 2006 presidential elections. Elections which were supervised by both the Organization of American States and the Carter Center. BOTH of whom stated that they had been honest elections.
reply
share
birthdaynoodle
15 years ago
1) Regarding the poverty figures (according to "official sources"): I am somewhat cynical about the opposition newspapers in Venezuela, but I'm even more skeptical of the government figures. Trust me, there are no saints on either side.
In 1999, when Chavez became president, the price of oil was $16 per barrel. Since then, the prices skyrocketed and they went as high as $147.25! Here's a chart from Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Brent_Spot_monthly.svg
Now, consider that oil accounts for about 73% of Venezuela's export revenues. We're talking about a real bonanza! Under those circumstances, a lot more could have been done for the poor. Too much was stolen or spent on buying friends abroad.
In 2009, oil has been trading between $39 and $75 a barrel, and the government is scrambling for money now. That's why Brazil's Lula has stated this week that he will not squander profits from the country's newly found oil reserves like "other countries" have.
2) Regarding crime: Here's a quote from Time, comparing the highest murder rates in the world:
"Caracas, with about 3.2 million people, is in a bloody league of its own, with an estimated murder rate of 130 per 100,000 residents according to government figures. Cape Town is about the same size as Caracas but nearer to Baghdad's murder rate with 62 violent deaths per 100,000 people. New Orleans, with an estimated post-Katrina population of just over 300,000, is tiny in size compared to its rivals. But the number of murders is huge; figures vary, but even the low estimate puts the city on a par with Cape Town."
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1894566,00.html
According to the article, the murder rate in Caracas is about twice as high as New Orleans'. And this is according to Venezuelan "government figures", which are surely very low! I'm not saying that the situation isn't bad in New Orleans, but you can't just ignore the fact that the murder rate in Caracas is at least twice as high as any other city in the world. That ain't good.
In any case, it goes beyond figures. It's something that you feel in your bones. People in Caracas live in a state of panic. Walking out at night is virtual suicide and driving late at night can easily end up in a tragedy as well. I hear all the time about neighbors or friends who have been kidnapped or shot to death. Most people in developed countries don't know anyone who's been shot on the street, much less shot to death. And the victims include people from humble backgrounds. The poor neighbors are especially dangerous, as you can imagine. But no areas of Caracas, rich or poor, can escape crime.
Here's a typical routine: when you stop at a gas station or at a pharmacy, they break into your car at gunpoint. Then, they take you to the closest ATM and withdraw as much of your money as they can. Next, they take you home and they put everything that is of value in the car. When they're done, they put you back in the car and they drive off to a remote place where, if you're lucky, they simply kick you out, so that you have a long walk to the nearest phone. If you're unlucky, they simply shoot you there. They also break into houses regularly. It's truly horrible. You cannot experience that situation while you read about Venezuela online. There was crime before Chavez too (it started in the 80's), but he's had over 10 years to do something about it and instead, it's blown completely out of proportions. The police contribute to crime as well. It's like a mafia.
And I disagree with you on that: the government is indeed responsible for curbing crime in a country. If they don't at least help alleviate the problem, it means they're probably doing something wrong. That's one of the reasons why Chavez's party lost in Caracas -- although in the end, the votes had no effect on the outcome of the elections.
3) Regarding the elections: You're right, Chavez won the presidential elections in 2006. But as I said, in the more recent regional elections, Chavez (despite winning in overall numbers) lost the most populated cities in the country, including the capital. You can read about it on Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venezuelan_regional_elections,_2008
In Caracas, he even lost in Petare, one of the poorest areas in the country. And that speaks volumes. But instead of letting the newly-elected mayor of Caracas run the city, which was clearly the will of the people, he installed a new figure who is above the mayor. This new mayor's boss controls the city's budget, the police and most of the duties that the mayor should be responsible for. That is unconsitutional. How would you react if the candidate that you voted for as mayor won, but the president, Supreme Court and Congress (all from the president's party) installed a new person from their party, leaving your candidate as a lame duck figure, with no real power? What would happen for example if, having McCain lost the elections, the Supreme Court had nevertheless installed Sarah Palin as Obama's boss? That would have more than raised some eyebrows, wouldn't it? Look at what happened when Bush did his best to sabotage the recount in 2000: it's considered a low point in American politics. But it seems fine when worse things happen in South America, south of the border, because it's tropical and it's messy down there anyway.
See what I mean? I understand that you're for the poor, and that you wish to see Chavez as the people's president. But nowadays, a lof of people who are behind him have become enormously rich as well. There are a lot of Chavista 'nouveaux riches'. Just to give you a sense, it became a huge trend for Chavistas to buy luxurious hummers, to the point that Chavez had to scold them in his radio program, because they were embarrassing the revolution... One governor from Chavez's party complained, "Why should revolutionary people not have the right to buy a hummer or a car? If we earn enough and we can afford it, what's the problem? Is it a matter of exclusivity?" Not so long ago, one Chavista mayor who is very close to Chavez was wearing a gold rolex as he criticized the rich on TV. There's a lot of hypocrisy. It's not as black and white as one would think... (Ever heard of Animal Farm?)
After my grandmother passed away, her house was bought by a governor from Chavez's party. What's curious about it is that he never went to see the house in person... Instead, he had some people who work for him go, check it out, do the bargaining and seal the deal. It is rumored that he was buying so many houses that he didn't have the time to go see each one in person. Anyway, who buys a house without first taking a look at it?
Power corrupts, especially in a country where corruption is a way of life.
Here's an interesting article from the New York Times (not exactly a bastion of right-wing journalism):
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/21/world/americas/21venez.html?fta=y
reply
share
Cat_2026
15 years ago
Chamo no te des mala vida por la gente ignorante y ciega que no tienen idea de lo que hablan, ignoralos, parece que solo buscan atencion... Uno sabe en la realidad en la que vive y como escribiste que se puede esperar de alguien que ni siquiera puede tener una conversacion civilizada en un forum...
Saludos y por cierto muy buenos post!
reply
share
malingenie
15 years ago
Guys I agree with Hugo Chavez making Venezuela a *beep* place. I was born there and lived up to his 'lol' second term. But I need some eveidence that Chavez funded this film. I hear it thrown about and I can't believe it. If it was a fact, wouldn't it be all over the news? And if so, Oliver Stone became nothing more than a $2 ho.
Too weird to live, to rare to die
reply
share
nihilvor
15 years ago
Thanks for balancing the discussion. The knee jerk reaction against Chavez (although I do have some respect for those who are actually in Venezuela and object for their reasons) ignores much of the history of the country and region and what is actually happening on the ground.
The issue of the freedom of the press in Venezuela comes up a lot, and, after the coup, freedoms have been curtailed. However, their press was actually freer than the press in the U.S., which not only gets restricted in its coverage of conflicts--its message very well-managed by the government, it is also much more corpratized than Venezuelian press. Because Chavez is a bombastic personality, it's easy to characterize him as a vilan in U.S. media. Stone's film offers a different view. I doubt it gets everything right, but it may help level some of the debate.
reply
share
nihilvor
15 years ago
BTW., I meant "coup attempt," which was encouraged and celebrated in some media there. In the U.S. the same thing would have happened if certain channels celebrated an attack on our president. There is a process whereby broadcast liscences can be revoked, just as in Venezuela.
reply
share
birthdaynoodle
15 years ago
I'm no big fan of the Venezuelan media in general. The government's TV channels and news websites only say nice things about Chavez. And the opposition's only show bad news and present the president in a negative light.
Mind you, part of the opposition gives me a stomachache. There are big mouths on both sides of the spectrum.
But not all the media celebrated the brief coup against Chavez. And yet, any journalist who is critical of the government becomes the target of vandals and violent militias that support the president. They attack journalists on the street, break into their offices and hurt people, destroy equipment, etc. The government doesn't do anything about it, so they are complicit. This sort of thing never happened in Venezuela before. It's pretty scary.
Chavez is threatening to close the most outspoken opposition channel, among other reasons, because they once reported on a small earthquake (a tremor) before the government did. So they claim that this was gravely irresponsible. Meanwhile, the militia that broke into the headquarters of that TV channel, with tear gas and what not, are free to do as they wish. Personally, I don't like that TV channel (just like I don't like Fox news), but I think it's not a good sign that the president can simply close it if he feels like it.
I posted another message regarding the media, which includes links to photos of peaceful journalists being attacked on the street ("regarding the media"):
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1337137/board/flat/147029039?d=147029039#147029039
I was actually optimistic about Chavez when he started, but it's increasingly evident that he's more interersted in staying indefinitely in power than he is in helping the country move forward.
reply
share
birthdaynoodle
15 years ago
The knee jerk reaction against Chavez (although I do have some respect for those who are actually in Venezuela and object for their reasons) ignores much of the history of the country and region and what is actually happening on the ground.
I agree with you on this, nihilvor. Part of the opposition don't want to recognize that they're also to blame for the current situation. Ironically, that part of the opposition's classism and racism are the president's strongest weapons.
I think it will take a long time for Venezuela to heal. The country needs a uniter, someone who is willing to help the people while taming the radicals -- perhaps someone closer to the center, like Brazil's Lula.
reply
share