Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5
Reply To Thread

'All are equal, but some are more equal than others"Follow

#1 May 29 2007 at 11:53 AM Rating: Good
***
3,128 posts
Bloomberg NEws wrote:
Chavez Threatens Second TV Shutdown as Protests Mount
By Guillermo Parra-Bernal and Alex Kennedy

May 29 (Bloomberg) -- Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez threatened to shut down the country's last opposition television station as students took to the streets for a third day protesting what they say is a crackdown on free speech.

Chavez said he had ``no fear'' of criticism he might face for closing Caracas-based Globovision, a 24-hour news channel that he accused of trying to instigate his assassination. The threat follows the May 27 shutdown of Radio Caracas Television, Venezuela's most-watched TV network.

``They're trying to light the streets on fire and justify violence,'' Chavez said in a televised speech to supporters broadcast from Vargas state. ``I call on the people in the slums to be alert to defend the revolution.''

The three days of rallies and disorder in Caracas and other major cities mark the longest stretch of anti-Chavez demonstrations since March 2004, when opposition-led protests demanding a vote to recall Chavez left nine dead. Clashes across Venezuela between the police and marchers injured at least 25 yesterday, El Nacional newspaper said.

The yield on the 2019 government bond, known as TICC, jumped 6 basis points to 4.88 percent, the highest since March 26, according to Econoinvest Casa de Bolsa CA prices. The price dropped 0.6 to 103.30 cents on the dollar.

University students gathered in eastern Caracas while Chavez supporters rallied downtown to back the closure of Radio Caracas TV.

Accusations

Communications and Information Minister William Lara yesterday, adding new pressure on non-state television networks in Venezuela, asked the attorney-general for a probe of foreign and local media for allegedly inciting violence.

``Chavez has just gone too far this time,'' Ruben Briceno, 22, a Central University of Venezuela student majoring in social work, said in an interview. ``First it was the shutdown of Radio Caracas. What will come next?''

Supporters of Chavez accused opposition parties of organizing the protests in a bid to overthrow Chavez, National Assembly Vice President Roberto Hernandez said.

Interior and Justice Minister Pedro Carreno said state intelligence and police services were prepared to quell any plan to destabilize politics in the country.

``What the opposition is trying to do is not appropriate,'' Hernandez told reporters in Caracas. ``They will not succeed in weakening this government.''

Barricades

Chavez's government accuses RCTV executives of using the network to help incite a coup that ousted him from office for two days in 2002.

While RCTV filled the airwaves with coverage of his ouster, it reportedly ran cartoon shows once Chavez was restored to office, declining to report his government's return to power.

Globovision television station showed students putting up barricades on the streets of El Junquito, a town about 20 kilometers (12 miles) east of Caracas. Another group temporarily blocked traffic at some points of the Prados del Este highway in Caracas, creating logjams, it said.

Groups of Radio Caracas TV supporters are planning to hold a demonstration in front of the Organization of American States' local offices.

The police deployed 3,000 officers to protect the surroundings of the OAS offices and will be reinforced by an additional 700 later today, Globovision reported, citing a police commander who declined to give his name.

RCTV's shutdown, coupled with planned probes against Time Warner Inc.'s Cable News Network and Globovision, will intensify scrutiny by regional governments and international groups of Venezuela's approach to free speech, Miguel Henrique Otero, editor-president of Caracas-based El Nacional, the nation's second-most read newspaper, said in an interview yesterday.


The Venezuelan Napoleon marches forth.

I know some nice Venezuelan people and I fear for their relatives safety as the centralization of power and abolishment of opposition that is going on today in Venezuela is following historical steps similiar to the establishment of a dictatorship.

Edited, May 29th 2007 3:55pm by fhrugby
#2 May 29 2007 at 12:56 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
I want to see Chavez waving peace signs to a crowd while intoning "I am not a dictator!" Nixon-style.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#3 May 29 2007 at 1:30 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

The Venezuelan Napoleon marches forth.

I know some nice Venezuelan people and I fear for their relatives safety as the centralization of power and abolishment of opposition that is going on today in Venezuela is following historical steps similiar to the establishment of a dictatorship.


Know anyone in the US?

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#4 May 29 2007 at 1:48 PM Rating: Decent
**
285 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
Know anyone in the US?
Worst thing about Ameh'cuns is that they all make sweeping generalisations.

All of 'em!
#5 May 29 2007 at 2:07 PM Rating: Good
If you're going read "Animal Farm", get the version illustrated by Ralph Steadman. It's neat.
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#6 May 29 2007 at 2:08 PM Rating: Decent
**
285 posts
Ralph Steadman is the man. Ink-splats 4tW!
#7 May 29 2007 at 3:31 PM Rating: Good
I have an extensive "Flying Dog" beer bottle collection, and this piece adorning the wall in my living room.

Viva Dr. Gonzo!
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#8 May 30 2007 at 2:05 AM Rating: Decent
fhrugby the Sly wrote:
The Venezuelan Napoleon marches forth.


Hey now!

At least Napoleon didn't pretend to be a Democrat. He just crowned himself Emporor, and that was that.

I'd like to know what Flea thinks about Chavez.

____________________________
My politics blog and stuff - Refractory
#9 May 30 2007 at 3:30 AM Rating: Good
*****
18,463 posts
I won't worry until I see Venezuelan women with natural breasts and their original noses on TV. Then I'll know something's up.
#10 May 30 2007 at 3:54 AM Rating: Decent
So boob jobs are covered by the Venezuelian Health System?

Caracas, here I come!

____________________________
My politics blog and stuff - Refractory
#11 May 30 2007 at 5:44 AM Rating: Good
***
3,128 posts
Monsieur RedPhoenixxx wrote:
fhrugby the Sly wrote:
The Venezuelan Napoleon marches forth.


Hey now!

At least Napoleon didn't pretend to be a Democrat. He just crowned himself Emporor, and that was that.

I'd like to know what Flea thinks about Chavez.


I was making an allegory to slightly different Napoleon.
#12 May 30 2007 at 4:00 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
fhrugby the Sly wrote:
I know some nice Venezuelan people and I fear for their relatives safety as the centralization of power and abolishment of opposition that is going on today in Venezuela is following historical steps similiar to the establishment of a dictatorship.



Ah. But it's absolutely absurd to argue that dictatorships often arise as a result of popular liberal movements. Absurd I say!!!

Yeah. Couldn't help myself. Sue me...
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#13 May 31 2007 at 1:29 AM Rating: Decent
gbaji wrote:
Ah. But it's absolutely absurd to argue that dictatorships often arise as a result of popular liberal movements.


Liberal?! What's "liberal" about Chavez? He's an old school communist, there's nothing liberal about him, or his movement!

Absurd, indeed.

____________________________
My politics blog and stuff - Refractory
#14 May 31 2007 at 5:34 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
gbaji wrote:
Ah. But it's absolutely absurd to argue that dictatorships often arise as a result of popular liberal movements. Absurd I say!!!


One could argue that if the extreme right wings weren't so damn conservative, that liberal movements wouldn't back nut jobs that use those movements to aid their cause.

It's also asinine to believe that said nut jobs couldn't form their dictatorships in a liberal state by using right wing movements to garner support.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#15 May 31 2007 at 6:56 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Any chance of this turning into a lengthy debate on whether the **** party was left or right leaning?

'Cause that would be just ducky.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#16 May 31 2007 at 7:39 AM Rating: Decent
Who could ever seriously argue that the **** party was not extreme far-right party?!

cue gbaji in 3... 2... 1...

____________________________
My politics blog and stuff - Refractory
#17 May 31 2007 at 8:19 AM Rating: Good
***
3,128 posts
Monsieur RedPhoenixxx wrote:
Who could ever seriously argue that the **** party was not extreme far-right party?!

cue gbaji in 3... 2... 1...



I think no one could seriously argue that The **** were anythign but extreme Right Wing facists in practice and doctrine once in power. However, they did pretend to be left leaning on many, but not all, issues, in building up their support early on - when they were known as the National Socialist German Workers' Party.

Edited, May 31st 2007 12:20pm by fhrugby
#18 May 31 2007 at 8:33 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Dude! It says "Socialist" RIGHT IN THEIR NAME!!! Smiley: eek
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#19 Jun 01 2007 at 1:48 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
See!!! Joph gets it. :)


Seriously though, the problem is that most of you automatically equate "oppressive dictatorship" with "right wing". Cause "right wing" means "authoritarian" to you. But that's a pretty obnoxious reinvention of the terms and isn't really correct.

You're trying to equate an end result with a method. That's why most of you don't grasp what I'm trying to point out here. The difference in conservative and liberal positions is not the end goals they're heading towards, but the methods they use to get there. They answer the question "how" when applied to governing. How do you propose we provide for the people? How should our economy work? How do we provide freedom/equality? Those are the fundamental differences between liberals and conservatives.

Either one can result in an oppressive dictatorship. Neither should be labeled as somehow associated with it. However, most people *do* associate the dictatorship with "right wing", and therefore somehow leap to the conclusion that if a nation results in an oppresive dictatorship that it must have arrived there as a result of "right wing" or "conservative" actions. Why? Because they have conveniently labeled them that way.

But when we study modern history, we find an alarming number of nations arriving in the state of dictatorship as a result of a popular movement within the nation itself. And these are *always* liberal movements. They promise things that are part of a liberal agenda (as we know it in the US anyway). They promise greater social benefits. Medical care "for the people". Housing "for the people". Jobs "for the people". Everything is "for the people". They make classical liberal promises like taking away from the rich to provide for the poor. They convince the people that the government could control the industries that make those people rich better then those people can/do and "the people" will benefit as a result. They promise a better world for their people if only they'll give power to the leader promising all of these things.

Hitler did it. Mussolini did it. Lenin and Mao did it (although they had to lead revolutions to get the power, but where supported by "the people" nonetheless). Heck. Pol Pot did it. And now Hugo Chavez is doing it.


It's not exactly a hard pattern to see. Not if you take the blinders off and look...

Edited, Jun 1st 2007 2:49pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#20 Jun 01 2007 at 1:53 PM Rating: Good
Quote:
But when we study history, we find an alarming number of nations arriving in the state of dictatorship as a result of a popular movement within the nation itself. And these are *always* liberal movements


Someone forgot about the Iranian/Islamic Revolution of 1979...
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#21 Jun 01 2007 at 2:00 PM Rating: Decent
**
285 posts
Omegavegeta wrote:
Quote:
But when we study history, we find an alarming number of nations arriving in the state of dictatorship as a result of a popular movement within the nation itself. And these are *always* liberal movements


Someone forgot about the Iranian/Islamic Revolution of 1979...
Don't forget Bush in '04
#22 Jun 01 2007 at 2:05 PM Rating: Good
Touche.
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#23 Jun 01 2007 at 2:08 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Omegavegeta wrote:
Quote:
But when we study history, we find an alarming number of nations arriving in the state of dictatorship as a result of a popular movement within the nation itself. And these are *always* liberal movements


Someone forgot about the Iranian/Islamic Revolution of 1979...


The ones that arise as a result of a "popular movement within the nation itself" are. The Iran revolution was a bit different. Honestly not terribly so though. Khomeini was in exile (in France of all places, so figure where that places him). He returned after a long campaign within Iran to depopularize the Shah and popularize Khomeini. He was able to organize upwards of a million people to attend rallys and protests against the Shah and demand his return (and empowerment).

One can certainly argue that based on the methods used it *was* a liberal process because it revolved around using popular opinion to defeat the Shah's government (marches, protests, demonstrations, etc). Of course, those who were attending the marches and protests likely didn't know what Khomeini would do once he was given power, but that's part of the point. When you use the "get the masses to protest for something different" approach to political change, you often don't know what exactly is going to replace the thing you are protesting against, which is how so many of these processes result in more oppresive regimes then the one they originally protested against.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#24 Jun 01 2007 at 2:16 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
You guys keep making somewhat arbitrary associations here. You assume that "religious" and "conservative" are associated. They're not. You assume that "liberal" always means "freedom". It doesn't. Liberal is about how you approach things, not what you're working towards.

A liberal tends to demand change. He focuses on what's not working in the society and fights for changes to fix those things.

A conservative tends to oppose change. He focuses on what is working in the society and fights to keep those things working properly (or making them work better).


While a conservative position can result in keeping things that maybe aren't working "best", or slowing down the introduction of new ideas, it will never result in a sudden shift of government (for better *or* worse). By the same token, liberal movements can result in positive changes that might take much longer to realize under a more conservative system, however the risk is that in the process of doing that, we can make things worse. Liberals tend to focus on what's wrong. They don't always make an adequate argument that the "new thing" they're doing is "better".

A good example is the last elections in this country. The Dems won, not on a ticket of what they would do, but largely based on the popular position that they other guy was doing something that they didn't like. The opposed the war, but did not really define what they were going to do differently. They won based on what they were "against", but not what they were "for".

And that's the danger of liberal movements. If you make changes based on what you're against, you often don't look too closely at what you're replacing it with. You're so focused on getting rid of something you don't like that many of those who march and protest and attend rallies have no idea what the people they're empowering are actually going to do. And that's how many modern dictatorships have been born. The people give a leader or government the power to get rid of something they don't like (or are empowered as a part of getting rid of something like a previous ruler) and then find out too late that the new system is just as bad or worse then the old one, but now they have no power to change things again.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#25 Jun 01 2007 at 2:18 PM Rating: Decent
**
285 posts
gbaji wrote:
One can certainly argue that based on the methods used it *was* a liberal process
Yes. Just one. You.

gbaji wrote:
those who were attending the marches and protests likely didn't know what Khomeini would do once he was given power
Wow. Just fUcking wow!

Yeah those banners they waved calling for Jihad were a smokescreen, right. The fact that they were mobilised in the Mosques and Madrassars by Imami and Ayatollhim was a clever red herring.

Amazed that even you would try to stretch stupidity to such elasticity.
#26 Jun 01 2007 at 2:40 PM Rating: Good
You've gotta be the only person alive who thinks that the Iranian Revolution was a "liberal process".

Khomeini certainly was "right wing". It was by using those conservative religious ideals he was able to convince the people of Iran that the Shah (the puppet Monarachy of Britain and the US of A) was worth overthrowing.

God I love the History Channel.


____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


« Previous 1 2 3 4 5
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 276 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (276)