President Hugo Chavez dead at 58

[GhostWriter16]

FDR was more evil than Obama, yes. Bush and Obama is kind of a toss up as to which one was/is more evil.

I want Calvin back... Or better yet, Grover Cleveland.

 

[Patroklos]

It's pretty fitting tha the Admiral-General is a dictator worshiper.

 

[King Kalmah]

Anyone else amazed that Castro is STILL alive....

I mean Castro might just outlive us all....

 

[innonimatu]

Friend of the working man.

Criminal Justice International Associates (CJIA), a risk assessment and global analysis firm in Miami,

niff said.

Actually I may as well say something, this keeps popping up and it is so stupid that it becomes infuriating. A variant of the old "Castro have been stealing money!" without any evidence whatsoever. Because people how have always led what can only be called a spartan life just wanted to hand over a few billion to some banker abroad , right?

The tin-pot dictators at least built themselves palaces. The military dictators stole to finance their exiles when the inevitable downfall came. But what would Chavez (or Castro, for that matter) want with money stashed abroad? Just think a little before you repeat obvious propaganda.

Is Chavez seriously your standard bearer for international socialism? The guy who busted labor unions?

Amazingly as it may be to some people, there were both unions against his policies and unions for his policies. One union again his policies, together with several owner's associations, forced a confrontation. Once that was done one of the sides was going to come out busted. He did what was only to be expected, he fought for his side. Legally and democratically. There were no "human rights abuses" in Venezuela beyond the level you can find in any western country. Some might argue even the opposite, but it is generally agreed that forcing people into poverty doesn't qualify as human rights abuse...

Populist welfare programs for the poor aside his rule was also accompanied by increases in military spending, spikes in crime and corruption.

You truly think that Venezuela is more corrupt now than it was in 1998 when popular disgust led to the collapse of the two parties that had run the country for decades and to what was effectively a revolution through the vote? And you truly thing that the decade of hell the country had gone through, and continued into at least 2002, didn't had anything to do with the rise in crime? Even in the US there are people trying to pin down crime increases on, or all things, abortion policies carried out decades prior to the events! But about Venezuela the very same media that carries such discussions about crime in the US kept associating "Chavez = crime increase". Because, you know, it was bloody hard to find something else to attack him about. They were constantly scrapping the bottom of the barrel. No electoral frauds, no massacre, no police repression, no secessionism movements, no economic collapse despite all the wishful thinking, thing else to pick on him about.

 

[Formaldehyde]

It's pretty fitting tha the Admiral-General is a dictator worshiper.

"It is pretty fitting" that the real "Admiral-General" can't even read and understand simple English sentences.

 

[Patroklos]

I can't wait for your Mugabe worship when he dies

 

[innonimatu]

Unfortunately his vaguely-leftist/populist policies and active hostility to America ensured he got lumped in with the Dictator Club along with the Castros (I seriously thought one of them would croak first), Lukashenko, Assad, and Putin which cut Venezuela off from a lot of potentialy helpful international trade.

Pre-1998 the those alternative trade circles in which Venezuela had specialized didn't seem to do any good for the country, quite the opposite. I don't think he closed any door, he just went knowing also on doors that others wanted kept closed.
I don't think he was a diplomatically savvy president, but trying to reach some "compromise" by refusing to trade with Russia, Iran, etc, would probably not reduce the enmity against him in many circles even one bit. He probably figured "what the hell, they'll find motives to attack my government anyway" and went on to take advantage of any international relations he could.

I am not Luiz. I personally lean left of center and am fully supportive of the opposition's platform and Capriles, who are both left of center.

The sad thing is that I'm sure you are not trying to be deceitful when you state that.

The only thing I can think of that's improved is the literacy rate, which while being good and all, was merely a positive sideffect of completely destroying Venezuela's education system.

That is an... interesting statement. Care to explain it?

I can sit here for a long time and list individual examples of various industries that have been screwed by Chavez rule. PDVSA and the country's oil in general, is only the tip of the iceberg and should hardly be the only thing talked about. Venezuela wasn't just an oil giant, Venezuela has vast reserves of natural resources from metals to various energies of both the natural and renewable kind, a very rich expense of plains ideal for farmland(before Chavez took power, Venezuela was I believe the 7th largest exporter of grains to USA), a booming tourism industry, and huge industrial capability. Many of these industries have severely gone down in efficiency, or in the case of aquaculture, due to brutal mismanagement, is nearly dead.

If it is true that Venezuela was so wealthy before Chavez was elected, then how, pray tell, did Venezuela manage to have half of its population living in poverty back in 1998? I mean, if it had all that...

Perhaps instead of blaming Chavez the disgruntled owners of all those businesses should have been busy thinking about what they did wrong. And it's no surprise that nationalization creates problems in the short term: the purpose of nationalization is to change how the business is operated, but it usually must be without the cooperation, or even against the active resistance, of those how had run it before. The issue, however, is that though this is a problem, letting some businesses continue to me managed privately can be worse for a country if all its income accrues to just some some very few. That is what the opposition to Chavez should have been busy considering. But no, Capriles is not left of center. He wants the old ways back. The same old ways that led to such such poverty and such a divide inside the country that they collapsed.

 

[choxorn]

.

This is just disgusting. And offensive. I think smoking is a crappy, stupid idea, but come on.

Wow, I'm actually agreeing with GhostWriter saying something is disgusting and offensive. I'm not in some strange parallel universe, am I?

 

[King Kalmah]

Wow, I'm actually agreeing with GhostWriter saying something is disgusting and offensive. I'm not in some strange parallel universe, am I?

It happens once in awhile the boy makes a good point....doesn't mean this point is right...lights up a fatty...

 

[Verbose]

There is much I don't particularly like about Hugo Chavez during the years he served as president. But I can also see that he accomplished much for the common Venezuelan by using the natural resources of his country for them, instead of allowing the rich to just get even richer to the detriment of most others in the country. For that reason there are some who will inevitably hate him, just as they hate all other socialists and even liberals.

Well, to my understanding it is HOW he did it, that is the rub.

Chavez never put himself out to make government support to lift the poor out of poverty and ignorance a right. He made it very clearly a gift, personally, from himself, through these special "missiones" (into which there is apparently no insight or oversight from then government itself).

And at the grass-roots level, the distrubition of these goods was left to the kind of "neighbourhood watch" things, these "colectivos". And then, apparently making the military aghast, Chavez went and armed the "colectivos" as well. So if, or when, the stream of goods to distribute to those selected as worthy gets jittery, the "colectivos" aren't going to like it, and now they've got guns...

Finally adding that the Venezuelan justice system has been pretty comprehensively gutted. There is an opposition, and Chavez isn't ostensibly anti-democratic. It's just that the amount of rubber legislation around has meant that every time the opposition threw up someone who might turn into a leader to rally around, the legal system has been used to put them in hock.

The man was a populist politician to the bone, and that should give anyone pause. As for his legacy, I'm thinking along the lines of comendable effort in some ways, but horrible execution in many others.

 

[gozpel]

My goodness, he was a fat cigar-smoking bastard that didn't help the poor.

Another "so called good leader", as they all are, as soon as they get their hands on the money.

 

[Agent327]

He did what was only to be expected, he fought for his side. Legally and democratically. There were no "human rights abuses" in Venezuela beyond the level you can find in any western country. Some might argue even the opposite, but it is generally agreed that forcing people into poverty doesn't qualify as human rights abuse...

Ummm what?

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

The weakening of Venezuela’s democratic system of checks and balances under President Hugo Chávez has contributed to a precarious human rights situation. Without judicial checks on its actions, the government has systematically undermined the right to free expression, workers’ freedom of association, and the ability of human rights groups to protect rights.

Weeks before the new National Assembly—with a substantial opposition composition—took office in January 2011, Chávez’s supporters in the legislature adopted several laws that increased the government’s ability to undercut rights.

Police abuses and impunity remain a grave problem. Prison conditions are deplorable, and fatality rates high due to inmate violence.

 

[Ailedhoo]

FDR was more evil than Obama, yes. Bush and Obama is kind of a toss up as to which one was/is more evil.

...in note of a planet which has a history of tyrants and power abusers you give the label of evil to such light note? Yes I aware of the camps in America in WW2 and yes they were among the most displeasing acts committed by the Western powers in WW2 (I remember even the infamous racist FBI head opposing the camping) but by what messurement are you using evil in that period? I greatly dispise Tony Blair and have made commentery (perhapes as a joke) that his excution would be among my exceptions to my dislike of captial punishment. However while he was liar and a ideaological zealot (I disliked the invasion of Iraq) to call him evil would be ignorance and insults to those who were "blessed" with... less nicer people as leaders. Are you placing Obama in the same league as say Ivan the Terrible? What of people between out-right tyrants and Obama? Why are you not focusing on the likes of Putin? I like to see you comment on how the Murdochs attempt to hyjack the democratic system in the UK. The Patriot Act was a act most fel but I like to rank things in messurement and placing the Patriot Act on the same level as, say, the couping of Chile by the CSI... we need to be careful in how one uses the word evil or you may risk making the word evil of less impact but instead a label to apply to stuff.

In the end: when does badness become evil? This question has to be concluded before we can judge the "evilness" of the current head of state of the USA.

O and how the heck did a thread on Hugo ended up hyjacked for the purpose of debating "who is more evil?!"

...the Patriot Act is a act most fel I must repeat again.

 

[luiz]

Where is your proof that the "average Venezuelan" hated Chavez as the two of you clearly do?

If you could show me where I said the average Venezuelan hates Chávez, I'll provide proof that the Earth is flat.

What I clearly stated is that Venezuela is roughly evenly divided between Chavistas and anti-Chavistas, so to talk about an "average Venezuelan", as you did, is patently absurd. Anyone who says the average Venezuelans either loves or hates Chávez is full of crap.

The average middle class Venezuelan, OTOH, clearly hates him.

Also, would just like to toss in the fact that Chavez is probably less heavy handed and authoritarian than Colombia's Uribe or Mexico's Calderon were. Their records are also fairly comparable, but only Chavez is ridiculed the world over.

How is Chávez any less authoritarian than Uribe or Calderon? Are you nuts? When did Uribe or Calderon shut down an opposition TV and literally tens of radio stations? When did they create an armed militia to terrorize the opposition? When did they demand that civil servants take an oath of loyalty? When did they pack the entire oil company with cronies?

Uribe and Calderón are Scandinavian politicians compared to the caudillo.

 

[Carras Dad]

 

[Cutlass]

Hating the president is irrelevant; that's not why I spoke up and that's not what you said. You specifically and proudly accused the majority of people who hate the president as racists, as if they couldn't possibly object to anything but his race. It goes to show you're either ignorant of their litany or willing to misrepresent them so you can feel free to ignore them without preoccupation.

"Hating" the president is pretty natural; I'm sure you remember the visceral bile people expelled on cue against the Bush administration, and neither case comes close to the divisive hatred people had for FDR, who was five times the "omg librul tyrant" that Obama is.

The difference being that others were hated for what they did, or tried to do. Obama was hated before doing or even trying to do anything. If anyone has a reason to hate Obama based on his actions, it is the left, not the right.

 

[Formaldehyde]

If you could show me where I said the average Venezuelan hates Chávez, I'll provide proof that the Earth is flat.

You do realize I was addressing someone who did actually express that opinion instead of you?

Are you trying to claim that you don't hate Chavez, which is what I actually stated?

What I clearly stated is that Venezuela is roughly evenly divided between Chavistas and anti-Chavistas, so to talk about an "average Venezuelan", as you did, is patently absurd. Anyone who says the average Venezuelans either loves or hates Chávez is full of crap.

Even though you are essentially repeating what I stated.

I don't see that much "hate" except from the usual suspects who "hate" any form of socialism. Those who seem to still be fighting the Cold War and are fearful and paranoid of any form of socialism.

The average middle class Venezuelan, OTOH, clearly hates him.

Then I'm sure it won't be difficult for you to prove it so we won't come to your own conclusion that it is "full of crap".

 

[Azale]

Well, to my understanding it is HOW he did it, that is the rub.

Chavez never put himself out to make government support to lift the poor out of poverty and ignorance a right. He made it very clearly a gift, personally, from himself, through these special "missiones" (into which there is apparently no insight or oversight from then government itself).

And at the grass-roots level, the distrubition of these goods was left to the kind of "neighbourhood watch" things, these "colectivos". And then, apparently making the military aghast, Chavez went and armed the "colectivos" as well. So if, or when, the stream of goods to distribute to those selected as worthy gets jittery, the "colectivos" aren't going to like it, and now they've got guns...

Finally adding that the Venezuelan justice system has been pretty comprehensively gutted. There is an opposition, and Chavez isn't ostensibly anti-democratic. It's just that the amount of rubber legislation around has meant that every time the opposition threw up someone who might turn into a leader to rally around, the legal system has been used to put them in hock.

The man was a populist politician to the bone, and that should give anyone pause. As for his legacy, I'm thinking along the lines of comendable effort in some ways, but horrible execution in many others.

Some of the leftists I read insist that Chavez indirectly empowered the grassroots and civil society, which was pretty moribund before him. That is what gives me hope. In addition, Chavez did not force a compromise between capital, labor, and the destitute with himself as the glue like older Latin American populists but more substantially attacked the foundations of the power of the wealthy.

I am having a hard time verifying what his actual accomplishments were as far as the numbers go. If the numbers his supporters claim on the reduction of absolute poverty are even half true though it is fairly impressive.

 

[Formaldehyde]

I am having a hard time verifying what his actual accomplishments were as far as the numbers go. If the numbers his supporters claim on the reduction of absolute poverty are even half true though it is fairly impressive.

Here's a humorous slam that FAIR did of an AP business reporter reporting on the death of Chavez:

AP: Chavez Wasted His Money on Healthcare When He Could Have Built Gigantic Skyscrapers

One of the more bizarre takes on Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's death comes from Associated Press business reporter Pamela Sampson (3/5/13):

Chavez invested Venezuela's oil wealth into social programs including state-run food markets, cash benefits for poor families, free health clinics and education programs. But those gains were meager compared with the spectacular construction projects that oil riches spurred in glittering Middle Eastern cities, including the world's tallest building in Dubai and plans for branches of the Louvre and Guggenheim museums in Abu Dhabi.

That's right: Chavez squandered his nation's oil money on healthcare, education and nutrition when he could have been building the world's tallest building or his own branch of the Louvre. What kind of monster has priorities like that?

In case you're curious about what kind of results this kooky agenda had, here's a chart (NACLA, 10/8/12) based on World Bank poverty stats–showing the proportion of Venezuelans living on less than $2 a day falling from 35 percent to 13 percent over three years. (For comparison purposes, there's a similar stat for Brazil, which made substantial but less dramatic progress against poverty over the same time period.)



Of course, during this time, the number of Venezuelans living in the world's tallest building went from 0 percent to 0 percent, while the number of copies of the Mona Lisa remained flat, at none. So you have to say that Chavez's presidency was overall pretty disappointing–at least by AP's standards.

 

[ReindeerThistle]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-21679053



A great hero of the Latin American common man is finally at peace after a long struggle with cancer. This will be a major blow to the Latin American anti-imperialist movement, I do not know enough about Maduro to know if he can rise to the occasion for Venezuela, much less to try and fill the shoes of Chavez.

I am a labor and community organizer in the United States, an have been for 21 years. The things I know best about the Bolivarian Revolution I have learned from those who participate in it -- here and in Venezuela. The Bolivarian Revolution lost a great leader, and we miss him, but it belongs to the people of the Americas: Nuestra America! Fear not, that while we have difficult times ahead is certain, and Chavez above all knew that, but his example, and those who came before him, serve as guideposts to progressive social movements.

Read Stephen Brouwers' "Revolutionary Doctors" to see what Venezuela did with education and health care. Read "Undertsanding the Venezuelan Revolution" by Marta Harnecker for a good idea of what he built and leaves behind.

And read "Open Veins of Latin America" by Eduardo Galleano -- the book that Chavez gave to Obama in 2009 (which shot it from #4000 to #7 on Amazon's sales list).

Venceremos, Patria o Muerte