Venezuela Unofficially Enters Hyperinflation

[luiz]

name one socialist characteristic of venezuela without citing the names of the ruling party, the ruling party's official ideology, or the colours used by the ruling party

Bah, while there was oil money to burn Venezuela was praised by the international left, from Chomsky to PSOL to Jacobin Mag, as an example of what socialism should look like. Supposedly workers' committees were running the nationalized factories, citizens' committees were running education in poor areas, oil profits were directed into social programs, and so on and so forth.

That it all failed miserably, just like I said it would, discredits Chomsky, PSOL, Podemos, Jacobin Mag, Le Monde Diplomatique, Jeremy Corbyn, Mélenchon, Sean Penn, Oliver Stone, and the whole bunch. Clowns, imbeciles, and accomplices of murderous tyrants, all of them. I wish they all could share the fate of Maduro when the regime finally collapses.

 

[BirraImperial]

Venezuela is a failed state... their government is no longer recognized by the international community...

 

[Hrothbern]

Bah, while there was oil money to burn Venezuela was praised by the international left, from Chomsky to PSOL to Jacobin Mag, as an example of what socialism should look like. Supposedly workers' committees were running the nationalized factories, citizens' committees were running education in poor areas, oil profits were directed into social programs, and so on and so forth.

That it all failed miserably, just like I said it would, discredits Chomsky, PSOL, Podemos, Jacobin Mag, Le Monde Diplomatique, Jeremy Corbyn, Mélenchon, Sean Penn, Oliver Stone, and the whole bunch. Clowns, imbeciles, and accomplices of murderous tyrants, all of them. I wish they all could share the fate of Maduro when the regime finally collapses.

I do not really disagree

The grass on the other side of the river is greener.
Especially for the people that have less (money, power) and are more in need of hope.
Especially for people that are less interested in what really happens and more interested in what they can "shop" for domestic political purposes.

When I was in my twenties, the CPN, the Communist Party of the Netherlands, still under substantial control of the Soviet-Union, was in the last phase of being taken over by the generation of the 60-ies. Being taken over by young critical people that had their own minds and their own thoughts. And did not accept the top-down suffocating, but wanted to improve the life of ordinary people close to the laborers, between the laborers, with a socialistic/communistic ideal. Not the college bunch of intellectuals talking about -isms with a beer. The top of the party was not able to stop the process of the inflow and started an internal propaganda campaign. Not only the "gestaalde kaders", the old Stalinistic hardcore members, but now also new members that were thought to be the "useful material" were invited to Eastern-European countries to see for themselves how "fantastic" it all was in nice holiday trips.

Well... they did came back with nice stories, but too many were not complete idiots, and the campaign did not really work, except for the people too desperate too hungry to believe.
Ofc much of this never reached the lower rank and file of the party and the voter base.
But already just before the fall of the wall, the influence of the Soviet-Union and the would-be believers was reduced to little indeed, and the new generation decided in 1990 to join up with other left wing parties to the GreenLeft party.

Don't fool yourself.

My opinion is that if you really want a more social society you need your eyes wide open to the reality, much more than the traditional neoliberals need to do that.
Hope is a nice companion, but a bad advisor.

 

[luiz]

I do not really disagree

The grass on the other side of the river is greener.
Especially for the people that have less (money, power) and are more in need of hope.
Especially for people that are less interested in what really happens and more interested in what they can "shop" for domestic political purposes.

When I was in my twenties, the CPN, the Communist Party of the Netherlands, still under substantial control of the Soviet-Union, was in the last phase of being taken over by the generation of the 60-ies. Being taken over by young critical people that had their own minds and their own thoughts. And did not accept the top-down suffocating, but wanted to improve the life of ordinary people close to the laborers, between the laborers, with a socialistic/communistic ideal. Not the college bunch of intellectuals talking about -isms with a beer. The top of the party was not able to stop the process of the inflow and started an internal propaganda campaign. Not only the "gestaalde kaders", the old Stalinistic hardcore members, but now also new members that were thought to be the "useful material" were invited to Eastern-European countries to see for themselves how "fantastic" it all was in nice holiday trips.

Well... they did came back with nice stories, but too many were not complete idiots, and the campaign did not really work, except for the people too desperate too hungry to believe.
Ofc much of this never reached the lower rank and file of the party and the voter base.
But already just before the fall of the wall, the influence of the Soviet-Union and the would-be believers was reduced to little indeed, and the new generation decided in 1990 to join up with other left wing parties to the GreenLeft party.

Don't fool yourself.

My opinion is that if you really want a more social society you need your eyes wide open to the reality, much more than the traditional neoliberals need to do that.
Hope is a nice companion, but a bad advisor.

Yeah. I'm also against radical "neoliberal" pipe dreams, like "let's abolish the minimum wage and the income tax!". I think many people, notably academics and militants, don't realize that people's lives are too precious to be treated like a lab experiment. Changes should be gradual and reversible, be it in the direction of "socialism" or "capitalism"

 

[Cutlass]

Well you have to look at the relative progress the country made during a specific regime, not the absolute numbers.

Argentina and Venezuela have traditionally been the two richest countries in South America, in per capita terms. Peru has always been among the poorest. But if you look at the last couple decades, poverty has fallen a lot in Peru (and also Colômbia), while exploded in Venezuela. Indeed the economy of Venezuela imploded, and the minimum wage there is now worth less than one dollar per month (yeah you read right, per month). There are hordes of Venezuelan migrants flooding into Colombia every single day - hundreds of thousands have made the.cross this year. The migration has always been on the other side - Colombians would flock to the much richer Venezuela. Now Venezuelans have nothing to eat. The country is becoming an oil rich Haiti. All thanks to the glorious 21st Century Socialism.

If those left wingers are so bad, then why did the right wingers choose to put them in charge?

 

[luiz]

If those left wingers are so bad, then why did the right wingers choose to put them in charge?

Actually for the most part they were elected democratically. But once they ruined the country and became deeply unpopular, they destroyed democracy instead of accepting electoral defeat.

 

[Cutlass]

Actually for the most part they were elected democratically. But once they ruined the country and became deeply unpopular, they destroyed democracy instead of accepting electoral defeat.

So why did the far right choose to put them in charge?

 

[luiz]

So why did the far right choose to put them in charge?

It was not the far right, it was the voters. Power alternance is a normal thing. Sometimes the left wins, sometimes the right wins.The problem is when a president decides he likes power so much he will change the rules to make sure he never has to leave. Like Chavez and Ortega did.

 

[Ajidica]

Price controls.

I think I've gotten sick and tired of posting this, but price controls were imposed by Richard Nixon.
Because if there is one thing we all know, it is that Richard Nixon was a socialist.

Effective immediately, therefore, I am ordering a freeze on prices.1 This freeze will hold prices at levels no higher than those charged during the first 8 days of June. It will cover all prices paid by consumers. The only prices not covered will be those of unprocessed agricultural products at the farm levels, and rents.
...
The freeze will last for a maximum of 60 days. This time will be used to develop and put into place a new and more effective system of controls which will follow the freeze. This new Phase IV [set] of controls will be designed to contain the forces that have sent prices so rapidly upward in the past few months. It will involve tighter standards and more mandatory compliance procedures than under Phase III. It will recognize the need for wages and prices to be treated consistently with one another.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=3868

 

[W|M]

Bah, while there was oil money to burn Venezuela was praised by the international left, from Chomsky to PSOL to Jacobin Mag, as an example of what socialism should look like. Supposedly workers' committees were running the nationalized factories, citizens' committees were running education in poor areas, oil profits were directed into social programs, and so on and so forth.

That it all failed miserably, just like I said it would, discredits Chomsky, PSOL, Podemos, Jacobin Mag, Le Monde Diplomatique, Jeremy Corbyn, Mélenchon, Sean Penn, Oliver Stone, and the whole bunch. Clowns, imbeciles, and accomplices of murderous tyrants, all of them. I wish they all could share the fate of Maduro when the regime finally collapses.

the great thing about being an anarchist is that exactly zero of those people, publications or political parties follow my ideology anyway, so them liking venezuela doesn't actually really have anything to do with me, despite me being on the far-left

also having social-democrats praise a country for being socialist isn't really much of a measure of anything considering that some people praise basically any country or political party that flies a red flag as socialist, regardless of what's actually going on there

 

[luiz]

the great thing about being an anarchist is that exactly zero of those people, publications or political parties follow my ideology anyway, so them liking venezuela doesn't actually really have anything to do with me, despite me being on the far-left

also having social-democrats praise a country for being socialist isn't really much of a measure of anything considering that some people praise basically any country or political party that flies a red flag as socialist, regardless of what's actually going on there

Well, yes. I've posted on more threads about Hugo Chavez on this forum than is healthy. Use the search function. From day one when leftists here were drooling and getting their panties wet over the dude I was saying "he's just another Latin American caudillo, he's not the first one to wave a red flag and lambast the US. They all sucked before him and he sucks too, and this will end in both a tragedy and a farce". I was not correct because I'm a prophet, but because the final outcome of the Bolivarian Revolution was evident for anyone with half a brain to see. But they answered: "no, this one is the real deal! Look, workers' assemblies! Look, Noam Chomsky approves!"

So no more arguing definitions. They wanted Chavez to be the true socialist, so let him be it. As far as I'm concerned Venezuela is socialist and that's that.

 

[Traitorfish]

Why are people like Luiz so convinced that people rioting against right-wing governments are just youthful malcontents who need to get a job, but that people rioting against left-wing governments are the indisputable Voice of the People?

(That's a rhetorical question, naturally.)

 

[luiz]

Why are people like Luiz so convinced that people rioting against right-wing governments are just youthful malcontents who need to get a job, but that people rioting against left-wing governments are the indisputable Voice of the People?

(That's a rhetorical question, naturally.)

The difference between you and me is that if the Seattle police had shot dead 400 people during the WTO riots I'd be pretty outraged.

But you don't give a damn about paramilitary thugs in Venezuela and Nicaragua killing hundreds who were protesting against tyranny.

You probably tell yourself that they are Bourges who deserve what they get, because you are you. But in Nicaragua it's mostly poor peasants and Indians getting killed, so there's that.

Another interesting difference is that the people rioting against the WTO or Milo speaking at their uni could voice their opinions on the ballot, in a civilized way. And it would matter. But in Venezuela or Nicaragua voting no longer matters - the opposition cannot run, and when they can they cannot rule.

So there's that.

Not that you were trying to make a honest point, you being you and all.

 

[Azem.Ocram]

I know some people who worshipped Hugo Chavez but are completely quiet now, they don't mention Venezuela, they don't say one thing or another about Nicolas Maduro because they know, deep down that the downfall of Venezuela was started by Chavez and that nothing would have been different had he not died.

 

[luiz]

I know some people who worshipped Hugo Chavez but are completely quiet now, they don't mention Venezuela, they don't say one thing or another about Nicolas Maduro because they know, deep down that the downfall of Venezuela was started by Chavez and that nothing would have been different had he not died.

Oh yeah. The far-left in both Europe and the US has been thoroughly discredited by the Venezuelan debacle (to say nothing of the Latin American far-left, but they were always discredited). But now we can know exactly what the likes of Noam Chomsky, Pablo Iglesias, Jean-Luc Mélenchon, Jeremy Corbyn and others of that ilk think a good government should look like. This is not slander: all of them have repeatedly praised Chávez and the Bolivarian Revolution. Google is there for that.

It's a pity that 99% of the population of the US and the EU doesn't give a damn about Venezuela, because if they did, nobody would ever take any of these clowns seriously. Hell, they'd throw eggs at them every time they left their houses, and the other political forces would use this incessantly to discredit them and bury their careers.

 

[Cutlass]

It was not the far right, it was the voters. Power alternance is a normal thing. Sometimes the left wins, sometimes the right wins.The problem is when a president decides he likes power so much he will change the rules to make sure he never has to leave. Like Chavez and Ortega did.

You, as usual, miss the point: Why did Venezuela's ruling right wing make the conscious and deliberate choice to be so monstrous that Chavez looked like the better option once the public got a chance to make a change?

There is no socialism until conservatives create the need for it.

 

[Traitorfish]

The difference between you and me is that if the Seattle police had shot dead 400 people during the WTO riots I'd be pretty outraged.

But you don't give a damn about paramilitary thugs in Venezuela and Nicaragua killing hundreds who were protesting against tyranny.

You probably tell yourself that they are Bourges who deserve what they get, because you are you. But in Nicaragua it's mostly poor peasants and Indians getting killed, so there's that.

Sorry, were you under the impression that I was particularly pro-Maduro, or pro-Ortega? Are we just working the under the assumption that everyone to the left of Reagan is automatically on-side with every tinpot Stalinist who wheedles his way into a set of epaulettes?

 

[Broken_Erika]

Sorry, were you under the impression that I was particularly pro-Maduro, or pro-Ortega? Are we just working the under the assumption that everyone to the left of Franco is automatically on-side with every tinpot Stalinist who wheedles his way into a set of eppulates?

You're either with us, or you're with the Communists!

 

[FriendlyFire]

Bah, while there was oil money to burn Venezuela was praised by the international left, from Chomsky to PSOL to Jacobin Mag, as an example of what socialism should look like. Supposedly workers' committees were running the nationalized factories, citizens' committees were running education in poor areas, oil profits were directed into social programs, and so on and so forth.

G.W.Bush and the Republicans didnt do much better
Venezuala really screwed themselves by putting sychopants in charge of their golden goose.

 

[luiz]

You, as usual, miss the point: Why did Venezuela's ruling right wing make the conscious and deliberate choice to be so monstrous that Chavez looked like the better option once the public got a chance to make a change?

There is no socialism until conservatives create the need for it.

Ruling right wing? Deliberate choices to be monstrous? Dude, read a bit about the history of Venezuela before writing such garbage.

Before Chavez Venezuela was a democracy in which both the center-left and the center-right alternated in power. There was a lot of incompetence, yes, but still Venezuela was the richest country in South America. It was a place people emigrated to, a country known in the region for high wages and jobs. It was far from perfect and there were many problems, but in a regional context it was very far from "monstrous". And you need to compare Venezuela with its peers and neighbors, not with Switzerland and Norway. Now Venezuela is the Haïti of South America, a place from where hordes of refugees escape every day, a place where people are starving, where even white collar workers can't afford basic necessities.

Here's a tip: read more on Latin America, watch less Oliver Stone movies.