 |
EnMasse
This place is all that is left.
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
DSquared
aka Aristotleded24
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 5570
Location: Winnipeg
|
 Posted: Sat Apr 02, 2011 9:56 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Metropolitan Police of Caracas to be disbanded:
| Quote: | On Wednesday Venezuela authorities formally announced the disbanding of the Metropolitan Police of Caracas (MP), paving the way for the newly-established National Bolivarian Police (PNB) to take over operations in the nation’s capital. Minister for Justice and Internal Affairs Tareck El Aissami, whose ministry is responsible for running the new national police force, made the announcement yesterday, adding that a total 730 million BsF was approved on Monday to pay all pending debts owed to the soon disbanded officers.
Speaking at the 2nd Meeting of Western Regional Policing Forces in Maracaibo, state of Zulia, Aissami elaborated on the content of the government’s Gaceta Oficial 39.644 published early Wednesday morning – the Metropolitan Police of Caracas will cease to exist within 90 days, with all current and former staff guaranteed their rights as workers, ending another phase in government efforts to consolidate all 134 police forces nationwide into one, national police force with standardized practices and equipment.
According to the Minister, all members of MP Caracas (officers, workers, and administrators) who wish to continue working in public service are guaranteed employment at the Ministry, with active duty officers expected to be incorporated into the National Bolivarian Police, or PNB. |
_________________
This is pre-eminently the time, to speak the truth, the whole truth, frankly and boldly. Let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself-Franklin Delano Roosevelt |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
A_J
Fulltime enMasse Member
Joined: 20 Feb 2008
Posts: 362
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 1:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TS. wrote: | | Senor Magoo wrote: | | "Implicit subsidy" just means the difference between their price and market price, applied to units consumed. It's implicit because it's not a case of the government writing every citizen a cheque to help with their gas bill; it's just the lost revenues due to the low price fix. |
That doesn't make it an "implicit subsidy". The price difference must be caused by something, somehow. |
Think of it this way - it's popular to decry tax cuts (that is, tax revenue forgone by the government) as a "hand out" to whomever benefits by paying less taxes. The government could tax corporations at 18%, but because Harper has instead reduced the rate to 16.5% (and committed to a further reduction to 15%), this is characterised as a multi-billion dollar "gift", "hand out" or even "subsidy" to corporate tax payers.
Similarly, the government of Venezuela could charge the going market rate for gasoline, but instead it chooses to sell it at a sharply reduced price, foregoing billions of dollars in revenue and, in essence, giving that money to the poor and downtrodden drivers.
| Rufus Polson wrote: | | It didn't suggest a market price . . . |
With a barrel of crude oil selling for over $100, that would suggest that a bare-minimum, un-subsidised price for gasoline of at least $2.50 a gallon.
| Rufus Polson wrote: | | . . . didn't mention the actual price . . . |
I've seen this figure of $0.12 a gallon reported in several places.
_________________
| John Stuart Mill in On Liberty wrote: | | He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rufus Polson
Purple Library Guy
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 3483
Location: SFU and/or the college of Riddlemastery at Caithnard
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 10:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So such things as a market price and an actual price do both exist--just not on the blog you cited. I don't recall claiming that they didn't.
In more interesting news, the Japanese nuclear reactor troubles (which are still ongoing and perhaps even worsening even though the headlines have largely left them behind) have convinced Chavez to change one policy he had that I definitely disagreed with:
Venezuela’s Chavez Halts Nuclear Energy Program following Japan Crisis
| Quote: | “What has been taking place in the last few hours represents an enormous risk and threat to the entire world,” said Chávez late Tuesday evening.
“Even with all of the great technology and advances that the Japanese have…just look at what is happening with some of those nuclear reactors,” he said . . .
Chávez said Japan’s ongoing nuclear crisis would affect the development of nuclear energy programs worldwide. “There is no doubt whatsoever that this has altered, and will alter in a very strong way, all planning for nuclear energy across the globe,” he said.
“For the time being,” Chávez said, “I have ordered the Vice President [and Minister of Energy Rafael] Ramírez to put a freeze on the plans we have been advancing, the very preliminary studies related to Venezuela’s peaceful nuclear energy program.” |
Another interesting event whose impact will be unfolding over the years to come, the disbanding of Caracas' local police forces:
| Quote: | | On Wednesday Venezuela authorities formally announced the disbanding of the Metropolitan Police of Caracas (MP), paving the way for the newly-established National Bolivarian Police (PNB) to take over operations in the nation’s capital. |
Crime has always been a major problem for the Chavez government. One of its major responses has been the inauguration of a new national police force--an answer that might leave many Canadians cynical, given our experience lately with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. The point seems to be, however, that with a new force they can start from scratch, implement professional and human rights standards and so forth. Also, that the various existing forces are so thoroughly corrupt that attempting to reform them is likely to be a doomed exercise.
There is also a political dimension to the matter--existing municipal police forces have tended to favour the opposition and have gotten involved in violence against government supporters, trade unionists and so on over the years; some have accused them also of being a major driver of the very crime which makes the Chavez government look bad and the state less stable. It's certainly been odd that as poverty and unemployment have declined, violence seems not to have followed. Chavez may quite simply be getting rid of a group of paramilitary forces that tend to favour his opponents, and replacing them with a paramilitary force which is more likely to favour him, or at least the revolution. The opposition is likely to strongly oppose this move and consider it illegitimate on that political basis. It would be easier to sympathize if the existing police forces weren't so widely agreed to be utterly useless and indeed generally counterproductive.
What's new in this piece is not the creation of the national police force, which has been building for some time, but the disbanding of the local forces in Caracas. It's a major new step. Now the new force has to show what they can do: Will they be an improvement? Will they respect human rights more? Will they work with community organizations? Will they have any impact on violent crime?
If it works, it will be significantly strengthen Chavez's government--it will blunt criticism on perhaps the biggest weakness he's had, policy-wise. And it will significantly strengthen the regime structurally, making it harder to destabilize. Even if it doesn't do all that much it's probably a net positive for him as long as it doesn't melt down and prove worse than the existing police, which would require being pretty dashed bad. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DSquared
aka Aristotleded24
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 5570
Location: Winnipeg
|
| Posted: Thu May 05, 2011 2:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Election 2012: Chavez at crossroads
| Quote: | A clear victory for Chavez — like the 63% he won in the 2006 elections — would give a powerful mandate to deepen the revolution.
However, the revolutionary forces face two key obstacles.
The first is US imperialism and its local allies in the opposition, who are desperate to get rid of Chavez.
Addressing a mass assembly of workers on April 26, Chavez warned that sections of the opposition dreamed of trying another coup or creating a scenario for a foreign intervention.
“We not only have to win the elections, we also have to impede them from upsetting national peace,” Chavez said.
The second challenge comes from within the revolution. It is the danger represented by the bureaucratism and corruption undermining the self-organisation and motivation of the poor and working people that make up the revolution’s base.
These weaknesses help explain the declining Chavista vote since 2006. |
_________________
This is pre-eminently the time, to speak the truth, the whole truth, frankly and boldly. Let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself-Franklin Delano Roosevelt |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DSquared
aka Aristotleded24
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 5570
Location: Winnipeg
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 13, 2012 3:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Why are left-wing leaders getting cancer?
| Quote: | Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has questioned whether the US has developed a secret technology to give cancer to left-wing leaders in Latin America.
Treated for cancer this year, Mr Chavez was speaking a day after news that Argentina's president had the disease.
Fernando Lugo of Paraguay, Dilma Rousseff of Brazil and her predecessor Lula have also had cancer.
Mr Chavez said this was "very strange" but stressed that he was thinking aloud rather than making "rash accusations".
But he said the instances of cancer among Latin American leaders were "difficult to explain using the law of probabilities".
"Would it be strange if they had developed the technology to induce cancer and nobody knew about it?" Mr Chavez asked in a televised speech to soldiers at an army base. |
_________________
This is pre-eminently the time, to speak the truth, the whole truth, frankly and boldly. Let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself-Franklin Delano Roosevelt |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senor Magoo
He's got a big one
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 8700
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 13, 2012 3:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
How does one say "chemtrails" in Spanish?
_________________
ř¤°`°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°`°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°°¤ř, |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
A_J
Fulltime enMasse Member
Joined: 20 Feb 2008
Posts: 362
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2012 12:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The opposition have selected their candidate for October's presidential election:
| The Guardian wrote: | Henrique Capriles to face Hugo Chávez in Venezuela presidential election
A youthful state governor is set to give Hugo Chávez a tough battle for Venezuela's presidency after sweeping the opposition nomination in primary elections.
Henrique Capriles, 39, crushed four rivals in a nationwide landslide after styling himself as the candidate with the best chance of unseating Chávez in October's presidential election.
. . .
With the vote 95% complete on Sunday night, Capriles had won 1.8m of 2.9m votes, more than double his nearest challenger. Just as important as his margin, said analysts, was the unexpectedly high turnout for a primary, showing the opposition base was mobilised and itching to take on Chávez. There are around 18 million registered voters in Venezuela.
. . .
The former tank commander has dismissed the opposition as "oligarchs" and "US imperialist lackeys" who take orders from Washington and plan to destroy the advances of what he terms a 21st-century socialist revolution. He suggested he would not debate his rival for the presidency: "An eagle does not hunt flies." |
And the government and state-media have responded . . .
| MSNBC wrote: | Chavez allies attack new opponent Capriles as Jewish, gay
Allies of President Hugo Chavez are bombarding Venezuela's newly anointed opposition leader Henrique Capriles with attacks, questioning his sexuality, disparaging his Jewish roots and casting doubt on the legitimacy of the primary vote.
. . .
With Chavez himself uncharacteristically quiet, senior officials and state media have led the attack, denouncing Capriles -- a 39-year-old state governor who wants to be Venezuela's youngest leader -- as "bourgeois" and "fascist."
. . .
Capriles -- the grandson of Jews who survived the World War Two Holocaust in Poland -- defines himself as a center-left "progressive" who admires Brazil's "modern left" model of free-market economics with a strong social conscience.
. . .
The most furious accusations have come from state media commentator Mario Silva, who often targets Chavez's foes on his late night TV show, "The Razorblade."
Silva insulted opposition leaders and then read out a purported police document reporting Capriles was caught in a car having sex with another man in 2000.
Capriles denied the allegation and said the document was falsified. Police have not commented.
Another state radio commentator, Adal Hernandez, wrote a vitriolic profile of Capriles, highlighting his Jewish family background and titled: "The Enemy is Zionism." Capriles, a practicing Catholic, has not responded to the profile.
One cartoon, retweeted on Wednesday by a senior Chavez aide, showed Capriles in pink shorts with a Swastika on his arm, squaring up to a much larger, muscular Chavez. He often talks emotionally of his grandparents' escape from Nazi repression. |
. . . As well as President Chavez himself:
| The Guardian wrote: | Hugo Chávez calls opposition candidate a 'low-life pig'
President Hugo Chávez on Thursday called the opposition's presidential candidate a "low-life pig", signalling a caustic start to Venezuela's election campaign.
The socialist leader vowed to crush Henrique Capriles in October's vote, branding him an agent of imperialism and oligarchy hiding behind a mask of moderation.
"Now we have the loser, welcome! We're going to pulverise you," he told an audience of medical students. "You have a pig's tail, a pig's ears, you snort like a pig, you're a low-life pig. You're a pig, don't try and hide it." He avoided calling Capriles by name, referring instead to "el majunche", slang for "the crappy one".
The speech, which all radio and television stations were obliged to broadcast live, followed Capriles's victory last Sunday in opposition primaries. The state governor won almost two-thirds of 3m votes cast, a higher than expected turnout which jolted the government. |
_________________
| John Stuart Mill in On Liberty wrote: | | He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senor Magoo
He's got a big one
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 8700
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 2:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think Stephen Harper should be allowed exclusive free use of the CBC for campaigning.
_________________
ř¤°`°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°`°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°°¤ř, |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Slumberjack
Fulltime enMasse Member
Joined: 13 Jul 2010
Posts: 923
Location: squelch~~big waves and high smiles from the stomach and intestine of capital.
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 3:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Senor Magoo wrote: | | I think Stephen Harper should be allowed exclusive free use of the CBC for campaigning. |
It's called the "At Issue" panel, a regular feature of its flagship news program, The National. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senor Magoo
He's got a big one
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 8700
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 3:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
But the CBC regularly says positive things about other parties.
Sheesh. Some totalitarian you'd make.
_________________
ř¤°`°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°`°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°°¤ř, |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bshmr
Fulltime enMasse Member
Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 4004
Location: Central USA, Earth
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 6:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Magoo, first you write 'think' when you mean 'fantasize' then you allude to viewing, with understanding, rapid Spanish Venezuelan broadcasts. You must be a true noble oligarch of European descent <g>.
Reminds me of a recent NPR routine castigating Chavez for housing projects, ignoring that Chavez's regime has done more tor literacy, housing, equality, voting tights, ... than centuries of rule by noble oligarchs of European descent. One only needs to peak at some Mary-Mount or Mother Jones write-ups to realize the imperialistic USAn propaganda. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senor Magoo
He's got a big one
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 8700
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 6:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Magoo, first you write 'think' when you mean 'fantasize' then you allude to viewing, with understanding, rapid Spanish Venezuelan broadcasts. You must be a true noble oligarch of European descent |
Uh, I'm not pretending I speak or understand Spanish. Do you believe that Chavez is being misquoted??
| Quote: | | Reminds me of a recent NPR routine castigating Chavez for housing projects, ignoring that Chavez's regime has done more tor literacy, housing, equality, voting tights, ... than centuries of rule by noble oligarchs of European descent. |
I see. So it's either return to rule by foreign nobles, or this guy.
I think that's called a 'false dilemma'.
Maybe this kind of juvenile shit plays well to his crowd. But if you think it's OK then you can hardly blame U.S. politicians who smirk with pride when their own Limbaugh's and Hannitys do the same thing.
_________________
ř¤°`°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°`°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°°¤ř, |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bshmr
Fulltime enMasse Member
Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 4004
Location: Central USA, Earth
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 9:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Senor Magoo wrote: | | ... Do you believe that Chavez is being misquoted?? |
Remember the SWC faux incident? Remember the 'coup'? Etc.
| Quote: | I see. So it's either return to rule by foreign nobles, or this guy.
I think that's called a 'false dilemma'. |
You introduced a 'dilemma'; all I intended was to test your memory and your objectivity.
| Quote: | | Maybe this kind of juvenile shit plays well to his crowd. But if you think it's OK then you can hardly blame U.S. politicians who smirk with pride when their own Limbaugh's and Hannitys do the same thing. |
What have they (Limbaugh & Hannity) done besides laugh all the way to THEIR bank; same pretty much applies to those smirking politicians you mentioned as well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ronb
mocker
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 2627
Location: Blackroof country, no gold pavement, tired starling
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2012 2:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | How does one say "chemtrails" in Spanish? |
That's how you say it in Russian. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senor Magoo
He's got a big one
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 8700
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2012 2:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ah, so perhaps Ukranian officials poisoned Chavez?
_________________
ř¤°`°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°`°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°°¤ř, |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senor Magoo
He's got a big one
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 8700
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2012 4:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Remember the SWC faux incident? Remember the 'coup'? Etc. |
No, not really.
But I'll ask again: do you believe that Chavez is being misquoted?
| Quote: | | What have they (Limbaugh & Hannity) done besides laugh all the way to THEIR bank |
That and basically conduct a slimy smear campaign against any non-Republican candidate or representative. I'm thinking that when Venezuela's state-run media basically accuses a candidate of being a gay Zionist Jew then they're taking a page from the very worst of American politics. At least Bush could claim that he doesn't control Fox News.
_________________
ř¤°`°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°`°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°°¤ř, |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Erik Redburn
Fulltime enMasse Member
Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 463
Location: In Transit.
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Fox news exists to serve the Republican party Magoo. Or rather the Republican party as it has devolved as faithful servant of billionaire media owners like Rupert Murdoch.
To answer your question directly, I don't know if he actually uttered those comments. None of us do. I don't believe Chavez is a saint, but a politician who has displayed authoritarian tendencies before and done a few stupid things. So yes I wouldn't be totally shocked if he did make at least some of these comments. Or his 'allies' on 'state-run' tv. But considering the fiercely vindictive, kneejerk, and often over-the-top opposition he's faced from the "independant" Venezuelan media, I'm not going to write him off just yet as an anti-corporate ally, as stories like this are designed to affect.
I am also somewhat suspicious of the source, given its comparitive portrayal of his latest "pro-business" rival as a 'moderate', and its failure to even mention previous attempts by his 'democratic' rivals to not only defeat but imprison him and dismantle everything he's built. Mike Harris, Gordon Campbell and Stephen Harper were all successfully sold as fiscally "moderates" to many small l Liberals by our own media watch-dogs, before they brought out the battle-axes and torches.
_________________
The time to move is now. Always has been. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ronb
mocker
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 2627
Location: Blackroof country, no gold pavement, tired starling
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 1:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Ah, so perhaps Ukranian officials poisoned Chavez? |
That'd be Russians Magoo. Yushenko was the Ukrainian nationalist, his poisoners were the ethnic Russians in the Ukraine including the Russian head of the Ukrainian Secret Police, who then fled to Russia where he now lives - it was Russia going to extreme lengths to keep the Ukraine in their sphere. Like Chavez is claiming the US might be doing. It happens. How many poisoning attempts has the CIA made on Castro? Your hand waving doesn't change the context, it is not the least bit improbable that the US would try to covertly eliminate Latin American socialists - hell sometimes they just flat out shoot them when they can get away with it, as Allende.
See, if there were no context - for instance that Chavez himself had recently avoided Allende's fate only by the good fortune that his would-be killers sent the wrong military assassins - then Chavez might seem a bit unhinged. But Venezuelans are well aware that the US has no scruples whatsoever when it comes to securing Latin American resources for their own designs. So his musings actually seem somewhat probable.
Honestly, if they would stoop to orchestrating a coup, what would stop them from poison, it's not as if this is unheard of in recent history... Yushenko... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senor Magoo
He's got a big one
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 8700
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 2:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm not laughing at the idea of the CIA doing harm to Chavez; that's not farfetched.
But the idea that there's some kind of "super-roofie" that can be slipped into your drink to give you some kind of random cancer is pretty ascientific, and frankly, paranoid.
I know that there are compounds that can increase your chances of contracting some specific cancers (e.g. bladder cancer) and we all know that there are substances all around us that can increase your chances of developing some non-specific cancer at some point in your lifetime, but the idea that the CIA (or whomever) can simply choose to "give someone cancer"? Srsly.
_________________
ř¤°`°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°`°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°°¤ř, |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senor Magoo
He's got a big one
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 8700
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 2:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | I am also somewhat suspicious of the source, given its comparitive portrayal of his latest "pro-business" rival as a 'moderate', and its failure to even mention previous attempts by his 'democratic' rivals to not only defeat but imprison him and dismantle everything he's built. |
Unless this individual was one of those democratic rivals, why should they? By opposing Chavez, is he suddenly a partner in their ventures?
| Quote: | | To answer your question directly, I don't know if he actually uttered those comments. None of us do. |
Of course. We weren't there and we (or at least I) don't speak Spanish, so there's no way anyone can possibly know.
The problem is, if we go that route then we really can't ever discuss international politics, can we? We weren't there, so therefore it's all a giant riddle that will never be answered.*
*Except if Chavez says something really noteworthy, in which case we CAN know, right?
_________________
ř¤°`°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°`°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°°¤ř, |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ronb
mocker
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 2627
Location: Blackroof country, no gold pavement, tired starling
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 5:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I am pretty suspicious of most reporting about Venezuela, just based anecdotally on some Chileans I know who say the reports we get are quite different than what is reported in the Spanish language press.
MSNBC claims Chavez did something... now why would they do that I wonder. And their retraction, if there is one, happens where?
As for cancer causing roofies, in cycling, doping is usually at least 5 years ahead of the technology that can detect it. Science fiction? Maybe. So was Dick Tracy's watch, and now I own one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Slumberjack
Fulltime enMasse Member
Joined: 13 Jul 2010
Posts: 923
Location: squelch~~big waves and high smiles from the stomach and intestine of capital.
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 5:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I don't know about all of this media cynicism, especially when they've been so bang on the mark for decades...like when the Iraqi's were taking Kuwaiti babies out of their incubators, and then went on to buy up all the Nigerian yellowcake they could lay hands on, and Iran is ever so close to going full nuke, just like they were 10 to 15 years ago, and like how the people in Gaza had it all coming to them anyway. And its not the bankers, it's those lazy Greeks and European socialism causing all the trouble. I mean after all that, I'm inclined to treat every sheet they do on Chavez like it was gospel handed down out of a celestial burning bush. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senor Magoo
He's got a big one
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 8700
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 8:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Unless this individual was one of those democratic rivals, why should they? By opposing Chavez, is he suddenly a partner in their ventures? |
Hate to quote myself, but it appears that he was, years ago, found guilty of some kind of coup-plotting. That said, I read this in the news, so it's not like there's a conspiracy to hide this. And in that regard, he and Chavez would probably be good company for each other, if they weren't ideologically opposed.
| Quote: | | I don't know about all of this media cynicism, especially when they've been so bang on the mark for decades |
If EM were to institute a moratorium on quoting any third party media on these grounds then we'd have a bit of trouble having facts to discuss, but if it were consistent I suppose I could live with it.
Thing is, if "the Media" says something people believe, or that they want to believe, suddenly we can trust them (evidently) which is pretty obvious nonsense. Either they're untrustworthy and should never be quoted, or else we should go ahead and operate on the provisional assumption that they're not lying until we have some proof that they are. But this shouldn't depend on whether we personally like what they're saying.
_________________
ř¤°`°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°`°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°°¤ř, |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Slumberjack
Fulltime enMasse Member
Joined: 13 Jul 2010
Posts: 923
Location: squelch~~big waves and high smiles from the stomach and intestine of capital.
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 8:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Senor Magoo wrote: | | Either they're untrustworthy and should never be quoted, or else we should go ahead and operate on the provisional assumption that they're not lying until we have some proof that they are. But this shouldn't depend on whether we personally like what they're saying. |
There's no need to extend any provision at all when they haven't earned it, except to presume that each and every time they speak they're re-measuring our eyes for another fitting of wool. How many decades do we really have to go back and examine to realize they've acted too often as mere stenographers to a specific agenda at best, or were an active part of various disinformation campaigns designed to assist in swaying public opinion towards a specific end, usually involving geopolitical corporate profit motives. I think it should be clear to any casual observer that US and Canadian 'journalism' doesn't like Chavez very much, just as it's clear, and coincidental I'm sure, that he isn't particularly well thought of in North American corporate circles. But we only ever hear the brimstone stuff and not anything to do with how his government's program serves the people that voted for him. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Erik Redburn
Fulltime enMasse Member
Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 463
Location: In Transit.
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 8:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Youre trying to pin a tail on a donkey that doesn't exist Mr. Magoo. I wrote already that I don't like everything that Chavez has said or done, so 'I wouldn't be shocked' if he is in fact using over-the-top invective against his latest rival. Maybe past experience might have something to do with it. OTOH it could be complete bs, as past experience has also shown.
What you're skimming right past is my main point -that this broader context is notably absent (not something that's actually denied by less Chavez friendly sources, just dismissed as irelevant) -a context which puts in question the acceptence of his present opponent being a 'left-leaning moderate' and therefore the 'independence' of their private media which only seems to run anti-Chavez material. The very fact that Chavez still allows private media and private interests kinda runs against the common assumption that he's just anther communist dictator -elected or not.
The Guardian has done some good work exposing stories and systemic injustice that more establishment media rarely touch anymore. Unfortunately I have detected drift to the right last couple years (compare most their present stories Re Israel-Palestine to their previous, eg) and like most other post-FOX 'progressive' sources they are almost as hostile to unapologetic socialists as unapologetic conservatives are. (Hello Jon Stewart)
I'd like to dig deeper into his latest rivals' left-of-centre' creds.
_________________
The time to move is now. Always has been. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Erik Redburn
Fulltime enMasse Member
Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 463
Location: In Transit.
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 8:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Slumberjack wrote: | | But we only ever hear the brimstone stuff and not anything to do with how his government's program serves the people that voted for him. |
That's just it, its ALWAYS a very negative picture of him being broadcast, even in supposedly liberal-left press, often based on nothing but some $te department release. I bet I can easily find less than moderate interests funding this latest challenger, for less than progressive reasons, something most 'journalists' no longer seem capable of doing.
_________________
The time to move is now. Always has been. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senor Magoo
He's got a big one
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 8700
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 9:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Can we count on the alternative press to be any more balanced? I'm sure they're happy to talk about social programs funded by the Chavez government, for example, but do they make proper note of these programs being emphasized prior to an election, and how this amounts to the government wooing the electorate with its own money?
Or will we only hear "Socialism, Si!"?
Gasoline in Venezuela is subsidized to the point of being cheaper than potatoes. Does the alternative press regard this as an environmental catastrophe? Or proof that Chavez loves his people?
_________________
ř¤°`°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°`°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°°¤ř, |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Erik Redburn
Fulltime enMasse Member
Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 463
Location: In Transit.
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 10:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Why do you always assume the left must be just as 'biased' as the right on every issue? Or that every 'bias' is the same? Since you like arguing by analogy let me openly declare that I am biased towards helping the poor; but I recognise that others are biased towards helping the rich or maybe just themselves. Are they the same?
_________________
The time to move is now. Always has been. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senor Magoo
He's got a big one
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 8700
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 11:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Why do you always assume the left must be just as 'biased' as the right on every issue? |
Is there a reason why I shouldn't? Are they just born more honest, more virtuous, and more willing to be transparent (warts and all) than the right?
| Quote: | | Since you like arguing by analogy let me openly declare that I am biased towards helping the poor; but I recognise that others are biased towards helping the rich or maybe just themselves. Are they the same? |
I don't believe that all biases are identical, but I tend to see political biases as more or less the same, insofar as there's no "right" and "wrong" to appeal to in politics. Being moderate is not, de facto, worse than being a socialist.
Let me also note that you're acknowledging your bias. If the Venezuelan state media wanted to be similarly transparent and say "hey, we're going to say or do whatever we have to to get Chavez re-elected" then it would be a different story. But insofar as we're now discussing "who to believe" then I don't think anyone's dishonesty is whitewashed by ostensibly good intentions or whatever.
_________________
ř¤°`°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°`°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°°¤ř, |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Erik Redburn
Fulltime enMasse Member
Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 463
Location: In Transit.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Slumberjack
Fulltime enMasse Member
Joined: 13 Jul 2010
Posts: 923
Location: squelch~~big waves and high smiles from the stomach and intestine of capital.
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 11:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Senor Magoo wrote: | | Can we count on the alternative press to be any more balanced? I'm sure they're happy to talk about social programs funded by the Chavez government, for example, but do they make proper note of these programs being emphasized prior to an election, and how this amounts to the government wooing the electorate with its own money? Or will we only hear "Socialism, Si!"? Gasoline in Venezuela is subsidized to the point of being cheaper than potatoes. Does the alternative press regard this as an environmental catastrophe? Or proof that Chavez loves his people? |
It is their own money and resources after all, administered by a government elected by popular vote; a point that gets left off of most reports interpreted to us by the MSM. We have an oil based global economy where the commodity price on the markets governs the cost of practically every other commodity, including food production. Subsidies here have a ripple effect throughout the entire economy, and when one is looking to alleviate general impoverishment, because that is what the average Venezuelan struggled with under previous regimes, it makes sense to target subsidies at specific areas that will have the most impact. The environmental catastrophe is everywhere, mostly the result of western capitalist countries, not just in Venezuela. You can better understand the bad temper of the global oil oligarchy, the financial capitalists and their media outlets in the context of Venezuela when you understand that gasoline subsidies makes everything comparatively cheaper for the average citizen, especially when other inflationary controls are applied to essentials. Across an entire economy it means less profit extraction. It flys in the face of maximizing productivity for profit, which in capitalist speak gets translated into a relentless narrative designed to remove obstacles to productivity. Take your average call center where they time how long it takes for everyone to urinate, where if someone develops a habit of taking a few minutes longer than they should it usually serves as cause for dismissal. They should be on the phone selling something...they're not being as productive as the next person. The same template applies to every country where capitalism considers that it owns the resources everywhere by right, where the unproductive factory managers...which is what national leaders are to them, simply must be replaced by someone who will promise a better bang for the buck, at the expense of the respective populations. This is what the media does...it assists corporatism with laying the groundwork for the dismissal of uncooperative or unproductive workers and managers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ronb
mocker
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 2627
Location: Blackroof country, no gold pavement, tired starling
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 6:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | If EM were to institute a moratorium on quoting any third party media on these grounds then we'd have a bit of trouble having facts to discuss, but if it were consistent I suppose I could live with it. |
How about we just use our innate wisdom to parse the bias - there's not a single kind word to be said about Chavez in the English language MSM - in fact he's a dictator if you ask most people who rely exclusively on the Globe and the NYT for their information. Let's see, he's a democratically elected, and re-elected socialist president of an OPEC member. I wonder what the subtext is?
Personally, I take these things on a by-case basis. When it comes to whether Demi moore is doing whippets, well, sure... but "Evil Commie dictator crushes all dissent and is an anti-semite too boot..." yeah, I'm going to assume that's on the lying for big oil side of the ledger until I see a whole lot more corroboration. Colour me unconvinced. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Erik Redburn
Fulltime enMasse Member
Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 463
Location: In Transit.
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2012 7:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ok Mr. Magoo, I get what you're saying, but I'm not sure you're getting me. You seem to be assuming that I'm arguing that the nobility of our proclaimed intentions count more than the plain 'truth', and therefore the ends justify the means. I'm not, I'm trying to say that everyone has political biases (though they vary OC depending on the issue, circumstance or even our moods) but not all biases are equal.
Some are not only more virtuous than others as ideals, (serving the poor rather than the rich) but they might also reflect more genuine needs. Some 'biases' may even be less biased than others, reflecting the reality of different needs more closely. If that is so then there is no conflict between our values and the 'truth'' of them. Therefore some biases can also be more open ended in action and play a bit more fairly with others, not having to rely so much on misdirection, denial or popular prejudices.
The poor by definition probably need more government assistance than you or I, but the rich by definition do not. The rich by definition probably need even less than me and you, and might even become a threat to us in ways the poor cannot, therefore it makes more sense to support politicians who serve the needs of the poor than the ambitions of the rich. (the rich can easily serve their own needs) The very rich unfortunately can buy and control mass media, unlike anyone else anymore, and have spent the last generation or so convincing the 'moderate' centre that in fact our relative lots in life reflect our relative virtues, and maybe even our real needs. (welfare destroys incentives, taxbreaks encourage initiative and investment etc etc) And they have succeeded to an amazing degree. At least in the convincing part; the observable impact on our society has been pretty much as the left has warned.
None of that means that lefties are more 'virtuous' personally than 'moderates', and certainly doesn't mean anyone is 'born' that way. That's never been my point.
When it comes to international politics I do lower my standards somewhat, given that all the players are playing in a much nastier and even more unequal arena, where history can't be ignored and consequences can be alot more lethal to alot more people. Whether those ugly statements were actually made by Chavez or his supporters are, I admit, secondary to me to the reality of whether Venezuelan oil will continue to benefit the majority of Venezuelans, not Exxon-Mobil or BP. I don't believe Exxon-Mobil or BP are really concerned about fair play or popular prejudice either. I also have my suspicions about the sources covering this, and their obvious bias towards his supposedly moderate opponent.
I'd like to look at bit closer at him too.
_________________
The time to move is now. Always has been. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Erik Redburn
Fulltime enMasse Member
Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 463
Location: In Transit.
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2012 11:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
From the Reuters link I posted:
Here are some of the main policy views of a man who defines himself as a center-left follower of the business-friendly but socially conscious Brazilian economic model.
OIL
* Capriles has denied the opposition wants to privatize state oil company PDVSA as some Chavez officials have said. He has insisted the vast energy enterprise will remain in government hands if he wins power. He has, however, vowed that PDVSA will be "de-politicized" with the replacement of politically-aligned managers by the best professionals available.
* Like the government, Capriles wants the OPEC nation to hike oil production to fund development. But beyond talking about wooing more foreign investment and accelerating projects in the huge Orinoco Belt, he is vague about how to achieve that. He frequently cites Norway as an example of a nation that has used its oil riches properly to diversify the economy.
* Capriles opposes Chavez's decision to pull Venezuela out of the World Bank's ICSID arbitration court where U.S. oil giants Exxon Mobil and ConocoPhillips are seeking billions in compensation for 2007 nationalizations.
* Capriles has said he would not immediately raise the price of gasoline, which for years has been the cheapest in the world due to government subsidies. The subject is a touchy one for Venezuelans who remember the trauma of deadly riots over price hikes in 1989. Capriles has said he would start a debate about the issue with an eye to eventually increasing fuel costs.
NATIONALIZATIONS
* Capriles opposes more nationalizations, but said sweeping takeovers carried out by the Chavez government since 1999 cannot be undone overnight. Rather, he has said each of the hundreds of companies and projects taken over should be studied case-by-case to see if there is justification for returning businesses to private hands or setting up some form of joint ownership with workers.
* Development of the economy, Capriles has said, can only be done when the fear of nationalizations has gone. He cited the failure to develop tourism in Venezuela - despite its extraordinary natural beauty from Caribbean coastlines to Amazon jungle and Andean mountains - as a classic example of the deterrent effect of takeovers. "No one here even wants to build a hostel for tourists ... The owners are scared that a minister will go one day, and he won't like the coffee, and they'll be expropriated."
CURRENCY
* Capriles has said the two-tier currency controls in existence - three-tier if the black market is included - have not achieved their aim of slowing inflation or preventing capital flight. Their removal, however, cannot be rapid and depends on the creation of investor confidence and economic stability under a post-Chavez government, he said.
* All pre-Chavez and Chavez-era debt, whether in local bolivars or foreign currency, would be respected, Capriles said, even though he has criticized the current government for borrowing far more than the nation needs.
SOCIAL POLICIES
* While most opposition candidates have made a point of highlighting crime as Venezuela's main problem, Capriles has made education his flagship policy, pointing to a strong record of opening new schools in his Miranda state. "Proper education is the long-term solution to our crime phenomenon," he said.
* He has applauded Chavez's commitment to building clinics and schools in low-income areas to offer free health services, but said the programs have been chaotically and often corruptly administered. He proposed keeping the best of Chavez's much-vaunted "Missions" for the poor, while administering them better to ensure they really benefit the most needy.
FOREIGN RELATIONS
* Capriles has pledged to prioritize relationships with countries in the Americas and "democratic" nations, as opposed to Chavez's ties with politically-allied governments often far away and with questionable rights records such as Iran or Belarus.
* Despite that, China will remain an essential partner of Venezuela, he vowed. "No one in the world can do without China."
* Capriles sees no need to cut relations with Cuba, where the Chavez government has had a particularly close relationship with the communist government, but ties must be put on a transparent footing. He has implied that the thousands of Cubans in Venezuela - from shantytown doctors to intelligence and security advisers - should be replaced by Venezuelans, and said the country should revise its agreement to supply oil to Cuba on preferential terms. "We will not give away oil to anyone, but neither will we stop selling to anyone."
ARMED FORCES
* Capriles has been guarded on the delicate topic of Venezuela's armed forces. Chavez is a former soldier and has packed the senior ranks with his supporters, especially after a brief, military-led coup against him in 2002.
* Capriles said the vast majority of soldiers simply want a stable, democratic Venezuela, and he believes the armed forces will stand by the result of the October 7 vote, whichever way it goes.
Boldfaced statements are what concern me most. They might sound reasonable if taken at face value, but many are standard vaguaries used to cover more radical neo-liberal agendas.
_________________
The time to move is now. Always has been. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Erik Redburn
Fulltime enMasse Member
Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 463
Location: In Transit.
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 2:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
I've been reading more on this Caprile fellow and, although I've found nothing conclusive, I have to add there's a number of conections that add to my suspicions.
One- he was born a rich kid -sorry but I don't trust rich kids taking up the cause of the poor, even if he was challenging corporate interests rather than fronting for them.
Two- he was accused of organizing anti-Chavez riots in his hometown, and charged. Charges were dropped but the English media just assume it was only a frame up. I see no proof one way or another.
Three -almost every damn English source, including liberal 'progressives'. and more important, supposedly indigenous "American Hemisphere" think-tanks (closely linked to US state department and vested interests) make it clear they still see Chavez as more of a tyrant than those who tried to overthrow him. And that they expect real changes there, if defeated, to make it more 'investor friendly' -the lack of which universally assumed as the cause of their present problems.
Four- the 'new' coalition he's heading still has a lot of the same bad actors involved, some who see Capriles as too moderate. Points for Capriles perhaps but if elected would the moderate wing hold, especially if opening up to foreign trade (ownership) again?
Five -the centre-left hero Lula DeSilva of Brazil he likes to compare himself to, isn't the miracle worker American liberals say. Development of the Amazon is still following the same wasteful trajectory and deforestation has only increased under his watch. The recent economic bump has yet to reach far into the lower classes who elected him. etc. Better than before but hardly a cause for hope.
I don't have anymore time now to provide all the links for this, but if anyone has more questions about any of these I can provide them later. Like I said, I'm not a fan of everything Chavez has done but I still have more faith in his incremental revolution than in the latest supposedly moderate challenger.
_________________
The time to move is now. Always has been. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senor Magoo
He's got a big one
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 8700
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 6:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | It is their own money and resources after all, administered by a government elected by popular vote |
What's the difference between that, and our own Conservative government throwing a bunch of money at some riding where they'd like a win?
| Quote: | | How about we just use our innate wisdom to parse the bias - there's not a single kind word to be said about Chavez in the English language MSM - in fact he's a dictator if you ask most people who rely exclusively on the Globe and the NYT for their information. Let's see, he's a democratically elected, and re-elected socialist president of an OPEC member. I wonder what the subtext is? |
What if we did the same in the left wing press, but substituted Rob Ford? Does the fact that there's not a single kind word to be said still indicate bias?
| Quote: | | Here are some of the main policy views of a man who defines himself as a center-left follower of the business-friendly but socially conscious Brazilian economic model. |
I don't know about you, but personally I'm not seeing any kind of beyond-the-pale evil there. Certainly not enough to warrant this kind of (alleged) smear job, or rather shocking bombast. You have to admit that if our own esteemed leader were to call Nycole Turmel a "low life pig" we'd all unanimously find that repulsive and juvenile.
Here's Chavez giving his speech, for those who believe this is all some kind of lie. I'm not a Spanish translator by trade, but it's not hard to hear the words "cochino" and "majunche". What do you make of it?
_________________
ř¤°`°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°`°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°°¤ř, |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Slumberjack
Fulltime enMasse Member
Joined: 13 Jul 2010
Posts: 923
Location: squelch~~big waves and high smiles from the stomach and intestine of capital.
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 7:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Senor Magoo wrote: | | What's the difference between that, and our own Conservative government throwing a bunch of money at some riding where they'd like a win? |
For starters:
Venezuelan Governing Party Popular Vote: 48.20%
Canadian Governing Party Popular Vote: 39.6%
Slightly more of a mandate I should think. The other thing is that Chavez's vote getting devices usually take the form of broad strokes which affects upon whole sectors of the economy, while in our context as you suggest, cronyism appears to be the primary determinant. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Slumberjack
Fulltime enMasse Member
Joined: 13 Jul 2010
Posts: 923
Location: squelch~~big waves and high smiles from the stomach and intestine of capital.
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 8:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Senor Magoo wrote: | | I don't know about you, but personally I'm not seeing any kind of beyond-the-pale evil there. Certainly not enough to warrant this kind of (alleged) smear job, or rather shocking bombast. You have to admit that if our own esteemed leader were to call Nycole Turmel a "low life pig" we'd all unanimously find that repulsive and juvenile. |
I think they're quite capable of running their own affairs without having to rely on our unsolicited electioneering advice and tips on how to talk to one another. If they started exterminating the opposition as the US has engineered in so many countries, then something like a world court of justice might wish to look in on things. Otherwise, events in Venezuela as they pertain to domestic politics should be left in domestic hands. It's not like they're ringing Canada with warships and military bases after all. Perhaps if they were, we'd be better positioned to inquire as to just what the hell is going on in politically in Venezuela. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
voice of the damned
Fulltime enMasse Member
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 6148
Location: slandered, libeled
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 8:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | For starters:
Venezuelan Governing Party Popular Vote: 48.20%
Canadian Governing Party Popular Vote: 39.6%
Slightly more of a mandate I should think. |
Well, if we're going by popular vote, I guess Rob Ford is more legitimate than Glen Clark of the BC NDP ever was. Ford's numbers were in Chavez territory, whereas Clark's were right down there at Harper levels.
Really. I politely advise all progressives to drop this "phony majority" stuff. You think no one is going to notice that New Democrats only complain about phony majorities when they lose? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
voice of the damned
Fulltime enMasse Member
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 6148
Location: slandered, libeled
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 8:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oh, and here's something I had forgotten...
| Quote: | Although the Liberal Party won a larger share of the popular vote, most of their votes were wasted in the outer regions of the province; they only won eight seats in the Vancouver area. This allowed the NDP to win reelection, eking out a six-seat majority government.
|
So, the party with the most votes actually lost that election. Clark's majority was even phonier than Harper's! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senor Magoo
He's got a big one
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 8700
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 9:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
According to Wikipedia, the breakdown for the 2010 Venezuela General Election was:
So if you look closely you'll see that with only 1.1% more of the popular vote, PSUV somehow managed to get itself 50% more seats.
Once again, for just over ONE PERCENT more popular vote, somehow they got HALF AGAIN as many seats.
That makes Harper's "phony majority" look positively legitimate.
_________________
ř¤°`°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°`°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°°¤ř, |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TS.
Delicious schadenfreude
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 14585
Location: Toronto, ON
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 1:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
How do you figure? With 48.3% of the vote, the PSUV got 57.4% of the seats. With 39.6% of the vote, the CPC got 53.9% of the seats.
Breaking that down, for every 1% of the vote that the PSUV got, they got 1.19% of the seats. For every 1% of the vote that the CPC got, they got 1.36% of the seats.
Conducting the same exercise for the major opposition parties, with 47.2% of the vote, the MUD got 38.3% of the seats. With 30.6% of the vote, the NDP got 33.4% of the seats and with 18.9% of the vote the Liberals got 11.0% of the seats. This means that for every 1% of the vote that the MUD got, they got 0.8% of the seats. For every 1% of the vote that the NDP got, they got 1.09% of the seats. For every 1% of the vote that the Liberals got, they got 0.58% of the seats. Averaging, then, in Venezuela the major opposition party got 0.8% of the seats for every 1% of the vote, while in Canada the major opposition parties got an average of 0.84% of the seats for every 1% of the vote. Basically the same as Venezuela. It means that the electoral system is no better, but not any worse, in Venezuela than in Canada.
_________________
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear." - Thomas Jefferson |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ronb
mocker
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 2627
Location: Blackroof country, no gold pavement, tired starling
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 3:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | What if we did the same in the left wing press, but substituted Rob Ford? Does the fact that there's not a single kind word to be said still indicate bias? |
You're just dithering now. Get back to me when the Globe and the Post start calling Ford a dictator, then you might have a point. Probably not though. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senor Magoo
He's got a big one
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 8700
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 2:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | How do you figure? With 48.3% of the vote, the PSUV got 57.4% of the seats. With 39.6% of the vote, the CPC got 53.9% of the seats.
|
Okay. Maybe it's just that Venezuela is effectively a two party race or something, because that margin -- one percent more vote, 32 more seats -- seemed more extreme than in Canada.
| Quote: | | It means that the electoral system is no better, but not any worse, in Venezuela than in Canada. |
Fair enough.
| Quote: | | Get back to me when the Globe and the Post start calling Ford a dictator, then you might have a point. |
So only if the Globe calls Ford a dictator can there be bias against him in the left wing media??
_________________
ř¤°`°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°`°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°°¤ř,¸_¸,ř¤°°¤ř, |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ronb
mocker
Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 2627
Location: Blackroof country, no gold pavement, tired starling
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 4:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| No, you are selectively screening for the result you want. Chavez is universally mis-described as an unelected tyrant in every major news outlet int North America constantly - and you keep parroting that, in spite of its manifest falsehood, as you just acknowledged. To make your weird comparison you had to invent something called the "left wing" media, as if there is such a thing. Do you mean Now magazine? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
al-Qa'bong
Fulltime enMasse Member
Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 6048
Location: A monistic vulgarity in which nobility and wisdom have been exchanged for a pale belief in progress
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 2:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Back before the Internets, there was a four-page mimeographed pamphlet called Independent Canada that I used to pick up for free at the public library or on campus.
That's about the last time I've read what could be called the "left-wing press." A few of us on community radio might be said to be "left-wing media." I doubt we have much influence on anyone.
_________________
"The purpose of government is to protect the weak from the powerful" Hammurabi
"We can't all be Sam the Sham; some of us have to be Pharoahs" Larry, brother of Darrel, and his other brother Daryl |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bshmr
Fulltime enMasse Member
Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 4004
Location: Central USA, Earth
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 3:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
AQB, Isn't community radio 'big' in Central and South America, certainly in select countries. From what little I have seen (attended presentations on), these can vibrant 'thorns in the sides of the oppressors and parrots'
FYI, I may dig up LeMonde, MotherJones, and MaryMount background pieces on Venezuela, Bolivia, and Columbia -- not that antagonists here would read any OR deviate from propagandized squawking..Chavez has done more for more citizens than the USA and colonists ever did. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lawlibrarian2
Member
Joined: 23 Apr 2009
Posts: 75
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 7:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That's true. Chavez has done a lot, or tried to do a lot, and that is often not reported here.
There are a number of big problems though, some have been alluded to by contributors here.
A big one of course is his marked trend towards personalization of power and his authoritarian streaks. So,no he is not an unelected tyrant, but the Venezuelan system has been called (in Spanish) a system of iperpresidencialismo (hyper-centralized presidential system) with few counterpowers. Thats is not healthy. I work with a lot with people in courts. Chavez has pretty much gutted the independence of the Venezuelan judiciary, one of the foundations of the division of powers in any nominal democratic system, presidential or parliamentary. Not a good sign for the future.
On the policy front, there are also various studies I have read over the years about his economic record. Various economists have done 2 things: 1) compared the record of companies he nationalized before and after nationalization in terms of profits, jobs, tax revenues etc. and 2) compared his record with the record of other Latin American countries.
1) there is not necessarily any marked improvement, but that was the promise
2) there is, among others, an interesting book of essays published in Mexico in 2010 called "Lo que queda de la izquierda: relatos de las izquierdas latinoamericanas" with essays doing things sulike measuring the fall in infant mortality, changes in poverty rates, job creation, education rates, etc. Many countries have done a lot better than Venezuela under Chavez, most notably "moderate" social-democratic left countries like Brazil and even countries like Peru, which has had centrist and moderate centre-left governments. The book calls more radical left countries like Venezuela "populist left" goverments. They just haven't done as well, despite their promises.
So, the big problem for Chavez is explainign why, with all the oil wealth, he has not done as well as he could have, compared to competitor countries or neighbours. The main critiques would be that: yes, he is authoritarian, but most importantly that he has squandered the oil wealth and has underachieved compared to "social democrats" he denounces as evil. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Erik Redburn
Fulltime enMasse Member
Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 463
Location: In Transit.
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Senor Magoo wrote: | | Quote: | How do you figure? With 48.3% of the vote, the PSUV got 57.4% of the seats. With 39.6% of the vote, the CPC got 53.9% of the seats.
|
Okay. Maybe it's just that Venezuela is effectively a two party race or something, because that margin -- one percent more vote, 32 more seats -- seemed more extreme than in Canada.
|
This isn't an uncommon skew in FPTP electoral politics, which is why the Venezuelan corporate class (classic capitalism is almost as endangered as classic communism) is trying to unite behind one challenger. If you look at his previous elections that pattern becomes even clearer. Chavez is still said to hold a commanding lead with about fifty percent support now, but with a larger number of 'uncertains'. There are problems in Venezuela that even 'Bolivarian' politics might have limited affect on.
Either way, its hardly a compelling case for nefarious dictatorial practices, unlike the coup-detat and violent riots organized by the forces still opposing him.
Or the brutal repression of earlier 'pro-American' regimes.
_________________
The time to move is now. Always has been.
Last edited by Erik Redburn on Fri Mar 02, 2012 9:05 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Erik Redburn
Fulltime enMasse Member
Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 463
Location: In Transit.
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 8:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Senor Magoo wrote: |
| Quote: | | Here are some of the main policy views of a man who defines himself as a center-left follower of the business-friendly but socially conscious Brazilian economic model. |
I don't know about you, but personally I'm not seeing any kind of beyond-the-pale evil there. Certainly not enough to warrant this kind of (alleged) smear job, or rather shocking bombast. You have to admit that if our own esteemed leader were to call Nycole Turmel a "low life pig" we'd all unanimously find that repulsive and juvenile.
|
Magoo, from my first post I said it is possible he said some nasty things about his rival. Possible, not proven. I also said we have to consider their historical and geographic context, which is his political rivals posing a genuine threat to not only him but his still popular reforms. Since you enjoy turning others arguments around rhetorical points, we might also fairly suspect that that kind of harsh demonization of ones political rivals might be even more common on the political right. Just look at how the Republican party operates.
Re what his most recent challenger says, its hardly beyond the pale evil, as I said. It does strongly indicate however that he's more concerned about the rights of foreign investors (his supporting the oil industry's law suit against his own country eg) than his own people. It indicates a strong belief in the current global economic order. His comment about replacing the present management of these oil firms with more 'professional' types is a common neo-liberal tract, which assumes that supposedly objective gains are better measured by profit margins, than the content of industrial re-investment and its integration within a larger national plan. Something the private corporate sector has proven not only incompetent at, but shockingly corrupt.
Not proof of malevelance but causes for concern, especially given the current history of 'western' intervention in other competing oil markets, economic, political, as well as military. That's what I mean by context.
_________________
The time to move is now. Always has been. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Voting Centre
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Front Page
Links
Acceptable Use Policy
Donate
Today's Active Topics