tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11704331.post5604712258364861058..comments2023-11-05T03:12:10.925-06:00Comments on Renegade Eye: Damn That Was QuickFrank Partisanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03536211653082893030noreply@blogger.comBlogger109125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11704331.post-65526178678406894082007-07-21T06:09:00.000-05:002007-07-21T06:09:00.000-05:00"We know that the only reason Chavez denied RCTV t..."We know that the only reason Chavez denied RCTV their "little bit of spectrum" was to punish them for their opposition. A warning to other media outlets not to do the same."<BR/><BR/>Yep, organize a violent overthrow of the government using the airwaves and you just might lose your license. I think the warning has had good effect on some of the other media which remain oppositional but aren't urging people to march on Miraflores to throw out the president, nor holding coup planning meetings in their offices and studios (we hope).Eugene Weixelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02775588986720568037noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11704331.post-56878653754612359942007-07-21T04:22:00.000-05:002007-07-21T04:22:00.000-05:00Oil Wars, whose real name is Dan Burnett, does NOT...Oil Wars, whose real name is Dan Burnett, does NOT live in Venezuela. He lives in NYC, and works at Columbia University's Heilbrunn Department of Population and Family Health in the Center for Community Health and Education. He lies constantly, even when posting comments on other blogs. He lied when wrote that the RCTV antennas and transmitters belonged to the state. That is false. Chavez sent the military to take over the transmitters and has not paid RCTV what they're worth.<BR/><BR/>Ricardo.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11704331.post-83075554163362906332007-07-20T13:53:00.000-05:002007-07-20T13:53:00.000-05:00beakerkin said"Perhaps you should ask her about sh...beakerkin said<BR/>"Perhaps you should ask her about shotages, FARC and massacres of Indians."<BR/><BR/><B>Massacres of Indians!? What!?</B><BR/>Don't skip over this one, you've said it. Why not prove it???Eugene Weixelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02775588986720568037noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11704331.post-62703731508981440882007-07-20T05:53:00.000-05:002007-07-20T05:53:00.000-05:00This denial-of-dictatorship reminds me of just one...This denial-of-dictatorship reminds me of just one thing - the left's attitude to Mugabe in the 1990s. They argued that he wasn't really a dictator, he was fighting for black liberation. He didn't massacre 20,000 Ndebele people during the Gukurahundi, he took a tough stance on those who supported colonialism. He didn't destroy the country's infrastructure and cast millions into poverty, he took much-needed reforms to free his country from the colonial yoke. He didn't give all of the country's most valuable assets to his cronies and supporters, he redistributed the land in favour of the poor.<BR/><BR/>Get real.<BR/><BR/>We know that the only reason Chavez denied RCTV their "little bit of spectrum" was to punish them for their opposition. A warning to other media outlets not to do the same. Removing RCTV's terrestrial license means the poor majority in Venezuela have no access to a dissenting voice. Sure, the rich can afford democracy with satellite TV. But the poor will only get interviews with the president, and happy stories, telling them how wonderful things are since Chavez came to power.<BR/><BR/>Please, don't be in denial. Although he's on the left, although he cares about the poor in Venezuela, Chavez is most certainly not a good guy. He's no knight in shining proletarian armour. He's just a crook. A populist dictator opposed to freedom of speech.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11704331.post-73865830808674910442007-07-18T07:30:00.000-05:002007-07-18T07:30:00.000-05:00If the students made fools out of themselves, it w...If the students made fools out of themselves, it was only because the entire event had been staged as a circus act long before the students arrived.<BR/><BR/>The students hadn't agreed to any "debate". They were present merely to deliver their petition for a redress of grievances to parliment.<BR/><BR/>It was the Chavista's who attempted to execute a nationally televised "ambush-debate" where the students would be outnumbered by "officialista" opposition speakers 100 to 1.<BR/><BR/>And by walking out, the students exposed the fraud. So if they were perceived as fools, it was in the same way one might regard a court jester as a fool.<BR/><BR/>And I agree with you, renegade eye. Chavez is a capitalist and nothing he has done to date would indicate a fundamental restructuring of the economy was underway. What IS underway is merely a transfer of ownership, from the wealthy oligarchs to the "new bureaucrats" (officialistas) of the caudillo. <BR/><BR/>And once the oil price goes "south", so will ALL of Chavez's current popularity. His "window of opportunity" for making his old-fashioned caudillo pirate government operating under the disguise of socialism permanent is rapidly closing.<BR/><BR/>His support for official confiscation of the means of production is nil. He needs foreign investment money desperately, because indigenous capital flight is accelerating. He will never support the workers of Sanitarios Maracay. The last thing Chavez wants to see is a political and material strengthening of the unions. Not until they're all in his own pocket, anyway.<BR/><BR/>The "threat" of full-blown socialism is merely the whip which allows Chavez to buy out the wealthy oligarchs for pennies on the dollar. And the money he makes will NOT go to the poor any more than Eva Peron's loose change tossed into the crowd did. He, and his new bureaucrats will be padding their Swiss bank accounts rather handily, instead.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11704331.post-77203255596681683182007-07-18T00:18:00.000-05:002007-07-18T00:18:00.000-05:00Farmer John: I wish you were more involved with th...Farmer John: I wish you were more involved with this discussion when it was fresh. You are my favorite representative of the opposition. You stay on topic, don't name call and use data.<BR/><BR/>If you prove correct, than Chavez should go. You are the only opposition person at this blog, who recognizes everything Chavez has done is within the confines of capitalism. I'm waiting to see how the new socialist party turns out, and the new constitution.<BR/><BR/>Inflation is under control, if numbers are compared to the oligarchy. Chavez is postponing the day of reckoning, as supermarkets etc hoard goods. With oil $$ he gets goods from outside. can't last forever,<BR/><BR/>The workers control movement is the real revolution.<BR/><BR/>I heard the students made fools of themselves.<BR/><BR/>I find it funny that the Maoists in Venezuela, think the opposition is socialist.Frank Partisanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03536211653082893030noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11704331.post-26769112098492562272007-07-17T18:39:00.000-05:002007-07-17T18:39:00.000-05:00btw - When I lived in Venezuela, '66-'70 the excha...btw - When I lived in Venezuela, '66-'70 the exchange rate was a constant 4.25 Bolivares to the dollar. Today it's 2150 to 1 (officially) and 2500 to 1 (unofficially).<BR/><BR/>In Venezuela, socialism has another name. They call it "officialismo". Only Chavez supporters are permitted to be the "official" representatives of the student or labor movement. No "independent" or "contrary" voices are given a hearing.<BR/><BR/>Don't worry, the "independency" of unions in Venezuela will soon be replaced with "official" unions. The so-called antidote to bureaucratization will soon be labor's "poison pill". One need only look at the student resistance movement to see what will soon happen to them, once they've served their purposes, anyway.<BR/><BR/>As was the case in the great "parlimentary" student debate where only ONE independent voice was allowed to be heard, and it had to walk-out of the proceedings as soon as its' message had been spoken.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11704331.post-61338012110624958452007-07-17T18:23:00.000-05:002007-07-17T18:23:00.000-05:00The workers will always be the puppets of oligarch...The workers will always be the puppets of oligarchy, bureaucrats and tyrants. They're too stupid to be anything else, let alone the economic "decision makers". It would appear that the joint vision of "socialism" held by members of this blog is to let the retards make all the important decisions.<BR/><BR/>I'd rather have Stalin over a "workers cooperative" making any decisions. At least his decisions would be "rationale".<BR/><BR/>No wonder Chavez wants nothing to do with the unions or the "revolutionaries" of Sanitarios Maracay.<BR/><BR/>$70 dollar oil is the only thing keeping this "socialismo o' muerte" regime in the "black". Venezuela has become a merchantilist-based capitalist economy, that's all. Socialism? LOL! That's the shell that hides the pea in Chavez's game of political three card monty.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11704331.post-70191302348489578172007-07-16T18:41:00.000-05:002007-07-16T18:41:00.000-05:00Binh: Very interesting comments. I'm not sure wh...Binh: Very interesting comments. I'm not sure where that group fits here or in Venezuela. It will gain nothing by being on the outside.<BR/><BR/>Roman: It is as simple as Venezuelan law says that stations using public wavelength, are not allowed to advocate violence against the government. It is not just a reporter, it was systemic of RCTV.<BR/><BR/>RCTV fired all pro-Chavez employees, including comedians with 30 years tenure there. RCTV operates freely on cable and satellite.Frank Partisanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03536211653082893030noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11704331.post-558120941369190462007-07-16T11:36:00.000-05:002007-07-16T11:36:00.000-05:00Binh,I had the privledge of hearing Chirino speak ...Binh,<BR/><BR/>I had the privledge of hearing Chirino speak 2 years ago in Chicago. He's a remarkable fighter.<BR/><BR/>Do you know whether Chavez has repressed Chirino's political formation in any way? Realizing that often the verbal attacks immediately precede other types of intimidation, has anything happened yet?John Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01515280071887632569noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11704331.post-71624803231572168812007-07-16T10:47:00.000-05:002007-07-16T10:47:00.000-05:00Thought you guys might be interested in the latest...Thought you guys might be interested in the latest ISR (www.isreview.org), of which this is an excerpt:<BR/><BR/><I>July–August 2007, International Socialist Review Issue 54: INTERVIEW: Orlando Chirino<BR/><BR/>The following interview was conducted with ORLANDO CHIRINO, national organizer of Venezuela’s National Workers’ Union (UNT) federation and leader of C-CURA (the United Autonomous Revolutionary Class Current) within the UNT. The interview was conducted after President Hugo Chávez proposed the formation of a new unified Venezuelan Socialist Party (PSUV). Originally posted on the left-wing Venezuelan Web site Aporrea.org in late April, it was translated and posted in English on the British International Socialism journal Web site in early May 2007. </I><BR/><BR/>****************************************************<BR/><BR/><B>WHAT IS your assessment of the issues posed by President Chávez when he launched the proposal for forming the PSUV on March 24? </B><BR/><BR/>THE GREAT virtue of the discussion that President Chávez has set in motion is that it gives us an opportunity to discuss the nature of the Venezuelan revolution, the project for creating the PSUV, the role played in the revolution by different social sectors, and in particular the working class. It’s a debate about how you build an organization and it raises a whole series of questions that we should discuss openly, publicly, and with complete honesty. <BR/><BR/>What is most worrying is that the president ended up by doing exactly what he criticized. <BR/><BR/>He criticized the political cannibalism that characterizes the organizations of the Left, but then he went on to say that anyone who does not share his views is a counterrevolutionary. <BR/><BR/>I think this is a serious mistake, because far from encouraging debate it closes it down and encourages the sectarianism that the president has said he is anxious to fight. <BR/><BR/><B>WHAT DO you think are the most important issues?</B><BR/><BR/>THERE ARE lots of issues to discuss, but let me address two in particular. <BR/><BR/>The president says, for example, that the reformists are a danger — and I agree. And yet it is my view that the program the president is putting forward rests on a reformist conception, and that there is no perspective for a break with the logic of capital. <BR/><BR/>Let me explain. <BR/><BR/>After the great neoliberal offensive of the 1990s, we are seeing again multimillion-dollar investments by international capital in strategic sectors of the economy such as oil, mining, coal, construction, and infrastructural projects. <BR/><BR/>International consortia from China, Russia, and Iran are exploiting our workers more than ever. <BR/><BR/>I don’t believe that some multinationals are better than others. <BR/><BR/>They are all essentially concerned with monopolizing production and trade, exploiting workers, pillaging the natural resources of nations and intervening politically in the economic decision-making processes of those countries. This strikes at the heart of the kind of economic model we are building. <BR/><BR/>The president represents investment by the multinationals as a step forward. <BR/><BR/>I see it as mortgaging the revolution. <BR/><BR/>For me, the first step toward socialism is to break with multinational companies and corporations. <BR/><BR/>What this government is doing, on the contrary, is promoting concentration into larger and larger economic groups; the purchase of CANTV and the Electricity Company of Caracas are examples. <BR/><BR/>There’s no question that the recuperation of these enterprises by the state is a step forward, but the business sector was so pleased with these developments that they made a public announcement of their support for the move.<BR/><BR/>Equally worrying is the president’s announcement that Sidor (a major steel company) will not be nationalized because it is being run by “good capitalists.” <BR/><BR/>In fact, this company was privatized under the Fourth Republic and is owned by a multinational consortium headed by Techint of Argentina. <BR/><BR/>Our understanding is that the president took this view because the company is based in a country governed by a “friendly” president, namely Kirchner. <BR/><BR/>But we wonder when we began to speak of “good” and “bad” capitalists?’ <BR/><BR/>The president is currently making a lot of public references to China. <BR/><BR/>We would ask him not to do that, because capitalism was restored in China a number of years ago, and today it is the country where the working class is most exploited. <BR/><BR/>They are modern-day slaves, led by a rotten party that calls itself communist, but is in fact completely subject to the multinationals. <BR/><BR/>To cap it all, the Chinese have just introduced into the constitution the right to private property. China is hardly a good example. <BR/><BR/>Another important issue is the role of social classes in this revolution. <BR/><BR/>You don’t have to refer to Marx, Engels, Lenin, or Trotsky to know that the only way to overturn capitalism, a system in which a minority imposes its will on the majority, is that the working class and the people—we who are the majority and the producers—take the lead in expropriating the enterprises and place them under our control. <BR/><BR/>In that sense, what we mean by socialism is very simply stated. <BR/><BR/>Yet that is becoming more and more difficult in Venezuela. <BR/><BR/>We workers are not in that position, even in the key sectors of the economy, to contemplate even joint management, let alone workers control. <BR/><BR/>The government will not consider the possibility of co-management in strategic sectors. <BR/><BR/>Our comrades at the Constructora Nacional de Válvulas (today called Inveval) had to undergo real physical hardships and hunger, and fight like hell before the government finally listened to them and agreed to expropriate the company. <BR/><BR/>The workers of Venepal (now Invepal) had to fight for ten months before they beat the capitalists—while the government looked the other way. <BR/><BR/>And now we have the case of Sanitarios Maracay where the workers are in the fourth month of an occupation for nationalization — but the government still seems less than interested in nationalizations like this. <BR/><BR/>This suggests that the government’s program does not include expropriation, and nor will the PSUV’s. <BR/><BR/>But if this doesn’t happen, we will not be moving toward socialism, but only toward some kind of state capitalism with a developmentalist perspective. <BR/><BR/>This leaves private property untouched, and means that capitalist exploitation and the accumulation of profit by a very few will continue. <BR/><BR/><B>WHAT ABOUT Chávez’s view on the independence of the trade unions?</B><BR/><BR/>THIS IS a really important issue. The president can’t change history and argue that those of us who are fighting for the independence of the trade-union movement have somehow been “poisoned” by the experience of the Fourth Republic. <BR/><BR/>On the contrary, trade union autonomy is the key antidote to bureaucratization; that’s why the revolution was saved in 2002 and 2003, and as long as it continues it will be the key safeguard of the revolution. <BR/><BR/>The CTV (the old national trade union, the Venezuelan Confederation of Labor) sold its soul to the old two-party system and the governments it produced. For forty years the Venezuelan trade-union movement lived through its worst period, because workers were puppets in the games played by the old parties (Copei and AD) and the bosses’ organizations. <BR/><BR/>Venezuelans still remember how AD (Democratic Action) decided the fate of workers, bought and sold contracts, and worked with the government to control the unions and the CTV. <BR/><BR/>We should remember that the bosses’ strike of 2002–03 was led by CTV and Fedecámaras (the bosses’ organization) working hand in hand. The raison d’être of the new UNT union is exactly the opposite: to fight for trade union autonomy, and organize the workers to fight against any attempt to submit them to political control or give in to compromises.<BR/><BR/>The president needs to remember that during the trade-union elections of 2001, when as we all know the CTV orchestrated an enormous electoral fraud, many workers did not support the alternative slate led by Aristóbulo Istúriz precisely because he was seen as the government’s candidate. <BR/><BR/>The president has to understand that because of what we call the class instinct, and the levels of class and revolutionary consciousness, as well as because of their relationship with the bosses, the behavior of workers is different from that of peasants, communities, or students. <BR/><BR/>The worst thing about the president’s comments, however, is the suggestion that by fighting for the independence of the working-class movement we are playing a counterrevolutionary role. <BR/><BR/>That is not true. <BR/><BR/>With other comrades we have built a national trade-union current that as well as fighting against bureaucracy and for socialism, is most committed to a fierce defense of trade-union autonomy. <BR/><BR/>The second congress of the UNT was proof of what I am arguing. What happened there was not just about five different factions or currents fighting or some leaders squabbling with others because we have personal disagreements, and President Chávez is wrong to describe it that way. <BR/><BR/>In fact, for the last two years “the mother of all battles” has been under way between two conceptions—on the one hand those who want to tie the trade unions to the government, and on the other, those of us who are fighting for the sovereignty and independence of the trade-union movement. <BR/><BR/>We have thirty years of trade-union work behind us and we have never compromised with the bosses or the government, let alone with imperialism. <BR/><BR/>And we have no intention of giving up now because the president has described us as “the poisonous residue of the Fourth Republic”! <BR/><BR/>We have fought tirelessly within the trade-union movement for class principles, democratic methods, and an integrity born of proletarian morality. As PST-La Chispa (Workers’ Socialist Party) we are proud to have been the first political organization to support Hugo Chávez’s presidential candidacy. He will remember the first meetings we organized in the La Quizanda district of Valencia and with the textile workers of Aragua. So our history is unimpeachable. <BR/><BR/>We are at the forefront of the struggle against the CTV, we supported the creation of the FBT (Bolivarian Workers’ Front), and we are enthusiastically behind the UNT. <BR/><BR/>We joined the best activists in resisting the coup of April 11, 2002, and we were centrally involved in the recovery of the oil industry during the bosses’ lockout of 2002–03. Our record is an extremely honorable one.<BR/><BR/><B>YET CHÁVEZ quoted the great revolutionary Rosa Luxemburg in support of his case. How do you see that? </B><BR/><BR/>THE PRESIDENT has tried to use Rosa Luxemburg’s writings to support his arguments against trade-union independence — but we have to see her positions in the particular political and historical context in which she put them forward. <BR/><BR/>When she discussed the question of trade-union autonomy she was referring to the German Social Democratic Party and arguing against syndicalist and bureaucratic tendencies within the unions. As a Trotskyist I have to recognize that Trotsky was wrong when he argued that the trade unions in Russia should not be autonomous shortly after the Bolshevik victory. Luckily, Lenin participated in the debate and he argued for autonomy. Trotsky’s arguments had real force, given that this was the time of the war economy, when there was hunger, civil war, physical assaults against working-class and trade-union leaders, and a confrontation with the holy alliance of the imperialist counterrevolution. Yet even so he was wrong while Lenin was right. <BR/><BR/>This should tell you that we are not dogmatists, that we study reality and engage critically with our own history. <BR/><BR/>It was not a coincidence that years ago the Stalinists described us as counterrevolutionaries because we were fighting for a new revolution that would sweep away the bureaucracy that had seized power in Russia. <BR/><BR/><B>WHAT EFFECT has this discussion had on trade-union independence?</B><BR/><BR/>IT HAS had major effects. <BR/><BR/>We haven’t yet been able to hold the UNT internal elections, for example. The argument last year was that we had to give priority to the presidential elections. We were not against calling for a vote for Chávez, but we argued that the best way to campaign for that call was that it should come from a legitimately elected leadership. Unfortunately, it did not happen. <BR/><BR/>The other reality is the tragedy that public-sector workers and oil workers are living through at the moment. <BR/><BR/>If the trade-union movement were not autonomous and we had to accept what the government was saying, we would have to accept the contract negotiated by Fedepetrol and the other federations. The contract was not just illegitimate, but in fact was part of the leadership of the bosses’ campaign of sabotage supported by imperialism. It is our independent struggle that has prevented that. <BR/><BR/>The same is true of public-sector workers. The current minister is busy making deals with the trade-union leaders who have no authority and are in a minority. Their power stems only from the leadership’s control of the apparatus and the support it gets from the government. <BR/><BR/>And there is another issue related to autonomy. The FBT and the Labor Ministry allege that the UNT is not fulfilling its historic role and should therefore disappear. At the same time they are talking about setting up parallel structures and putting forward a series of proposals that will decimate the trade-union movement. It is crucial that these proposals are seriously and carefully discussed by the working class. <BR/><BR/>It is because we are independent that day in and day out we are able to fearlessly express our views on the errors — sometimes the appalling errors — that the government is committing. <BR/><BR/>Public-sector workers cannot be left waiting for twenty-seven months for their contract to be negotiated. And it seems that the oil workers will face a similar fate. The key question is whether it is right to struggle for the independence of the trade union, and whether our exposure of these issues makes us counterrevolutionaries. <BR/><BR/>Of course this is not just about trade-union autonomy. It is also about the relationship between the PSUV and the government. Will all PSUV members be obliged to support the decisions of the government and its bureaucrats? Will the new party be more than just an appendage of the government? <BR/><BR/>Imagine an oil worker who risked his life challenging the bosses’ sabotage participating in a meeting where the minister will order him to accept a collective contract negotiated with the people who organized the coup! These are important issues that need to be discussed. <BR/><BR/><B>DO YOU feel you were properly represented by Osvaldo Vera, who spoke at the launch meeting of the PSUV as a representative of the workers? </B><BR/><BR/>NOT AT all; he did not raise a single issue of concern to the working class. He just spoke in generalities. <BR/><BR/>And I have to ask myself who decided, when and where, that he should speak in the name of the Venezuelan working class? <BR/><BR/>For me this is the key question. <BR/><BR/><B>How is the PSUV being built? </B><BR/><BR/>I want to express my solidarity with thousands of my compatriots who went to Caracas to take part in the event and who were not only excluded, but mistreated and beaten in the bargain. <BR/><BR/>On television we saw governors, mayors, and deputies who do not have mass support occupying the first rows. <BR/><BR/>There were bosses and bureaucrats present who have defended the bosses, and a number of people who have been accused of corruption and the defense of policies that did not reflect the interests of the people. <BR/><BR/>That is why there is so much discontent—because people know that this process has begun in a very questionable way. <BR/><BR/>We in C-CURA believe that we have to be clear in our class allegiance. <BR/><BR/>We cannot give space to bosses, landowners, bureaucrats, or those guilty of corruption. But it would be completely wrong to exclude the grass roots or those who disagree with the president. <BR/><BR/>Everyone knows that Vera does not represent the working class. The FBT is a minority within the UNT, yet he stood and spoke in the name of all workers. That is why we are fighting for the PSUV to accept internal currents without conditions or qualifications. <BR/><BR/>Nobody should be forced to dissolve — that would be completely arbitrary and designed to stop discussion before it begins. And we need to know what the position of the president and the organizing committee is on these matters. <BR/><BR/><B>HOW DO you see the future of the PSUV project?</B><BR/><BR/>WE HAVE to recognize that the people have placed great hopes in it; indeed, it is seen by many as a real political victory over the leaderships of the old parties like the MVR, PPT, Podemos, and all those other organizations that for years have fed a tiny group of fat bureaucrats while the majority grew thinner by the day. <BR/><BR/>However, I must say to you that the way it has been presented by President Chávez will not succeed in bringing in the real class fighters, the honest revolutionaries working within the trade-union movement. <BR/><BR/>And that is why we insist on taking part in this debate. <BR/><BR/>We have a view of how to build a revolutionary party in Venezuela, which is imperative if the struggle for a revolutionary process is to continue and develop to the point where it can seize from the capitalists their economic, political, and military power. <BR/><BR/>Until now, we have seen nothing of that in the discussion about the PSUV. <BR/><BR/>What is important is that the debate is open and that everyone says clearly what they think and what kind of party they want, what its program should be, and how it should be built. <BR/><BR/>We are part of that debate and we will not allow anyone to discredit our contribution or accuse us of anything. <BR/><BR/>We will speak honestly, openly, and listen to others in the debate. <BR/><BR/>Our views are different from those put forward by the president and the organizing committee. <BR/><BR/>We will make sure that they hear our views and visions for the Venezuelan revolution.planetanarchy.nethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07696103767505857138noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11704331.post-14474833684906880572007-07-16T10:26:00.000-05:002007-07-16T10:26:00.000-05:00ren, JB,If there were flagrant violations of state...ren, JB,<BR/><BR/>If there were flagrant violations of state subversion committed by the station, wouldn't a more logical approach be to arrest the individuals responsible instead of shutting down the whole station?<BR/>It's as if CNN had run a series of expose's critical of the Bush Admin by Anderson Cooper and then calling for the immediate overthrow of the administration by any means possible (not that that is what happened in the Chavez case). Question: Do you shut down CNN or do you arrest Cooper and the administrators directly responsible for the series? In other words, punish the individuals responsible... DO NOT SHUT DOWN THE MEANS OF FREE DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION.<BR/>It is, as you well know, the very last bastion of defense against government corruption and abuse.romanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15988548647887978919noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11704331.post-90173036268724805912007-07-16T10:21:00.000-05:002007-07-16T10:21:00.000-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.romanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15988548647887978919noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11704331.post-36576455583092050672007-07-16T10:06:00.000-05:002007-07-16T10:06:00.000-05:00Beat,I'm more than a bit of a Marxist! As you poi...Beat,<BR/><BR/>I'm more than a bit of a Marxist! <BR/><BR/>As you point out, Marxists are primarily concerned with production and not consumption.<BR/><BR/>Production is generally given more consideration among Marxists because the issue of worker <I>control</I> of the Means of Production (MoP) remains the cardinal thesis of Revolutionary Marxism.<BR/><BR/>Obviously, if workers control the MoP as the bourgeoisie do today in most places, they control both <I>production</I> and <I>consumption</I>. These two things can't be looked at individually. Rather, as Marx discusses in both Capital v2 & v3 - they work symbiotically as part of an economic cycle. <BR/><BR/>I'm not saying the problem is one of production and not consumption or vice versa. Rather, I'm trying to look at the material forces that affect each.<BR/><BR/>While political turbulence and other factors you've listed do explain why new refineries aren't opening, I would argue that oil production has remained <I>relatively</I> constant. Outside of a few places (like Iraq & Iran) The availability of oil hasn't diminished in a way that qualitatively impacts people's lives.<BR/><BR/>Rather it is the consumption of an oil within an oil-based economy that has caused the demand for oil to rise.<BR/><BR/>You say that this isn't a problem since in places like India and China (and Venezuela) the bourgeoisie continue to enrich themselves. Fair enough, but the fact remains that their increased consumption has an impact globally.<BR/><BR/>Questions about the MoP have little to do with production as production. Rather, they have do with the decisions undertaken by those who control them about a circular process that includes production, consumption, and distribution. <BR/><BR/>They never stand in isolation from each-other.John Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01515280071887632569noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11704331.post-20402498292366121502007-07-16T09:44:00.000-05:002007-07-16T09:44:00.000-05:00Ren: thanks for calling my attention to the Peru ...Ren: thanks for calling my attention to the Peru stuff.<BR/><BR/><B>MULLAH BEAK the DHS PEDOPHILE</B>: What's Operation Condor.John Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01515280071887632569noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11704331.post-53871072815885415602007-07-16T09:16:00.000-05:002007-07-16T09:16:00.000-05:00Roman,The refusal to renew RCTV's license was such...Roman,<BR/><BR/>The refusal to renew RCTV's license was such a blunder that his approval ratings have remained above 70%!<BR/><BR/>Your claim suggestion that RCTV will adopted tactics like broadcasting on satellite TV to get around the Bolivarian masses demonstrates one thing: you haven't been paying attention.<BR/><BR/>From the very moment the decision was made, Comrade Chavez had said the same <B>WarOn Commies</B> at RCTV who tried to overthrow him in the coup could move to cable and to satellite. But that wasn't the issue: the Bolivarian masses no longer wanted to public airwaves contaminated with soft-core porn and reaction all day long.<BR/><BR/>And they acted.<BR/><BR/>And Chavez listened to them.<BR/><BR/><B>MUMIA in 2008</B>John Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01515280071887632569noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11704331.post-29056384751156099532007-07-16T00:17:00.000-05:002007-07-16T00:17:00.000-05:00Daniel: Welcome to this blog.In the US, the main s...Daniel: Welcome to this blog.<BR/><BR/>In the US, the main stumbling block to social change, is the Democratic Party. They don't want to tarnish the presidency, because they'll have it next. The Democratic Party uses the rhetoric of social change, only for votes.<BR/><BR/>Roman: Your analogies are straw man analogies. Unlike Castro, Pol Pot etc. Hugo Chavez won eleven straight elections, and retains a 71% approval rating from an independant polling company. Chavez came to power through the ballot box. How would Bush do with a recall election?<BR/><BR/>RCTV broke the law. They used their resources to coordinate an illegal coup attempt. Some of their management was in the parliment building with the plotters. It wasn't a free speech issue, it was an issue of them breaking Venezuelan law.<BR/><BR/>In the US, as liberal as the radio show "Democracy Now" is, they never call for the violent overthrow of the government. If they did, they'd be put off the air.<BR/><BR/>Where is the outrage about Alan Garcia in Peru shut down two TV stations and three radio stations. A similar action took place recently in Uruguay.<BR/><BR/>The difference between Venezuela and a Cambodia, is that Venezuela has a democratic history. If you want to talk about dictators look at the 2002 coup. The plotters overturned an election and abolished parlement and the judiciary.Frank Partisanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03536211653082893030noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11704331.post-35227044161766597802007-07-15T23:37:00.000-05:002007-07-15T23:37:00.000-05:00ren,Chavez and his boys realized what a PR blunder...ren,<BR/><BR/>Chavez and his boys realized what a PR blunder of enormous proportions it was to not renew the TV station's license. They are keeping a low profile and will take no action to prevent these broadcasts from outside. The station will return to the airwaves on an unofficial basis using other technical means like satelite transmissions. This is only a neccessary political but TEMPORARY status in view of all the recent negative press around the world. Once the press and student protest die down, there will be further crackdowns. His government by populist charismatic strongman cannot allow for freedom of the press to exist. This is why his speeches contain venom towards the USA. He needs to create strife where none really exists in order to keep his constituants under his thumb. His stance so far is historically identical to that of similar dictatorships that are anti-Democratic. USSR under Stalin, North Korea, China under Mao, Cuba, Cambodia under Pol Pot to name a few. All have been complete failures. The ones that still remain have either changed or are "closed" states with no freedoms of the press. The steps to ascendancy formula looks very much the same. Chavez is using the Fidel cookbook and following the ingredients set forth after the fall of the Batista regime letter for letter. History's dustbin is ready for another deposit and Venezuela's middle and upper classes (those with the means) will start a mass migration before utter chaos develops. This will be the next step. Look for this tell-tale sign in the coming months and years. Please save this comment so I can say I-told-you-so.romanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15988548647887978919noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11704331.post-71030786479873123902007-07-15T23:21:00.000-05:002007-07-15T23:21:00.000-05:00New to your site. Older blogger! Can't understand ...New to your site. Older blogger! <BR/><BR/>Can't understand why Americans don't ride Bush out of town on a rail. What's stopping them?<BR/><BR/>Admire Chavez. Hate Cheney, capitalism, religion, nationalism and racism though not in that order.<BR/><BR/>Bloggers must unite before we are banished!<BR/><BR/>Cheers from Down Under!Danielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02798600572745255535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11704331.post-56465359665479726182007-07-15T23:08:00.000-05:002007-07-15T23:08:00.000-05:00Here is a case of political corruption with BAE (U...Here is a case of political corruption with BAE (UK - Saudi Arabia - US):<BR/>· UK asked to hand over secret payments evidence<BR/>· Refusal could endanger sharing of intelligence <BR/>The Serious Fraud Office in London spent £2m and more than two years amassing documents which showed BAE had transferred £1bn to Washington accounts controlled by Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia, and another £1bn to Swiss bank accounts linked to agents acting for Saudi royals. The records include highly classified Ministry of Defence files detailing the government's involvement in the al-Yamamah arms deal payments.<BR/><BR/>The Saudis and BAE say the payments were all above board. But Mr Blair said the Saudi royals privately made threats to cut off intelligence links unless the investigations were halted. He claimed this might increase the risk of British citizens being murdered in al-Qaida terrorist attacks "on British streets".<BR/><BR/>The US justice department has sent its formal request for mutual legal assistance to the Home Office in London. This was confirmed by the SFO at the weekend. If ministers refuse to cooperate, they will face a fresh international crisis. The OECD, which polices international anti-bribery treaties, has already accused Britain of potentially breaching those treaties.<BR/>http://www.guardian.co.uk/baefiles/story/0,,2127191,00.html<BR/><BR/>In terms of corruption, the lack of explaining why there was no wmd in Iraq is going to hit us back in the face 20 folds at an international level, we are not credible anymore.steven rixhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18154964357134050639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11704331.post-17920536978910342852007-07-15T19:34:00.000-05:002007-07-15T19:34:00.000-05:00Beaker: of course.Beaker: of course.steven rixhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18154964357134050639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11704331.post-36036173899411247252007-07-15T16:30:00.000-05:002007-07-15T16:30:00.000-05:00Ask someone in the import export business to name ...<I> Ask someone in the import export business to name the most corrupt countries. </I> Tell me.<BR/><BR/><BR/>One decade ago, I was in the Import/Export business with the US. I could talk in lengths about the US case but I never did business with other countries such as China or India, so i can't really compare. In my pool of business opportunities, I was buying goods to the third-world countries and selling to the western countries, and I had especially problems in the US regulations with the FDA files, and many problems of getting my money back in some cases.<BR/><BR/>Hey guys I might be away for a few months. I'm working for a US corporation lately, I have one market study in Canada, followed by a marketing plan, and then I have to go to India to delocalize the operation center, so I won't be home that often. I charge them out of the ass of course, these "fat capitalist pigs". I just heard this expression on a blog earlier today :)steven rixhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18154964357134050639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11704331.post-7900883911018068502007-07-15T16:01:00.000-05:002007-07-15T16:01:00.000-05:00Hola la catalonia.Salut la Catalogne, ca va toi?Hola la catalonia.<BR/><BR/>Salut la Catalogne, ca va toi?steven rixhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18154964357134050639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11704331.post-52422193707648667612007-07-15T13:45:00.000-05:002007-07-15T13:45:00.000-05:00From 'Oil wars" 07/15/07; Yesterday I finally saw ...From 'Oil wars" 07/15/07; <I>Yesterday I finally saw a full set of poll numbers on Chavez from Datos, one the polling firms with the best track record in giving accurate numbers.<BR/><BR/>Cutting to the chase, Chavez's approval rating stands at 71.1%.<BR/><BR/>That is an astounding number, especially given all the supposedly "negative" events since last December - the formation of a single party for pro-Chavez groups (PSUV), the nationalization of major companies, all the "shortages", the "closure" of RCTV (BTW, the "closed" RCTV will magically re-open tomorrow and resume spilling its bile), and the little hate fest the Venezuelan opposition had over the past month and a half. Despite all that, despite all the rocks and insults hurled at the government, its approval rating remains at 71%!<BR/><BR/>In some other numbers from the poll 53.3% of those polled think the country has improved over the past 8 years, 18.5% think things are the same, while 24.8% think things have gotten worse.<BR/><BR/>With respect to their own personal situation 49.8% say it is better, 33.4% say it has remained the same, and 15.6% say it has gotten worse.<BR/><BR/>Asked to classify the situation of the country 45.3% say it is good, 5.3% say it is excellent, 23% say it is bad, and 16.6% say it is very bad.</I>Frank Partisanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03536211653082893030noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11704331.post-82619138001491099382007-07-15T13:28:00.000-05:002007-07-15T13:28:00.000-05:00Beatroot: Do you believe in "peak oil theory"? In...Beatroot: Do you believe in "peak oil theory"?<BR/><BR/> In line with your belief concern about Venezuela is related to its oil resources. Peru is going through gigantic general strikes that may bring down Alan Garcia is not noticed. He shut down two TV stations and three radio stations, without a peep from "Reporters Without Borders".<BR/><BR/>Another aspect is humanitarian intervention. You were the first to smarten me up about the situation in Sudan. France finished a conference on Sudan, with plans to aid Darfur, in typical imperialist fashion, didn't have speakers from the groups they support. Oil = humanitarian intervention.<BR/><BR/>Beak: The price of oil is influenced by the amount of the resource, and the demand. How profound. I'm surprised you haven't blamed Chomsky for oil prices yet.Frank Partisanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03536211653082893030noreply@blogger.com