|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
 Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2007 8:21 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Gopher wrote: |
This goes further than I intended to go, Jinju. |
Its true and you know it. I forgot to say she's also a coward and now doesnt go back to her Chavez threads, except this one. Spineless. And when she does its to lie, so I guess she's also a liar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2007 8:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So, Gopher. As an area expert (in training?) for Latin America. Where do you see this all going? Is Chavez the future, the present or the (near) past of Latin American politics, in relation to and independent of, America?
What is your take on all this? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2007 8:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Chavez is a high-profile, drama-seeking caudillo. They come and go all the time in most of Latin America and the Caribbean. Personalism dominates their politics.
As far as Chavez in Venezuela, this will not end well. People like him usually lead their followers over the abyss (Allende, for example). But I do not believe anyone needs me to tell them that.
(And, of course, when all the dust settles, people will bitterly blame America for the whole thing.)
Last edited by Gopher on Sun Mar 25, 2007 8:44 pm; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2007 8:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
As far as Chavez in Venezuela, this will not end well. People like him usually lead their followers over the abyss. But I do not believe anyone needs me to tell them that.
|
Well, economic collapse is, I think, a given. Oil or no oil, he does not have the funds to sustain what he is building. But that aside, what is "the abyss" in this situation? A full end to democracy? Gulags? ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2007 8:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
| ...what is "the abyss" in this situation? |
Do not know. Most probably a reaction against him. Domestic or regional actors.
Domestically, he has suppressed not a few voices and interests.
Moreover, he has made a huge number of regional enemies with his overtly antagonistic style and his barely-concealed intervening in Mexican, Colombian, Peruvian, Bolivian, Ecuadorian political affairs, and, a while back, the longstanding but still very touchy Chilean-Bolivian border dispute.
I understand even the Israelis broke relations with him after he subjected their ambassador to a series of righteous and emotionally-punctuated lectures during the Israeli-Hezbollah War last summer.
He has alleged the Americans and even the Vatican want him out or assassinated. He has said again and again that the W. Bush Administration perpetrated 9/11 -- thus interferring in American politics, demanding that the United States Senate investigate W. Bush over this, not to mention his populist "oil-for-the-poor" program and the doctors he wanted to send to New Orleans, likely just as a cynical, sneering propaganda device. He has also personally attacked W. Bush in the United Nations, crudely violating diplomatic protocal (again).
He is on a collision course with something, then. And, as I said above, given the direction things are going, this will not end well. Because I seriously doubt that he will moderate his position and, more probably, he will only become more extreme, more outrageous, in his efforts to stay in the spotlight of world affairs.
I would advise him to relax and work on governing Venezuela, at least for the moment. But I doubt he would listen. Probably more "go to hell, gringo!" just for daring to advise him... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2007 8:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Interesting stuff! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2007 9:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Big Bird, I am glad there are some impoverished people in Venezuela receiving health care, an education rather than being neglected in the old fashioned way. However, Chavez has too much personal power vested in him and is trying to control the economy too much. This hasn't been shown to work. It reminds me of Nasser in Egypt and the high hopes people had for him among the Egyptians. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Manner of Speaking
Joined: 09 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2007 9:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| WHAT? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Interested
Joined: 10 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2007 9:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jinju wrote: |
Its true and you know it. I forgot to say she's also a coward and now doesnt go back to her Chavez threads, except this one. Spineless. And when she does its to lie, so I guess she's also a liar. |
Yes, what a pitiful excuse for a human being! Let's hope she stays at home where she belongs, looking after those pesky brats of hers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2007 9:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Interested wrote: |
| jinju wrote: |
Its true and you know it. I forgot to say she's also a coward and now doesnt go back to her Chavez threads, except this one. Spineless. And when she does its to lie, so I guess she's also a liar. |
Yes, what a pitiful excuse for a human being! Let's hope she stays at home where she belongs, looking after those pesky brats of hers. |
you said it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2007 11:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Interested wrote: |
| jinju wrote: |
Its true and you know it. I forgot to say she's also a coward and now doesnt go back to her Chavez threads, except this one. Spineless. And when she does its to lie, so I guess she's also a liar. |
Yes, what a pitiful excuse for a human being! Let's hope she stays at home where she belongs, looking after those pesky brats of hers. |
I think Big Bird is coming from the Leftist perspective of concern for the poor and the colonized. Her views may be viewed as not so balanced from a Left perspective, but many who criticize her are not exactly balanced when they deal with the issues either.
At least, she pays attention to the impoverished masses that have been ignored for so long. Chavez has not applied Soviet style Marxism when it comes to property. I believe others besides Marx talked about land redistribution like John Locke, but John Locke talked about properly using the land and giving opportunity to all. Chavez has not shown how he will address the fact that Venezuela cannot provide for itself in terms of agriculture.
Chavez can be seen to be creating class warfare. I would like to see a coherent program by Chavez, or this giving of land may end up looking like what Mugabe and Nasser did. The poor have long been shut out of the system. He is giving them somewhat of a voice, but he has not been successful in dealing with the shortages yet. Marx had a plan, and he had some good theories. How can Chavez deal with the failed application of Socialism in the former USSR? Marxism has not worked. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
friendofIgnatius J.
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2007 7:55 pm Post subject: Dangerous Promise |
|
|
I think a solid case can be made for the good Chavez is doing in Venezuela. He had traded cheap oil for Cuban doctors and teachers to help the poor. He has built housing for the poor. All good stuff. When I went through there last year it was evident that the poor needed help and were getting some.
However, I agree that Chavez has not helped the economy that much. Undoubtedly, their economy has grown thanks to rising oil prices. To say that without oil their economy would suck is stupid. They are a poor South American country, of course their economy would suck.
I think that in the long term they are in trouble. By nationalizing the oil industry and spending the bulk of the profits on social programs, Chavez has not helped the long-term growth of the oil industry. The oil industry, like any business needs continued investment to grow. But by spending all their profits on social programs and dollar diplomacy and not providing a steady cash flow for exploration and development of new oil fields they are living on the investments of the 80's and 90's. Secondly, by nationalizing other industries, the energy industry, Chavez has scared of investors from investing in other parts of the Venezuelan economy. Thus their economy will not diversify. When the oil is gone, what will they have. Nations like Norway, UAE, and others have attempted to use their oil wealth to diversify their economies.
Plus, this guy has dictatorial tendencies. He has "suggested" that all Socialist parties be merged into his party. That his terms should be extended and has had his opposition leaders continually invested for fraud.
All in all, I think Chavez was inevitable after the IMF crisis of the 90's. Hopefully, a more moderate leader will be able to get elected. Eventually. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
crazy_arcade
Joined: 05 Nov 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2007 10:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
Chavez is a high-profile, drama-seeking caudillo. They come and go all the time in most of Latin America and the Caribbean. Personalism dominates their politics.
As far as Chavez in Venezuela, this will not end well. People like him usually lead their followers over the abyss (Allende, for example). But I do not believe anyone needs me to tell them that.
(And, of course, when all the dust settles, people will bitterly blame America for the whole thing.) |
I'm not going to say much. However, to even bring the case of Allende into this is disgusting and no true "scholar' of Latin America would say such a thing. What some people will do to justify and support crimes in the name of power politics is disgusting. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2007 11:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crazy_arcade wrote: |
| I'm not going to say much. |
Smart move.
Would not really matter much, in any case. I have had my fill of self-righteous, moralizing leftists and the Allende case on this board and no longer have the energy to take apart their pro-Communist myth-making and antiAmerican diatribes.
But if you insist on preaching the story that I know you will inevitably preach, please at least start by confirming you really have read little on the event -- and you probably cannot even cite a single book you have read treating the Allende Administration and the Chilean military's coup d'etat without Googling for information to dazzle us with anyway -- not to mention not having read any of the primary sources, including the Church Committee's interim reports, the Hinchey Report, Prat's memoirs, Davis's memoirs, any of the dox we find at State's FOIA Reading Room (online), or any of the major secondary treatments, notably Sigumund's, et cetera et cetera.
Let me guess, however...? A leftist professor told you what to think about this, you nodded your head "yes," and then you watched Missing seventeen times.
However that may be, I would simply propose we skip this. Read Jonathan Haslam's Death of Allende's Chile (London: Verso, 2005). I disagree with parts of it, including its leftist slant, but there is much that is salvageable about it: especially the author's admission that Allende was in way over his head and led Chile over the abyss -- much like Chavez is now in Venezuela.
If you like, I can link contemporaneous Soviet reports: they reached the same conclusion by summer 1973 and washed their hands of Allende. And, by the way, Haslam reports the East Germans had reached the same conclusion at around the same time (starting with Araya's death/assassination).
But this is really an old conclusion: Loveman long ago argued that Allende and his supporters acted like children attacking a castle with rosepeddles, only to express righteous indignation when the knights finally lost patience and came out and slaughtered them... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2007 2:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Salvador Allende was in power for only three years. He only had 36 percent of the vote at most, though there was a percentage of Leftist votes beyond what he got for his allies. Chavez appears to be more popular among the Venezuelan masses, and, at least, for now, he has military backing. That is why the first coup failed. He had military loyalists backing him and Ali Rodriguez told him to place guards loyal to him in strategic locations in the palace, and that helped.
There is massive poverty in Venezuela and the masses are behind him which wasn't the same in Chile. A CIA inspired plot would have a harder time getting off the ground. We are talking about a different time period, a different country, and a leader who is firmly in touch with his military. Could unrest unseat Chavez? If economic conditions lead to extreme shortage, run-away inflation etc... Then, the opposition will be able to gain ground. Fidel Casto has been around for a long time. Cuba had extreme poverty as well. Allende had a much larger opposition to start with so any small misstep would have put him in jeopardy. Chavez may just lose popularity and impoverish his country further.
I don't see a strong comparison between Allende and Chavez. Maybe Nasser and Chavez or Castro and Chavez. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
