chavez

[guevara-marley]

what do you think about chavez?

[cubalibra]

Viva Chavez!

[Atlas Swallowed]

Chavez is doing alot of good for his people at the expense of US corporate interest and the wealthy in Venezuala. He is one of the few leaders of nations in the world that I have any respect for.

[Scars]

Chavez is doing good things, but he is still a bougeois politician and is (overall) not to be trusted. He will turn when it suits him. Market Socialism isn't the answer, neither is social welfare. Revolution is the answer.

[RebeldePorLaPAZ]

but he is still a bougeois politician and is (overall) not to be trusted.

How so? He already said he's starting to dismantle capitalism and his government is doing so, he already said that socialism is the solution and he's working for it. You can't just run into an armed revolution if that’s what you are saying because down in Venezuela the proletarian are calling this a revolution and it's not an arms struggle.

Socialism doesn't come over night. It won’t come right after a revolution either; you have to make it happen. Cuba wasn't socialist when victory won. They had to build up on it. Chavez is one the left should trust.


--Paz

[Rawthentic]

very well said, comarde, I agree with you. We cant say for sure what hes gonna do or become, so lets hope that he does good for his PEOPLE and keeps the yankees at bay. I still trust him, I beleive in his revolution which need not be armed. ;)

[Karl Marx's Camel]

I do not like his idea of creating a pipeline to the amazon forest :angry: :angry: :angry: :unsure: :( It makes me feel sick in my stomach.


Besides that, I find him okay.

[ReD_ReBeL]

Yes Chavez is doing good for the poor people of venezuela and he's showing a good form of Reformist Socialism. Only thing is i don't like his foreign political connections ie. the former dickhead dictator of Iraq Saddam Hussein. A man like Saddam who has persecuted Communists all through his political career and slaughtered loads of innocent human beings. Why would a Socialist want to be linked with a Communist hater?

[LA GUERRA OLVIDADA]

The thing I've noticed about anti-Chavez people like 'Scars' is that they all have this extremely romanticized view of a "revolution". They think it will be beautiful and cool, and they'll run out in the street and throw molotov cocktails at the Pigs and then establish their little textbook Marxist-Leninist government and all will be good.

And at the end of the day these people tend to be so bourgeois that they shouldn't even be allowed to call others bourgeois. They read their little Das Kapital and think it's all so easy, while Chavez is actually DOING SOMETHING!!

I will concur with the other poster in saying, viva chavez motherfuckers.

[Luís Henrique]

What is up with this stupid idea of posting photos of two people shaking hands and implying that this means they are doing anything else besides demonstrating common sence politeness to each other?

Caramba.

Luís Henrique

[Abbigail]

Well said comrade, La Guerra

viva chavez!

[Psy]

Originally posted by Luís [email protected] 27 2006, 09:15 PM
What is up with this stupid idea of posting photos of two people shaking hands and implying that this means they are doing anything else besides demonstrating common sence politeness to each other?

Caramba.

Luís Henrique
Saddam was a brutal CIA puppet, lest Chavez could have done is gave him the bird.

[Luís Henrique]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2006, 09:49 PM
Saddam was a brutal CIA puppet, lest Chavez could have done is gave him the bird.
He was also the leader of a country that exports oil. Just like Chavez. Maybe you don't know, but oil exporting countries have an association (OPEC), which means that their leaders at times meet to discuss problems of prices and production of oil. What the point would be for Chavez to behave like a child in a meeting that is meant to discuss important economic policies? :rolleyes:

Luís Henrique

[Psy]

Originally posted by Luís Henrique+Jan 27 2006, 09:55 PM--> (Luís Henrique @ Jan 27 2006, 09:55 PM)
[email protected] 27 2006, 09:49 PM
Saddam was a brutal CIA puppet, lest Chavez could have done is gave him the bird.
He was also the leader of a country that exports oil. Just like Chavez. Maybe you don't know, but oil exporting countries have an association (OPEC), which means that their leaders at times meet to discuss problems of prices and production of oil. What the point would be for Chavez to behave like a child in a meeting that is meant to discuss important economic policies? :rolleyes:

Luís Henrique [/b]
Yes it helps Venezuela but is counterproductive to spreading revolution abroad. If Chavez was really revolutionary we would have been encouraging Iraqis to overthrow Saddam and put a end to social and economic inequality in Iraq.

Now Chavez is helping workers in Venezuela but just he is not helping the global revolution much.

[Phalanx]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2006, 10:20 PM
Now Chavez is helping workers in Venezuela but just he is not helping the global revolution much.
He has to start somewhere, doesn't he? From what I know, I don't think the working class of Venezuela was in a good state before Chavez.

Besides, Chavez has established good ties to Fidel and Evo Morales (who, at this point, cut his own salary in half). People like Chavez can make a change, but first he must make a change at home!

[ReD_ReBeL]

ok i know this isn't the proper thread to post this , but since we are on Saddam , was Fidel friends with Saddam , Cuban Gov friendly with Iraq Gov? cause i read when a failed assasination attempt on Uday Hussein left him in a bad state , it was a Cuban medical team wht helped him to recovery. I would of jst left the twat .

[Psy]

Originally posted by Chinghis Khan+Jan 27 2006, 11:15 PM--> (Chinghis Khan @ Jan 27 2006, 11:15 PM)
[email protected] 27 2006, 10:20 PM
Now Chavez is helping workers in Venezuela but just he is not helping the global revolution much.
He has to start somewhere, doesn't he? From what I know, I don't think the working class of Venezuela was in a good state before Chavez.
[/b]
The USA already tried to get rid of him through a military coup and Chavez is fighting a uphill battle aginst the media in his own country. The revolution must spread so it becomes bigger then Venezuela and Chavez, the revolution has to get a life of its own so it can't be snuffed out by counter revolutionary forces.

[Scars]

Chavez is establishing reformist socialism, this is not the answer. People still exploit one another under socialism and socialism simply gives rise to a new ruling class, like it did in the USSR. Socialism is not our goal, communism is. The establishment of communism is not on Chavez's agenda.

In the short term what he is doing is good. His actions via things like his education programmes will give more people access to knowledge and will help build a class consciousness. But in the long run Chavez and his reformist-socialist platform have no future.

As for my romantic views of revolution, well, I don't hold them. I believe that violence and revolution are necessary and honestly I do think that this is a sad thing. I'd support a peaceful revolution if it was possibly, but sadly it is not. Capitalism cannot reform itself, nor can it be reformed from within. It must be swept away.

He's a 21st century Nasser.

[MexAmLeft]

Capitalism to Democratic Socialism to Socialism to Communism, this isnt gonna happen overnight, its gonna evolve in my opinion.

[LA GUERRA OLVIDADA]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2006, 01:10 AM
Chavez is establishing reformist socialism, this is not the answer. People still exploit one another under socialism and socialism simply gives rise to a new ruling class, like it did in the USSR. Socialism is not our goal, communism is. The establishment of communism is not on Chavez's agenda.

In the short term what he is doing is good. His actions via things like his education programmes will give more people access to knowledge and will help build a class consciousness. But in the long run Chavez and his reformist-socialist platform have no future.

As for my romantic views of revolution, well, I don't hold them. I believe that violence and revolution are necessary and honestly I do think that this is a sad thing. I'd support a peaceful revolution if it was possibly, but sadly it is not. Capitalism cannot reform itself, nor can it be reformed from within. It must be swept away.

He's a 21st century Nasser.
You're stupid for thinking long term "Communism", let alone stateless-ness, can ever be established. History is a continuation of class struggle, to deny that is to be a fucking idiot.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by LA GUERRA OLVIDADA
You're stupid for thinking long term "Communism", let alone stateless-ness, can ever be established. History is a continuation of class struggle, to deny that is to be a fucking idiot.

Yeah, that Marx fellow was a "stupid fucking idiot" all right. :lol:

Clearly we have another "fan thread" here; a bourgeois reformist begins to modernize Venezuelan capitalism and establish a social "safety net" and...hallelujah, the revolution has arrived!

The Brits went through all that back in the late 40s and early 50s. In the U.S., we heard all that crap about FDR back in the 30s.

Now it's your turn to learn that words are not the same as deeds.

Yes, the standards-of-living of working people in Venezuela are going to substantially improve...and that's nice.

What it's not is "socialism"...much less communism.

It's modern capitalism.

A "stage" of development that every country must pass through on its way to proletarian revolution and communism.

I can sympathize with your enthusiasm for the wave of reformist politicians that have recently come to power in Latin America. "Change is in the air" and it's been a long time coming for you folks. The last century was a "quiet" catastrophe for Latin America...nearly ruined by servile, corrupt oligarchs and military despots. It must indeed seem emotionally like "the end of a dark age".

In a way, it is that. Your kids can look forward to living like people live in North America or Europe...with enormously wider horizons and expanded opportunities for personal development.

But try to grasp that none of this is going to change the class nature of your societies.

You are still going to have to sell your labor power in order to survive. More and more, the purchaser of your labor power will be a native capitalist rather than a foreign imperialist...and indeed, your local state apparatus is going to get a lot bigger.

And a lot more intrusive. :o

I don't really expect, of course, that Marx's ideas could even make much sense to you at this point in your history...so feel free to dismiss my remarks as the incoherent babblings of another "stupid fucking idiot".

Your great-great-grandchildren will understand what I'm talking about a lot better than you can.

Welcome to the modern world. :D

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[Soheran]

Clearly we have another "fan thread" here; a bourgeois reformist begins to modernize Venezuelan capitalism and establish a social "safety net" and...hallelujah, the revolution has arrived!

Out of curiosity, what would it take for you to call a leftist leader something other than a "bourgeois reformist"?

[Fidelbrand]

a bourgeois reformist ...... haha.

Big clash between the takes on evolution and revolution.

A big problem that hinders our solidarity.

The person that can fully answer this question shall be a great leftist.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by Soheran
Out of curiosity, what would it take for you to call a leftist leader something other than a "bourgeois reformist"?

I'm not a big fan of "leftist leaders" as a matter of principle.

Neither was Marx...


Let me cite one proof of this: such was my aversion to the personality cult that at the time of the International, when plagued by numerous moves — originating from various countries — to accord me public honour, I never allowed one of these to enter the domain of publicity, nor did I ever reply to them, save with an occasional snub. When Engels and I first joined the secret communist society, we did so only on condition that anything conducive to a superstitious belief in authority be eliminated from the Rules.

Letter, Karl Marx to Wilhelm Blos, London, November 10, 1877 (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1877/letters/77_11_10.htm)

Who was the "leader" of the Paris Commune? Of syndicalist Barcelona? Of the May 1968 French general strike? Of the February 1917 great uprising in Petrograd?

A whole bunch of people you never heard of, right?

Even professional historians have a hard time picking them out.

That's because those were real class revolutions that were "led" by ordinary working people.

That's how you tell when a real proletarian revolution is taking place.

If you see some fat mouth's mug all over the place, then you can simply forget about working class revolution...though it can certainly be some other kind of class revolution.

My impression is that the left bourgeois reformists in Latin America represent a rising native bourgeois revolution against the "old bourgeoisie" that served the imperialists as well as against any remnants of the old landed aristocracy that may still exist.

Of course, I'm always criticized for my "impressionistic" evaluations...since I am unable to be an "expert" on the "fine details" of every country in the world. :lol:

Doesn't bother me...the track record of the "experts" has not exactly been one of "stunning successes". :D

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[Luís Henrique]

Yes it helps Venezuela but is counterproductive to spreading revolution abroad.

Well, he is President of Venezuela, he is not President of Revolution Abroad!


If Chavez was really revolutionary we would have been encouraging Iraqis to overthrow Saddam and put a end to social and economic inequality in Iraq.

Perhaps he was, but wouldn't tell Hussein about that? :blink:

Come on. Chavez was a Colonel in Venezuelan Army. Do you think proletarian internationalism has had any chance to stablish itself among Venezuelan Army High Officials?


Now Chavez is helping workers in Venezuela but just he is not helping the global revolution much.

If he isn't "helping" "global revolution", how in earth can he be "helping" "workers in Venezuela"?

Anyway, be him a reformist, a nationalist, a revolutionary, an anarchist, whatever... what would giving the finger to Saddam in a summit meeting do in favour of whatever he is for, be it International Proletarian Anarchist Revolution or Venezuelan Military Neo National Socialism?

Acting out is not the same as action!

Luís Henrique

[ReD_ReBeL]

The Brits went through all that back in the late 40s and early 50s.

hey!, thanks to the Labour Party of 1949 everyone living in this country can get healthcare without doctors having to look for a check in your pocket! unlike them yanks. Sure they might not be what 'Marx' wanted but there sure as hell better than any current capitalist government.

[Atlas Swallowed]

Canada and some European countries have nationalized healthcare but I get your point and wish we had it here in the states.

[LA GUERRA OLVIDADA]

Originally posted by redstar2000+Jan 28 2006, 08:19 AM--> (redstar2000 @ Jan 28 2006, 08:19 AM)
LA GUERRA OLVIDADA
You're stupid for thinking long term "Communism", let alone stateless-ness, can ever be established. History is a continuation of class struggle, to deny that is to be a fucking idiot.

Yeah, that Marx fellow was a "stupid fucking idiot" all right. :lol:

Clearly we have another "fan thread" here; a bourgeois reformist begins to modernize Venezuelan capitalism and establish a social "safety net" and...hallelujah, the revolution has arrived!

The Brits went through all that back in the late 40s and early 50s. In the U.S., we heard all that crap about FDR back in the 30s.

Now it's your turn to learn that words are not the same as deeds.

Yes, the standards-of-living of working people in Venezuela are going to substantially improve...and that's nice.

What it's not is "socialism"...much less communism.

It's modern capitalism.

A "stage" of development that every country must pass through on its way to proletarian revolution and communism.

I can sympathize with your enthusiasm for the wave of reformist politicians that have recently come to power in Latin America. "Change is in the air" and it's been a long time coming for you folks. The last century was a "quiet" catastrophe for Latin America...nearly ruined by servile, corrupt oligarchs and military despots. It must indeed seem emotionally like "the end of a dark age".

In a way, it is that. Your kids can look forward to living like people live in North America or Europe...with enormously wider horizons and expanded opportunities for personal development.

But try to grasp that none of this is going to change the class nature of your societies.

You are still going to have to sell your labor power in order to survive. More and more, the purchaser of your labor power will be a native capitalist rather than a foreign imperialist...and indeed, your local state apparatus is going to get a lot bigger.

And a lot more intrusive. :o

I don't really expect, of course, that Marx's ideas could even make much sense to you at this point in your history...so feel free to dismiss my remarks as the incoherent babblings of another "stupid fucking idiot".

Your great-great-grandchildren will understand what I'm talking about a lot better than you can.

Welcome to the modern world. :D

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif [/b]
Hail Mary, I can only imagine what you look like.