The fact is that LoF will make any excuse he wants on the day to protect what he sees as the advance of socialism. He's not hiding anything when he does this. He's stated repeatedly that he feels terrible things can be done in support of this goal.*

 

There's nothing hypocritical in his position. Or surprising.

 

 

 

*Even if he does have the opinion that communism can be maintained through happy communes of democratically sound local groups. Imagine the waltons, but with guns and berets.

"You're confusing totalitarians with people who believe in helping others and using the government as a positive institution."

 

Except, Chavez doesn't believe that. He belives in his his own pursuit of total domination and power. He is the very defintion of a scumbag. He doesn't care about the Venezuelans. The man has no morals whatsoever.

No, it comes from my belief that personal freedoms -- including free speech- are of far greater importance than arbitrary national laws, and that the only role of government is to ensure the continuation of those same freedoms. That's (part of the reason) why I hate Communism and all other totalitarian governments.

Okay, so, you're just posting **** that doesn't have anything to do with the topic at hand while you decry EVIL SOCIALIST TOTALITARIANISM A BLOO BLOO.

 

No. I'm explaining why I detest the man and his actions.

 

"You're confusing totalitarians with people who believe in helping others and using the government as a positive institution."

 

Except, Chavez doesn't believe that. He belives in his his own pursuit of total domination and power. He is the very defintion of a scumbag. He doesn't care about the Venezuelans. The man has no morals whatsoever.

 

This.

PS: He's being arrested for spreading false information, not "being offensive."

 

One man's truth is another man's lie.

Hugo Chavez is kinda Southamericas Berlusconi. He sure does have a sense of humor.

Just because the media doesn't like your policies does not give a government the right to censor them. A democracy cannot exist without a free media.

Except, Chavez doesn't believe that. He belives in his his own pursuit of total domination and power. He is the very defintion of a scumbag. He doesn't care about the Venezuelans. The man has no morals whatsoever.

No, he does care about the Venezuelan people, that's why he uses the oil money the country gets to help the general public, subsidizes things, guarantees workers' right to strike, etc.

Just because the media doesn't like your policies does not give a government the right to censor them. A democracy cannot exist without a free media.

The guy's not even in custody any more (still can't leave the country, tho). Way to be uninformed.

Like I keep up with Venezuela's news 24/7.

 

Besides, it is all the media Chavez has shut down, not just one guy. Chavez is power hungry and he justifies it by convincing himself and his people that he is helping, but truth is he is just another petty dictator. No better than those he opposed.

Sometimes, petty dictators are a lot more effective at getting a country up on the ground. Not sure if that's the case with Venezuela, but there it is.

Like I keep up with Venezuela's news 24/7.

 

Besides, it is all the media Chavez has shut down, not just one guy. Chavez is power hungry and he justifies it by convincing himself and his people that he is helping, but truth is he is just another petty dictator. No better than those he opposed.

Yeah, except for the part where Chavez was democratically elected in every election. Stop swallowing US propaganda about him. They United States continually and effectively produces false propaganda about its strategic, political or economic enemies. The fact that it does not have a state press has never stopped it.

Like I keep up with Venezuela's news 24/7.

 

Besides, it is all the media Chavez has shut down, not just one guy. Chavez is power hungry and he justifies it by convincing himself and his people that he is helping, but truth is he is just another petty dictator. No better than those he opposed.

Yeah, except for the part where Chavez was democratically elected in every election. Stop swallowing US propaganda about him. They United States continually and effectively produces false propaganda about its strategic, political or economic enemies. The fact that it does not have a state press has never stopped it.

 

Actually, you're incorrect. To be classed as a 'democracy', a nation requires a free press, which Venezuela clearly doesn't have.

Actually, you're incorrect. To be classed as a 'democracy', a nation requires a free press, which Venezuela clearly doesn't have.

A) No it doesn't.

B) Yes it does.

King Smurf was democratically elected too...

 

(read the plot summary if you haven't read the comic)

Actually, you're incorrect. To be classed as a 'democracy', a nation requires a free press, which Venezuela clearly doesn't have.

A) No it doesn't.

B) Yes it does.

 

Explain to me how you are going to maintain fair and transparent elections without an independent and free press?

Actually, a democracy is not necessarily liberal. It's just that the particular model of democracy the West has adopted and thinks everyone else should adopt happens to be a liberal democracy.

I believe the point Mr Krezack was trying to make is that a democracy without a free press is like a car without wheels. It may still be a car but you won't get anything like the optimal performance out of it.

Democracy? Optimal performance? Hah!

Like I keep up with Venezuela's news 24/7.

 

Besides, it is all the media Chavez has shut down, not just one guy. Chavez is power hungry and he justifies it by convincing himself and his people that he is helping, but truth is he is just another petty dictator. No better than those he opposed.

Yeah, except for the part where Chavez was democratically elected in every election. Stop swallowing US propaganda about him. They United States continually and effectively produces false propaganda about its strategic, political or economic enemies. The fact that it does not have a state press has never stopped it.

 

And who controls the elections... The government. His government.

Actually, a democracy is not necessarily liberal. It's just that the particular model of democracy the West has adopted and thinks everyone else should adopt happens to be a liberal democracy.

 

That's odd, I'm pretty sure I posted a civil and coherent reply to this... was it deleted? I'm guessing it wasn't actually. ****ing browser...

 

Anyway, Tigranes, I'd like you to reply to this, because I can't be bothered typing the whole thing out again: Explain to me how you are going to maintain fair and transparent elections without an independent and free press?

 

Because democracy without a critical and independent press is like a judge whose wages are paid by your accuser.

And who controls the elections... The government. His government.

Feel free to find an election watch organization which claims voter fraud is ongoing in Venezuela. Go right ahead, I'll wait.

I believe the point Mr Krezack was trying to make is that a democracy without a free press is like a car without wheels. It may still be a car but you won't get anything like the optimal performance out of it.

Eighty percent of the public in the United States believes that the country is "run by a few big interests looking out for themselves." "Optimal performance" and bourgeois democracy cannot fit together.

Explain to me how you are going to maintain fair and transparent elections without an independent and free press?

Self control.

 

e: besides, the idea that Venezuela doesn't have a free press is bull**** that the US comes up with to prepare for the 2012 coup d'etat.

Edited March 31, 201015 yr by lord of flies

And as much resources Chavez has now he could just buy off the people such organization would send or simply deny them access to his country.

And as much resources Chavez has now he could just buy off the people such organization would send or simply deny them access to his country.

That's not really how election watch organizations work. Go away.

MAKE ME! I dare you!

I believe the point Mr Krezack was trying to make is that a democracy without a free press is like a car without wheels. It may still be a car but you won't get anything like the optimal performance out of it.

Eighty percent of the public in the United States believes that the country is "run by a few big interests looking out for themselves." "Optimal performance" and bourgeois democracy cannot fit together.

 

It's not as bad as that, but they're probably not too far wrong.

 

The problem is, you're pretending that America has a well-oiled, functional democracy. It doesn't. It has a pathetically cumbersome two-party state with a political system and cultural mentality that encourages irrational extremism and which is largely paid for by economically powerful lobby groups.

 

This does not make the situation in Venezuela any less totalitarian, it's just an unfortunate observation of the American political system. Which is at least still essentially democratic with more than one party and a free press.

 

Perhaps you should compare Venezuela to a democracy that is functioning well, such as Australia, New Zealand, Brazil or one of the many states of Europe (not the UK or Canada with their horribly planned first past the post systems). Or would this ruin your ability to rant?

Yes, Brazil is far more democratic than the US. I just heard a report yesterday how in Brazil police don't bother to arrest criminals, they just execute them on the spot.