Venezuela nationalises steel firm

[bemildred]

Source: al Jazeera

The Venezuelan government has ordered the nationalisation of a large foreign-owned steelmaker, extending a wave of state takeovers of private companies.

Caracas said on Wednesday that Ternium Sidor would be taken into state hands, sending the Argentinian-Italian controlled company's shares plummeting.

---

Ramon Carrizalez, the Venezuelan vice-president, said the nationalisation was meant to protect workers' rights and complained that the company showed "great arrogance" in talks with unions.

"The president has instructed me to inform the company that the government is taking control of the business," Carrizalez said.

Read more: http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/1FBD9E07-8D14-4650-AF65-57F37DB2D260.htm

---

:popcorn:

[Doctor Cynic]

1. This won't end well. n/t

[harmonicon]

27. what makes you think that? NT

[bemildred]

2. Venezuela renationalizes iron, steel industry

CARACAS, April 9 (Xinhua) -- The Venezuelan government announced Wednesday the renationalization of the Orinoco Iron and Steel (Sidor) enterprise, the biggest steel group in this South American country.

The measure is the second of its type affecting foreign capital this week after Colombian President Hugo Chavez announced on April 3 the nationalization of the cement industry.

---

Carrizales called Ternium-Technit directors to begin negotiations with the government to sell their 60 percent share. The government holds 20 percent and the workers hold 20 percent.

Sidor was privatized in 1997 by the previous Venezuelan government.

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-04/10/content_7953022.htm

[rAVES]

4. Columbian president Hugo Chavez?

Swanky reporting there!!! lol

[Dr.Phool]

5. Hugo took over Columbia, and nobody noriced?

With this administration, it's believable.

[papau]

3. But we bribed the previous Venezuelan Government to sell the state asset to our Rich folks -not fair

[Oerdin]

6. This isn't for the people.

This, like most other actions Chavez has taken, is mainly to expand Chavez's personal power and that isn't a good thing for Venezuela. I will never understand why so many people on this site continue supporting authoritarian figures like Chavez and Mugabe.

[lostinacause]

7. I think there is a tendency for people who feel strongly about Chavez to offer their opinion.

In my opinion much of the support arose from comments made about Bush. That would certainly be the most justifiable reason for supporting him as it was clear where he was headed. Chevez is going to continue to lose support at DU as he continues his path to ruining Venezuela.

[rAVES]

13. Ruining Venezuela? I dont mind telling you how Ignorant you seem saying that.

[lostinacause]

50. Perhaps ruin is a bit of an exaggeration, but everything that he has done that has been

an improvement was started early in his presidency. However, when you look at the successful liberal democracies you generally do not see the same degree of government intervention in the day to day lives of citizens. You ideally an education system that shows people a variety of view points promoting diversity and self-identity. You see an institutional structure that grants a great deal of flexibility to people, the government usually does not directly control the operations but rather provide the mechanisms to every citizen to the opportunity to achieve their goals. The media as a complete entity is generally fair and does not hold primarily onto one groups conception of the good. Politicians do not systematically use hatred as a mechanism to acquire political power. Beyond the basics necessary to survive these are the things that really matter. It ought to be clear that Chevez is moving Venezuela further away from these goals. Call me ignorant if you wish, but I hold little regard for the political viewpoints of Chevez and his supporters. In many regards there are the antithesis of what it means to be liberal.

[Judi Lynn]

51. Maybe you could help raise the general consciousness by sharing what you have learned about Hugo

Chavez's "improvements" accomplished "early in his presidency."

No doubt you'd be assisting the ones here who obviously don't know anything whatsoever. It sounds as if you have done an impressive amount of reading on the subject.

They should pay close attention to your informed answer.

[Judi Lynn]

52. To refresh memories, here's a quick grab from google. As it's the first thing I saw, there are

other, more recent ones, obviously. This was published in August, 2005:

In Venezuela over 80 percent of the population lives below the poverty level. Before Chavez, most of the poor had never seen a doctor or dentist. Their children never went to school, since they could not afford the annual fees. The neoliberal market "adjustments" of the 1980s and 1990s only made things worse, cutting social spending and eliminating subsidies in consumer goods. Successive Administrations did nothing about the rampant corruption and nothing about the growing gap between rich and poor, the growing malnutrition and desperation.
Far from ruining the country, here are some of the good things the Chavez government has accomplished:
* A land reform program designed to assist small farmers and the landless poor has been instituted-this past March a large landed estate owned by a British beef company was occupied by agrarian workers for farming purposes
* Education is now free (right through to university level), causing a dramatic increase in grade school enrollment
* The government has set up a marine conservation program and is taking steps to protect the land and fishing rights of indigenous peoples
* Special banks now assist small enterprises, worker cooperatives, and farmers
* Attempts to further privatize the state-run oil industry-80 percent of which is still publicly owned-have been halted and limits have been placed on foreign capital penetration
* Chavez kicked out U.S. military advisors and prohibited overflights by U.S. military aircraft engaged in counterinsurgency in Colombia
* "Bolivarian Circles" have been organized throughout the nation, neighborhood committees designed to activate citizens at the community level to assist in literacy, education, vaccination campaigns, and other public services
* The government hires unemployed men, on a temporary basis, to repair streets and neglected drainage and water systems in poor neighborhoods

Then there is the health program. I visited a dental clinic in Chavez's home state of Barinas. The staff consisted of four dentists, two of whom were young Venezuelan women. The other two were Cuban men who were there on a one-year program. The Venezuelan dentists noted that in earlier times dentists did not have enough work. There were millions of people who needed treatment, but care was severely rationed by one's ability to pay. Dental care was distributed like any other commodity, not to everyone who needed it, but only to those who could afford it.

When the free clinic in Barinas first opened it was flooded with people seeking dental care. No one was turned away. Even opponents of the Chavez government availed themselves of the free service, temporarily putting aside their political aversions.
Many of the doctors and dentists who work in the barrio clinics (along with some of the clinical supplies and pharmaceuticals) come from Cuba. Chavez has also put Venezuelan military doctors and dentists to work in the free clinics. Meanwhile, much of the Venezuelan medical establishment is vehemently opposed to the free clinic program, seeing it as a Cuban communist campaign to undermine medical standards and physicians' earnings. That low-income people are receiving medical and dental care for the first time in their lives does not seem to be a consideration that carries much weight among the more "professionally minded" practitioners.

I visited one of the government-supported community food stores that are located around the country, mostly in low income areas. These modest establishments sell canned goods, pasta, beans, rice, and some produce and fruits at well below market price, a blessing in a society with widespread malnutrition.

Popular food markets have eliminated the layers of middlepeople and made staples more affordable for residents. Most of these markets are run by women. The government also created a state-financed bank whose function is to provide low-income women with funds to start cooperatives in their communities.

There is a growing number of worker cooperatives. One in Caracas was started by turning a waste dump into a shoe factory and a T-shirt factory. Financed with money from the Petroleum Ministry, the coop has put about 1,000 people to work. The workers seem enthusiastic and hopeful.

Surprisingly, many Venezuelans know relatively little about the worker cooperatives. Or perhaps it's not surprising, given the near monopoly that private capital has over the print and broadcast media. The wealthy media moguls, all vehemently anti-Chavez, own four of the five television stations and all the major newspapers.

http://thirdworldtraveler.com/Parenti/GoodThings_Venezuela.html

"The enormous gap between what US leaders do in the world and what Americans think their leaders are doing is one of the great propaganda accomplishments of the dominant political mythology."

Michael Parenti

[lostinacause]

97. Given what you have said it is unnecessary.

Do you think that it is necessary to violate many of the fundamental aspects of liberalism to get these things? Liberalism is about more then just economic equality. In fact most theories of liberalism center around thing other then economics.

[Judi Lynn]

98. Then share what you've got regarding the violation of "fundamental aspects of liberalism."Thanks. nt

[bitchkitty]

126. LOL - I want to know about those fundamental aspects too!

But all I hear are crickets chirping...

[rAVES]

104. One step at a time... He's providing education to those that otherwise wouldnt get one...

Educated people seek out their own view points.. while the poor uneducated never get the chance.

all people like you seem to want to do is provide credence to the neo liberal scumbags who want their own way in that country.. by all means drink it in... but don't expect much backup from real progressives.

[Ima]

149. education

The school days are longer than ours. The students are provided three meals a day. Here we will provide breakfast and lunch. But to a poor kid it would be a long time from school lunch to breakfast.

I don't know how to find my old posts anymore, but I had some articles about when Chavez first took over.

[niceypoo]

137. Chavez is a clown...

Ahmadinejad, Bush and Chavez, the three stooges of world politics. Chavez, like Bush and Ahmadinejad, is a freaking buffoon.

All of that aside, I think it is about time a Latin American country broke away from the neo-liberal economic policies that has sucked the life out of the region for the last 500 years.

[bitchkitty]

119. No, he isn't.

The same people who support Chavez now will continue to support him - because we've become pretty much immune to the propaganda tactics practiced by some.

Viva Chavez! :)

[Peace Patriot]

9. The Venezuelan people elected Chavez--in elections that put our own to shame

for their transparency. In the 2006 presidential election, he won 63% of the vote, and he currently enjoys an approval rating of nearly 70%. Chavez's policies have been thoroughly vetted over the last ten years. He is not an unknown. He has not hidden his views. And the corporate news media in Venezuela remains largely in the hands of vitriolic rightwing Chavez critics (despite the denial of a license renewal to the rightwing coupsters at RCTV). So it's not as if people have not heard the other side. The other side dominates the airwaves, in Venezuela and among global corporate predator news organizations like the Associated Pukes.

So, who you are really blaming is the Venezuelan people--for electing Chavez and his government and an overwhelmingly pro-Chavez National Assembly. It was the National Assembly that voted Chavez limited edict powers on economic issues--limited in scope and in time--to address problems in critical industries that are essential to Venezuela's survival. Previous National Assemblies have done the same thing with regard to previous Presidents. This is not "authoritarian." It is the will of the people--expressed in their electing Chavez, repeatedly, by ever increasing margins of victory, and electing National Assembly members who largely support Chavez's policies. Democracy in Venezuela is working exactly as democracy should work. There is absolutely nothing that Chavez has done that is illegal or authoritarian, or that even raises much objection, outside of the minority rightwing, the Bush Junta and the corporate press. He has been running a scrupulously lawful, beneficial government for ten years. Strength and authoritarianism are two very different things. I don't at all mind government leaders using their political strength on behalf of the people, against moneyed interests. As our own FDR said, "Organized money hates me--and I welcome their hatred!" Strength--confidence, sure action, political wherewithal--is a good thing, in leftist hands. I wish we had some here, in our party leadership.

Unlike us, the Venezuelan people have the right to directly recall their president. In fact, the Bush Junta tried to use this against the Chavez government, in 2004, by using our tax money to fund a rightwing recall campaign (which Chavez easily won). (They furthermore paid Mark Penn's P.R. firm to create a false poll, claiming that Chavez had not won--to foment rightwing riots and try to instigate another coup.) But a genuine recall effort could be mounted, if Venezuelans decide they don't like Chavez's policies any more.

I have to laugh at your assertion that "This isn't for the people." When have private corporations ever been for the people? Venezuelans know this. Some of us have yet to learn it. But they know it, most of them. You say that almost everything Chavez has done ("most actions Chavez has taken") are to expand his "personal power." On what basis are you making that judgement? FDR, for instance, acquired enormous personal power during his FOUR terms in office, but he was supported by the majority of Americans because they knew that he was using his power for their benefit. Chavez's election numbers, and his approval numbers--not to mention Venezuela's nearly 10% economic growth over the last five years, with the PRIVATE sector showing the most growth (not including oil)--indicate that Venezuelans have made the same judgement of Chavez--that he is using his power for the benefit of the majority. Why should we believe your assessment, and not theirs?

Do you even know what the differences are between Venezuela's election system and our own? I'll bet you can't tell me. And, if you don't know, you should find out--like I have taken the trouble to do. The differences between our election system and Venezuela's are why we have a president with a 20% approval rating (which our Democratic Congress has equaled, as a matter of fact--both elected branches of our government are scorned by the people), and Venezuela has a president with a 70% approval rating. There, the majority actually has power; here, we do not.

So, let's translate your statements, and substitute "the Venezuelan people" for "Chavez," and see what we come up with:

You wrote...

"This, like most other actions Chavez has taken, is mainly to expand Chavez's personal power and that isn't a good thing for Venezuela. " --Oerdin

Translated by me...

This, like most other actions that the people of Venezuela (have) taken, (are) mainly to expand the people of Venezuela's personal power and that isn't a good thing for Venezuela.

You see? You are attacking democracy, by personalizing your statement, and attacking Chavez, and failing to acknowledge that he was elected, and has great support. "That isn't a good thing for Venezuela"? Says you.

You also wrote...

"I will never understand why so many people on this site continue supporting authoritarian figures like Chavez and Mugabe."

Well, maybe you could start by understanding that I and others at this site know that Chavez was honestly elected, because we have done our homework and know the facts. We further know that he does not resemble Robert Mugabe in any way. So I'm asking you two questions: 1) What are the key differences between Venezuela's election system and our own, that make theirs transparent and valid and ours non-transparent and very invalid? And 2) What, in your opinion, are the similarities between Chavez and Mugabe? And please include answers to these questions: Who has Chavez killed (vs. Mugabe)? When did Chavez bar international election monitors (vs. Mugabe)? And what is Chavez's view on equal rights for gays (vs. Mugabe's)?

[Vidar]

11. Great post. Thank you.

[northzax]

73. wait a second

so being fairly elected means that all actions of that person represent the 'will of the people'? So you support nafta, right? There is no question that bill Clinton was fairly elected, twice, correct? And he made no secret of his support for nafta, therefore, it must represent the will of the people at that time, right? Exact same logic. Please, explain how I am wrong? Nafta represeted the will of the people at that point, therefore it must be good for the people? Right?

[guyanakoolaid]

10. Why lump Chavez and Mugabe together? No doubt to complete your smear.

Chavez wanted less term limits for President. The President would still have had to be democratically elected, and this proposal was democratically voted down. Care to try to provide any other examples of "most of Chavez's actions are to expand his personal power?" or can we safely assume you, like the MSM, think if you throw enough slander and shit that eventually it will just stick on its own?

[Peace Patriot]

16. I'm afraid I agree. We have DU commenters who just say things like this--

trying to link Chavez and Mugabe--but they don't have anything to back it up. The two-sentence hit piece, which seems straight from the Karl Rove "talking point" sheet. Politics as psyops--just get that hit in there, whatever it is. Authoritarian; Mugabe. And there seem to be cadres of people who do this--all with the latest "talking point." (I've seen this Mugabe crap in other posts recently. It's the new one.) I don't expect a reply--or, if there is one, I expect it to be another one-sentence or two-sentence hit. I certainly don't expect this poster to actually answer my questions, because I don't think this poster knows anything about either subject--Venezuela's transparent elections, or Mugabe.

The trouble with this kind of Fox News discourse (wingers out to score "hits" and yelling "talking points" at each other) is that it's hard to get a GOOD discussion going, with well-intentioned, well-informed people actually trying to understand the rather amazing leftist, democratic revolution that is occurring in South America--not just in Venezuela, but also in Ecuador, Bolivia, and Argentina (with Venezuela, the lead countries in social justice and regional self-determination) and also with leftist governments in Uruguay, Brazil, Chile and Nicaragua--and soon (this April) in Paraguay. (That leaves only the fascist death squadders in Colombia, and the corrupt 'free traders' in Peru--and Peru will likely go leftist in the next election cycle.)

This revolution cries out for examination--for many reasons, not the least of which is the EXAMPLE it gives us of how to go about a leftist revolution HERE. The South Americans are in stages of recovery from brutal fascist regimes. They are way ahead of us in understanding how to restore democracy. Another reason is that our government is actively seeking to destroy these democracies, and we should be doing everything we can to educate our people and to help prevent that from happening. A third reason is that it is an absolutely fascinating revolution with tremendous historical importance. In Bolivia, for instance, they have elected the first indigenous president, ever--in a largely indigenous country. But even more than this, U.S. corporations and moneyed interests have always regarded South America as a place to plunder and oppress, and the South Americans have never been able to pull together, as they are doing now, to fight back and to declare their right to control their own affairs and their own resources, and do something about it. Chavez has been particularly visionary on this issue--they must pull together, economically, and politically. But this is a movement that goes way, way, way beyond one man, one leader. It is a GRASS ROOTS movement, all over South America--and has MANY leaders--Evo Morales in Bolivia, Rafael Correa in Ecuador, Cristina Fernandez da Kirchner in Argentina, Tabare Vasquez in Uruguay, to name a few. This movement PUT Chavez into office--and kept him there through a violent rightwing military coup attempt--and through every shitty thing the Bushites have tried to do to overthrow him. That's the architecture of power in Venezuela--and all over South America. The PEOPLE are becoming the rulers. Democracy, by God, is happening in our own hemisphere! As Evo Morales has said: "The time of the people has come." It is a great event. It is like our own revolution, only it is--incredibly--completely peaceful.

The Bushites are trying to start a war in South America. They lust to restore global corporate predator control of the oil in the Andes (lots and lots of it in Venezuela and Ecuador--the two biggest Bushite targets). They recently tried to get Colombia (armed to the teeth by the Bushites) into a war with Ecuador and Venezuela. That failed. (Chavez headed them off--a diplomatic feat for which President Lula da Silva of Brazil called him "the great peacemaker.") The Bushites will now probably focus (for the moment) on Bolivia, where a white separatist movement intends to split off the eastern provinces (where the gas and oil are). I strongly suspect that the Bushites are funding, arming and organizing these white separatists, and hope to draw Venezuela and Ecuador (allies of Evo Morales) into a war in that situation. The threatened split up of Bolivia could happen soon--in May (because of certain constitutional maneuverings that will likely come to a head then). This is what the Colombian 'free' trade deal is all about--economic warfare and military warfare against the Andean democracies. Our money. Our military (DynCorp, Blackwater, and conventional forces with bases in Ecuador, Paraguay, Chile and other places.) (Ecuador's president has pledged not to renew the lease for the U.S. airbase in Ecuador in 2009, by the way--one of the reasons the Bushites hate him. Correa is a card. When the Miami press asked him about this, he said that he would agree to U.S. boots on the ground in Ecuador when the U.S. permits Ecuador to place an Ecuadoran military base in Miami!)

So this crisis could be upon us before we know it--and could become a big factor in the November election. The Bushite demonization of Hugo Chavez (and now, Rafael Correa as well) has not been without purpose. It is pre-war psyops--very like Iraq WMDs. It is aimed at brainwashing North Americans so that we sleep through their planned horrors in South America, as we have done (generally) in the past. I don't think the Bushites are going to succeed. They are fighting history. They are like to Bourbons in France, or the Tsars in Russia, or the Brits here. They just don't get it. They can cause a lot of trouble--and suffering and grief--but they can't win.

Probably the best thing we could be doing is supporting the labor-friendly Democrats in Congress who are blocking the Colombian 'free' trade deal. That deal is part of a Rumsfeld war strategy, some of which he reveals in this article...

"The Smart Way to Beat Tyrants Like Chávez," by Donald Rumsfeld, 12/1/07
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/30/AR2007113001800.html

He urges "swift action" by the U.S. in support of "friends and allies" in South America. I think he means the white separatists in Bolivia. When Donald Rumsfeld starts talking about "tyrants," you know that chaos and bloodshed are the means, and oil is the goal.

[niceypoo]

139. Chavez attempted to become president permenantly

He attempted to become dictator but, fortunately, he lost in his bid.

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news/2204">Venezuelan Enabling act allows Chavez to dictate laws by decree

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/dec/03/venezuela.usa">Chávez loses bid to rule until 2050

[Judi Lynn]

140. Don't you ever READ these links? Your first one says 5 previous Vene. Presidents used this authority

and that Chavez himself used it twice earlier. Here's that quote from your first article:

This is the third time Chavez has received such authorization during his presidency and Chavez is the fifth Venezuelan president to take advantage of this power, which both the 1961 and the 1999 constitutions permit.

Also, you're wildly unfocused when you screech losing term limits qualifies national leaders as "dictators." Completely ignorant. Franklin D. Roosevelt was in his FOURTH term, completely turning our country around after a devastating depression, when he died. During that time, American business had actually attempted to start a revolution against him, which didn't pan out. Here's a reference to that:

Business Plot
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The Business Plot (also known as the Plot Against FDR or the White House Putsch) was a political conspiracy in 1933 where several wealthy businessmen and corporations planned to overthrow the presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Details of the plot came to light in early 1934, when retired Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler testified before the McCormack-Dickstein Congressional Committee.<1> In his testimony, Butler claimed that a group of men had approached him as part of a plot to overthrow Roosevelt in a military coup. One of the alleged plotters, Gerald MacGuire, vehemently denied any such plot. In their final report, the Congressional committee supported Butler's allegations of the existence of the plot,<2> but no prosecutions or further investigations followed, and the matter was mostly forgotten.

Major General Butler claimed that the American Liberty League was the plot's primary source of funding. The main backers were the Du Pont family, as well as leaders of U.S. Steel, General Motors, Standard Oil, Chase National Bank, and Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company. The 2007 BBC radio documentary The White House Coup<3> alleged that Prescott Bush, father and grandfather to the 41st and 43rd US Presidents respectively, was also connected with the plot.<3>

More:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot

After that brain stroke, right-wingers threw all their effort into establishing term limits because they decided they wouldn't allow another Democrat to be in office that long.

Countries all over the world have leaders who are elected WITHOUT TERM LIMITS. Hardly a new concept, and they are not dictators, obviously. Just the sub-normal right-wing would even be ignorant enough to swallow that crap. Don't you grasp the fact that the people STILL have to elect the man if he is to remain in office? That means it's THEIR CHOICE. It's not yours.

Built into the Venezuelan constitution is the provision for a recall election, should the people decide to remove the President from office, rather than waiting for a Congress to impeach him, as they were going to do with Nixon and did, with Clinton. Anytime after the first half of the current term, the people are legally entitled to petition and to vote to recall the President. Is your own President that responsive to his public? Maybe another right-winger genius can help you with that answer.

[JohnnyCougar]

141. Absolutely wrong.

Not that facts are going to stop you, but rescinding term limits in a democracy is absolutely not a dictatorship. Was FDR a dictator? How about all our senators? Are they part of a dictatorship?

[Warren Stupidity]

17. I'll go with 'not a dictator' for 800 dollars, Alex. nt.

[harmonicon]

28. hold on a minute there

This industry was state owned until just over 10 years ago. It was privatized by the previous corrupt administration. This is simply a return to order and good policy.

[Judi Lynn]

39. You bet it was. The BBC timeline for Venezuela says oil, steel were nationalized in 1973. n/t

[DutchLiberal]

44. I'll never understand why ignorant and clueless people continue to conflate Chavez with dictators...

Oh, wait, I do... They must believe the Western press.

[King Coal]

8. Shit. If he nationalizes the gold fields, I'm out several thousands of dollars.

It just makes me sick to my stomach guys. I'm gonna be screwed.

[Warren Stupidity]

18. Why would that be?

If Venezuela nationalizes the gold fields, gold will not lose value, profits derived from mining gold will go the Venezuelan government rather than to the former owners of the gold mine. Nationalization is done with full compensation, share holders get bought out. The value of shares in specific gold minig companies might take a hit, but they will not lose all their value.

[Vidar]

12. Another step in his campaign to undo 200 years of European colonialism. Bravo, Hugo!

[DuaneBidoux]

14. I don't care what happened when, to continue nationalizing everything that disagrees with you willy

nilly will soon lead to a non functioning soviet style economy.

This isn't democratic, this is authoritarian rule by a cult of personality.

I know there have been many injustices in their past, but to continue taking property away from stockholders, foreigners, and even Venezuelans without due process or compensation is a disaster for any economy anytime--it has never worked anywhere before.

[Peace Patriot]

20. The Venezuelan Constitution includes protections for private property and

Hugo Chavez has never violated the Venezuelan Constitution or any Venezuelan law. The owners will receive fair compensation.

How can you say that "This isn't democratic"? It is VERY democratic. He is not acting as a "cult of personality." He is acting as the legitimate, elected, LAWFUL president of Venezuela, who has been granted limited powers over the economy, by the legitimate, elected, LAWFUL National Assembly. What is so sacrosanct about "stockholders" anyway? They are just gamblers. Chavez is obviously trying to insulate Venezuela's economy against the shocks of Bushitism, which are starting to hit us here in the U.S., and probably also against the DELIBERATE Bushite sabotage of critical Venezuelan industries. That is not "authoritarian." That is SMART. That is good government. That is what he was elected to do!

Every government on earth holds the powers of eminent domain, and many don't bother with "compensation"--as the Chavez government has done (and will do in this case as well--there is no reason to think otherwise).

France, Sweden, Norway, Italy and numerous other countries have nationalized various industries that they consider essential to their SOVEREIGNTY and to the welfare of their people. Free enterprise is alive and well in these countries, as it is in Venezuela. The industries that Chavez has nationalized--cement and steel--are essential building materials, and building is a linchpin of the Chavez government's economic plan--as well as being vulnerable to Bushite/global corporate predator manipulation. Chavez did not nationalize the oil. That was nationalized long before Chavez was elected. And Norway's Statoil, France's Total, British BP and even Chevron are cooperating with Chavez's deal that Venezuela gets 60% of the profit from its own oil. So, what do you mean by "nationalizing everything...willy nilly"? That is not happening.

Do you think it's "democratic" to have Exxon Mobil holding us hostage to their zillion dollar profiteering, and to their goddamned war in Iraq? What would be truly democratic would be to nationalize Exxon Mobil! Pull their corporate charter, dismantle them and seize their assets for the common good. They are DESTROYING the trucking industry and every mail order business in the country--not to mention the airline industry! Chavez has the right idea. When corporate greed threatens the lifelines of your country, you MUST take action against them--if you are president. Otherwise you are a TRAITOR--like Bush!

[Warren Stupidity]

21. 'democratic' means 'neoliberal capitalism'

Since the reagan counter revolution the meaning of the word, from Chile to Iraq has been transformed by the right from its original meaning of government by the people, to a government of any form that promotes laissez faire capitalism. The less government interference in the affairs of corporations, the more 'democratic' a system is, in rightwingworld.

[Nederland]

41. The owners will receive fair compensation?

And I wonder who gets to decide the definition of "fair"... :eyes:

[Judi Lynn]

48. If you were seriously concerned you'd probably research it, rather than idly speculating. n/t

[Nederland]

53. Ok, I researched it

This is what I learned: shareholders will have no choice in the matter--they have to sell their holdings to the government at a price that is set by the government. By definition, a transaction that occurs without the free consent of both parties is not fair.

[tama]

159. True

I have never agreed to the neoliberal transaction of social value, where shareholder value (aka pure greed) surpasses all other values. Fuck shareholder value, fuck institutional greed!

Or do you really believe that "greed is good" and that shareholder value - especially as highest social value - gives something good?

Why oh why, if not for the neoliberal dogma of "shareholder value" fetish, is your country and the whole global horribility bankrupt not only morally but now also economically?

[DutchLiberal]

45. 'Without compensation'? You didn't read the whole article, did you?

[Nederland]

46. I'm sure they will be compensated

...in a mannner that Hugo defines to be "fair". :eyes:

[DutchLiberal]

49. Yeah, I'm sure you have all the inside-information already at your disposal.

:eyes:

[ljm2002]

56. "taking property away..."

"...without due process or compensation..."

Would you care to back up this assertion with a citation? Or did you just pull this little nugget out of your a... out of thin air?

[SteinbachMB]

15. This Jackass needs to be exposed

...in a major way so the world can know exactly what he is, and what he is doing. (Ya, like that's going to happen.)

[Warren Stupidity]

19. OMG he is a SOCIALIST!

The Jackass is the leader of a political party that advocates the transformation of Venezuela into a democratic socialist system. There is nothing to expose here. It is all right out in the open.

[SteinbachMB]

22. I'd like to see him in a sit down interview

...with a decent journalist/interviewer, and have to answer some basic questions about world affairs. Give him about 20 minutes and I guarantee he will be seen for the idiot he is. What I'm saying is that I think his core beliefs are on the lunatic fringe, and I don't think much of the world realizes this.

[tama]

24. Lunatic fringe?

Like DU and any person not believing in the official dogma of neoliberalism?

[SteinbachMB]

26. No.

Like ask him some simple questions about world events/history, and I think you'll find out he's a little crazy/ignorant.

[harmonicon]

30. As compared to who?

Our great leader? Chavez is highly informed, well traveled, and well read. He also has military experience. His level of international non-ignorance should be a bench-mark for leaders across the globe.

[SteinbachMB]

32. Based upon his speeches at the UN

... I don't think he's very bright at all.

[Flanker]

38. You are either prejudiced or racist

From close observations I think he is one of the smartest leaders today, the way he is always outflanking the opposition (barring the last election he could have very well won), and outflanking the US. You wanna guess what his #1 weapon? people underestimating him for his race and speech style. His former "mentor" turned adversary remarked the way he would easily troll the detractors, by for example calling a carrot a pencil, leading the opposition spending an entire week talking about he is too stupid to govern. And therefore a week not offering an alternative.

[SteinbachMB]

107. Neither.

I'm sensible. Chavez is a wannabe-dictator, who would like to remain in power as long as possible (remember that little thing about the referendum a few months ago?) Thank goodness the Venezuelan people voted NO.

[JohnnyCougar]

109. You're hopeless.

Do you think FDR was a wannabe-dictator, too?

[SteinbachMB]

110. Why do you change the argument?

Chavez is not my kind of leader. He's a buffoon.

Compare him with our socialist premier, Gary Doer, in Manitoba. There's no comparison.

[JohnnyCougar]

116. I'm not changing the subject.

What makes you think he's a wanna be dictator?

[Judi Lynn]

120. From what we heard, it's Bush who's the wanna be dictator. He said so.

"If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just as long as I'm the dictator." George W. Bush, December 18, 2000

He's a dictator who has given huge chunks of change to Uzbekistan's Islam Karimov, who boils his polticial dissenters alive.

[SteinbachMB]

122. Look, Chavez is a trouble-maker

...pure and simple.

1. He wanted to rule for as long as he could with his referendum ( voted NO) If voted YES, it would have allowed him to win endless reelections.

That's enough for any sane person to realize he is a wannabe dictator.

[Judi Lynn]

127. Apparently you're not aware FDR had no term limits when he served 4 terms,

and turned the country around, right? It was the destructive, venemous, greedy Republicans who decided they were going to put an end to that, to prevent another successful run by a great Democrat, who demanded term limits, NOT GOD IN HEAVEN. Term limits didn't come from THE CREATOR.

Didn't you know your President's puppet President Álvaro Uribe, closely associated with the Colombian narco-terrorists by the U.S. Defense Department in a report in 1991, decided he would have his own majority controlled national assembly fix it so he could run for an unprecidented 2nd term, and once securing that term, started working on the move to secure a THIRD TERM immediately? I didn't hear any of you citizens bellowing your lungs out over that one. Did you have selective hearing when the news came out, or did your corporate media refuse to highlight it, and scream it from the tallest mountain to make sure even the most slow witted and incapable among you heard all about it?

You also haven't taken the time to become aware of how many other countries don't have term limits for their leaders. That's something you really should look into. There are DU'ers who live in countries without term limits, who have posted here, wondering what the hell is wrong with the right-wingers who shriek about this.

Even with the ability to win repeatedly, Chavez would STILL have to be re-elected, would he not? How is that dictatorlike? Dictators simply cancel elections, like Fulgencio Batista, etc. In Venezuela, written into their constitution there's the provision to recall the president any time after the first half of his current term, so he is available to be voted OUT of office by the public as well as being impeached. Hardly the way a dictator would want things.

You need to take some time finding out about the subject you're attempting to discuss FIRST before coming here and screeching about this brown-skinned furriner whom you, in your confusion have worked up a foaming-at-the-mouth hatred, based on no real information whatsoever. Remember, just because _Bush sends your money to the Venzuelan elite opposition by the buttload, Venezuela is NOT your country.

Start educating yourself. That's not going to happen at Fox cable news, or the free republic or any right-wing controlled and pandering media.

[SteinbachMB]

135. Okay smarty pants, check this out.

My name, SteinbachMB, stands for Steinbach, Manitoba, Canada, where we don't have term limits.

My posts about Chavez on this thread represent my disrespect for him as a politician, and that's it. The fact that you went so far as to suggest that I, in any way, commented on the color of his skin, and in so doing, implied that my intentions were racially biased is CONTEMPTIBLE. Not that it matters to someone like you, but I'll inform you that I have a racially mixed family.

I have to say that your is THE WORST post that I have received on this website so far, and I hope it's the last.

Start educating myself? I'd laugh if I wasn't so upset at your stupidity.

[Judi Lynn]

136. Let me be the first to recall one of the finest posts DU has ever seen:

SteinbachMB (235 posts)____________________________________________________________________________ Fri Apr-11-08 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #116
122. Look, Chavez is a trouble-maker
...pure and simple.

1. He wanted to rule for as long as he could with his referendum ( voted NO) If voted YES, it would have allowed him to win endless reelections.

That's enough for any sane person to realize he is a wannabe dictator.
Beaver Country

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This land-breaking post appears to be from a fine "Canadian" gentleman who joins hands with the semi-literate American right-wing in rabid, yet uninformed hatred of the Venezuelan people's choice for their own President. He agrees with our most sociopathic citizens that the U.S. should continue to interfere in the private politics of sovereign nations. In their illness, they believe there are no closed doors, no national boundaries, no REAL world leaders outside the U.S., as everything everywhere belongs to the American right-wing.

Obviously, an American with such mouth-breathing, knuckle dragging sentiments would never be aware that there are people walking the face of the earth, as close as Canada who don't have term limits for their elected office, or he'd be in his pick-me-up, barreling along the road to Canada, on his way up there to "open a can of whup-ass."

Have the good grace to lie down.

http://vwt.d2g.com:8081/assets_c/2007/09/arrow_thru_head2-thumb-220x149.jpg

[JohnnyCougar]

128. Stop being ridiculous.

An elected president with no term limits is not a dictator.

[bitchkitty]

123. Wannabe-dictator is a recurring meme among

the anti-Chavistas. I swear, sometimes I think some of these people are straight from Boiler Room 101.

[LanternWaste]

61. There's your world leader pontificating grandly about world history for ya....

"Don't forget Poland!!!!!"

There's your world leader pontificating grandly about world history for ya....

[JohnnyCougar]

80. He's already been interviewed by Barbara Walters and Ted Koppel among others.

Chavez is an intelligent, well read person. Both of his parents were teachers. You don't know anything about him.

[Peace Patriot]

35. Education for all? Medical care for all? Decent jobs and housing for all?

Equal rights for gays and women? Venezuela getting 60% of its own oil profits? Transparent elections? Maximizing citizen participation in government and politics? Giving local communities control over government-funded projects in their communities? Indigenous land rights? Loans and grants to small businesses and worker co-ops? Land reform with the requirement that those who benefit actually produce food, and receive technical assistance to do so (the first well-thought-out land reform program in Venezuela's history)? Encouraging local manufacturing of machine parts for the oil industry--rather than importing everything? Encouraging local arts as opposed to imported corporate monoculture? Creating the Bank of the South, to keep development loans local, and in regional control (rather than South American countries being crippled by the World Bank/IMF loan sharks)? Creating a South American "Common Market"?

These are "lunatic fringe" ideas? You a Bushite, or what?

What the "world realizes," and what you don't seem to realize, is that Chavez is mainstream European/Scandinavian. Nothing he has done is "lunatic fringe" in Europe and Scandinavia. His "core values" are the core values--and the best values--of western civilization. It is the Bushites--who hate him--who are the "lunatic fringe." Steal everything in sight. Sell your country to the sheiks of Araby and China. Shred the Constitution. Slaughter 1.2 MILLION innocent people to get their oil. Nuke Iran to get its oil. Torture prisoners. Lunatics! It is our tragedy that we cannot evict them from power. But that doesn't make them any less a "lunatic fringe."

I repeat: Chavez is MAINSTREAM. He is seeing to his country's interests. He is actively seeking social justice. He has formed friendships and alliances all over South America. He has invaded no one, harmed no one. Where do you see "lunacy" in this, or "fringe"--except from the perspective of, say, Condoleeza Rice, or Donald Rumsfeld.

And if you could FIND a "decent journalist/interviewer"--not a whole lot of those around in our war profiteering corporate news monopolies--I'm quite sure that the interview would quickly reveal Chavez's intelligence, his great literacy, his interest in many subjects, and his acute analysis of local and global economics and politics. He is a very intelligent, well-read guy. And very personable, from accounts I've read.

You "guarantee" that he "will be seen for the idiot he is." Well, I've read interviews of Chavez. He is not an idiot. You might try to look up some of his interviews--or read his book. Try www.venezuelanalysis.com. Are you forgetting that he held up a copy of Noam Chomsky at the United Nations and told all the ambassadors to read it? Do you know that there is a Venezuelan government project to provide free copies of "Don Quixote"--and of Venezuela's Constitution--to all citizens? Can anyone who values Noam Chomsky and "Don Quixote" be an "idiot"? Can anyone who wants his people to read their Constitution, and revere their Constitution, and defend their Constitution, be an "idiot"?

I, too, would like to see Chavez sit down for an interview for a North American news outlet. Do you know why they don't do it? Because it would prove that Chavez is not an idiot, not a dictator, not a "strongman," and not a bad guy at all--like they have been lying to us about. They don't dare do it--because the Bushite "Big Lie" about Chavez will evaporate and people here will begin to think about socialism, and what it's like to have a president who benefits the poor. They won't do it because Chavez will call them on their crap--their lies, their disinformation, their greed, the "black holes" in their news, and their toadyism to the Corporate Rulers.

Go ahead. Call up MSNBC or Fox News or the New York Times or the Washington Post or the Wall Street Journal, and ask them to interview Hugo Chavez. Give it a whirl, and come back and report to us. I hope you succeed, but I guarantee you that you will not. Because they don't want you to see the real Chavez. They want to maintain their power to filter any information about Chavez--or about the leftist revolution that has swept South America--to the purposes of greed and war. They want to create a cartoon Chavez, fitted to unconscious stereotypes that can be manipulated. But, I mean it--give it a try. It's a good idea. And I would be interested to hear their excuses for why they won't do it.

[Nederland]

43. All paid for by rising oil prices

Without rising oil prices, Chavez would have been history long ago. He is not a brilliant leader or some miracle worker. He is a guy who got billions of dollars tossed into his lap by circumstances outside his control. IOW, he got lucky. It doesn't take a genius to get 70% approval numbers when you have a big pile of money to throw at people.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

57. He was also popular during the late 90s before oil prices skyrocketed.

By the way how's that Iraq invasion working for you?

[Nederland]

59. Not really

He only polled in the 30% range during 1998, and won the runoff with only 56% percent of the vote. Not exactly close to the 70% popularity he enjoys today.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

63. Duh, that was before being elected with 56% as you said.

56% which is higher than waht most of our politicians get. The referendum for the new constitution passed with 72%. And he was very popular at first. His numbers started going down as his rhetoric increased and the local media declared war on him. Oil prices where not as high then as they are now, which was my point.
I noticed you didn't answer my question.

[Nederland]

66. An answer

I think the invasion of Iraq is going about as well as can be expected given it is being managed by an incompetent leader and his cronies.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

68. So a war of aggression against a complex country we knew nothing

about is fine with you depending on who's doing the invading. OK, I see. It seems to me you wouldn't know dumb/illegal policy even if it was giving you a lap dance.....But I do appreciate the honest answer. I guess that's just something we'll never agree on.

[Nederland]

72. Not exactly

It doesn't matter who is doing the invading, what matters is how is turns out. That's the funny thing about war, it can only be justified by its ends. You can't even justify WWII, the quintessential "good" war without referencing its end: the defeat of fascism. A similar effect exists with the Korean War. At the time it was waged, nobody wanted to defend America's involvement there--it was viewed as a colossal waste of American lives and money. Today, 50 years later, nobody can objectively compare North Korea and South Korea and say it wasn't worth it.

But at this point we are very much off topic. Start another thread and I'll be happy to defend myself.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

78. I bring this topic for a reason. You and I I have had this conversation before.

As a person who supports the biggest fuck up that this country has committed in a while, I just found it curios that you would jump in here lecturing others on what a sovereign nation should or should not do. Your comparisons to Korea and WW2 are weak. this is more Vietnam/Cambodia than anything else. But you're right I should try to remain on topic.

As one who seems to know history you should understand that people in the south of our continent are tired of our duplicity and our bullshit. The movements happening in Latin America are no accident. this time there is no Soviet Union to pin it all on. The paternalistic and hypocritical old ways from Washington just won't cut it anymore for many people around the world. This train has left the station. You don't have to like it. But the people are not having it anymore. For decades Latin America has followed every recipe from the Washington cookbook. Poverty and the break down of society has increased by the year.

The funny thing about self determination is that it is justified by the ends. I guess time will tell if the Venezuelans, Bolivians, Ecuadorians, etc. are making the right decisions.

[northzax]

74. dude, you can't win this

you either think Hugo is infalliable, or you think bush is the greatest leader since Moses. There is no middle ground on these threads.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

77. Dude, I don't know who you're referring to.

There is nothing infallible about Hugo Chavez. Crime is still rampant after all the years he's been in power and there is still way too much corruption even within his own party. There even more things that could be improved within the revolution that's taking place in Venezuela. Everyone with an objective mind could tell you that. I know you were trying to be cute but the poster I was replying to is pretty much the only defender of the Iraq invasion that I know in this board. I think he knows why I brought the subject up. There is something I find odd about someone who approves of the biggest fuck up this country has gotten itself in a while and then starts criticizing how others are trying to get their country from under the boot of of neo-colonialism.

This isn't about Chavez. I could give a fuck about him. This is about Latin America trying to exercise their right to self determination. There's your "middle ground".

[JohnnyCougar]

82. Yes, there is.

Hugo is not infallible, but what the American press and politicians say about him and insinuate about him is way off base, and often blatant lying. Look at the reactions in this thread by some. Hugo re-nationalizes an industry that was already nationalized just 11 years ago, and he is some sort of goon because of it.

Many, many European countries have nationalized certain industries over the last 50 years, but no one is calling their democracies a "dictatorship."

The fact is, the US media takes every little thing Chavez says or does, and blows it out of proportion in a way that makes him look like a tyrant. Chavez has a big mouth, and that doesn't help matters out for himself, but the things the US press and government say about him are just plain divorced from reality.

[northzax]

113. well, all I can go on is my experience

on these threads. and if you question St. Hugo, you are called a freeper, or worse. this one is better than most, but I speak from some experience here.

and what European countries maintain nationalised energy companies? I assume you are talking about things like TotalElfAquitaine (now just Total)? check out how well that worked, eh? (you might want to google "elf oil scandal" for more information) you know it is a publically traded company, right? listed on the NYSE? that means it gets audited, using US auditing standards. or are you talking about Statoil in Norway (also publically traded, and audited) there are no major state-owned oil companies in Europe that are not publically traded. (with the notable exception of Yukos in Russia, and I think we can all agree the Russian system isn't worth emulating at this point) even PEMEX is audited and publically reports results.

so when's the last time that PDVSA released audited financial statements to the owners of the company (the people of Venezuela?) I'll give you a hint: 2002. no one has any idea what is going on in that company, because the government allows them to operate with complete opacity. seriously, the agency tasked with oversight is the Ministry of Energy and Petroleum. The current minister is Rafael Ramirez. oh yes, the same Rafael Ramirez who is CEO of PDVSA. AS head of PDVSA, he reports to the Minister of Energy and Petroleum. he is in charge of oversight and regulation of himself! good times. you can say, with a straight face, that this isn't a recipie for corruption?

[JohnnyCougar]

117. I've been misquoted

In reference to European countries, I didn't say "energy companies," I said "certain industries." For example, post-war nationalizations in the UK, France, well, you name it and there was a nationalized industry somewhere. And in Scandinavian, Western, and Eastern European countries today, there are many nationalized industries. No one is talking about how those people are stealing from the people, or that their presidents are dictators.

You have to admit that there is a double standard when Chavez does these types of things. It looks more dramatic 1) because of the propaganda campaign waged against him, 2) because the right-wing in Venezuela has refused to participate in their democracy, and 3) because Venezuela's economy was in such shambles beforehand, and there was no strategic buildup of infrastructure, schooling, housing, and healthcare. Sometimes when you want to make a dramatic change in a country you have to nationalize things. Venezuela was one of those places that needed a dramatic change.

[bitchkitty]

125. Last audit in 2002?

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news/1987

That article is written in 2005, referencing the audit in 2005. And the audit you reference didn't even take place in 2002, it was a year late, in 2003.

[northzax]

138. my apologies

their last audited year was, according to your article, 2005. it's 2008. in that time, PDVSA has absorbed several large international partnerships, the price of oil has increased 30%...Where were the reports from fy2006? should have been out in June last year? i assume 2007 will be fine, on time as usual?

[bitchkitty]

150. I want to tell you about this thing I found.

You type in a phrase or even a question! In this case, I typed:

"did PDVSA release a financial statement in 2007?"

And got a bunch of things they call links! It's called Google, and it's free! http://www.google.com

Here's an article that references PDVSA's 2007 financials:

http://www.marketwire.com/mw/release.do?id=760268

And there's lots more where that came from! I did not want to link a .pdf file here but this site has a link to the preliminary report:

http://www.incakolanews.blogspot.com/2008/03/pdvsa-2007-results.html

And of course there's that old fav, Yahoo news:

http://biz.yahoo.com/ccn/070514/200705140390579001.html?.v=1

edited for old lady fingers

[northzax]

151. Sorry, petrofalcon is not pdvsa

you linked to articles talking about the financial state of PetroFalcon, which was owed money by PDVSA which explains the presence of the name PDVSA in the articles. the two firms also have a joint venture.

I won't be nearly as snarky as you were, cause well, the post speaks for itself. All this shows to me is that financial reporting by public firms in Venezuela is standard. So thanks for proving my point. Got anything else?

[Peace Patriot]

64. Chavez WORKED for the oil revenues. Prior governments were giving away 90%

of the profits to multinationals. Chavez jawed them down to 40% corps, 60% Venezuela, and had to (successfully) handle a crippling oil professionals' strike in the meantime.

He didn't get all the profits "tossed into his lap."

And, in any case, WHAT BETTER USE COULD THESE OIL PROFITS BE PUT TO, than education, medical and all the bootstrapping of the poor, diversification of the economy and national and regional development?

Your argument is Alice-in-Wonderlandish--that is, upside down and backwards. Chavez is the first president of Venezuela to significantly increase Venezuela's share of its own oil, as the result of his policies, and his courage, and to use the revenues PROPERLY.

You regard this as a FAULT? Where should the money be going? Into the pockets of the rich?

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

65. I know, what a dick. Why didn't he let the corporations keep all the profits? n/t

[Arctic Dave]

87. I would think the 70% approval is the sign of a brilliant

leader with a pile of money. Why not spend money on building up the base structures of your society? Capitalist call this investment. When done properly investment provides far more then the original amount. What I see is this type of mentality, feed, shelter and educate ourselves with our own resources so we are not a ward of another country. Sounds good to me.

[tama]

79. Very astute

Mr Chavez is indeed mainstream, as in "best the western civilization can offer" social democrat (not third way but real social democrat). Does not make him good or bad, just mainstream.

Being from the lunatic fringe myself (banging a shaman drum and howling the moon etc.) I don't allways totally agree with what if best of western civilization, and having a truly and profoundly critical discussion on Chavez and Venezuela could be interesting, instead of the inane prejudice and stupid smearing fed by the mass media. But not much of chance with that hope, it seems.

[DutchLiberal]

47. ABC News disagrees with you. Here is your interview:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDaSJ23DRjs

Both presenters agree he's a very intelligent and well-mannered man.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

55. Here's an interview with Lucía Newman from CNN. n/t

[EFerrari]

99. There's a great interview he did with Greg Palast that is on film

in the documentary "Bolivar's Sword". He is very knowledgeable on a wide range of topics.

[Texano78704]

115. Interview?

Hugo Chávez has his own talk show where he talks for hours. It's called "Alo Presidente."

http://www.alopresidente.gob.ve/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al%C3%B3_Presidente


Imagine what it would be like for Dumbya to talk more than 15 minutes.

[Peace Patriot]

23. Jackass. Clown. Idiot. Scumbag. Loudmouth. Dictator. We've heard it all.

And Chavez has heard it all. And the Venezuelan people have heard it all--and they just keep electing him, and giving him 70% approval ratings.

Talk to me about Bush. Now there is a jackass. Talk to me about Alvaro Uribe, the go-to guy for the Medellin Cartel, in his early career; now the go-to guy for the Bush Cartel, in its war against the leftist DEMOCRACIES in South America. Another jackass, greedy for the $5.5 BILLION of our tax dollars that the Bushites have sent his way in (war profiteer) military aid.

There are lots of jackasses in the world. We have hundreds of them right now running our government, and still slaughtering people in Iraq.

But Chavez is not one of them. For one thing, he was actually elected--and didn't kill anybody to get elected (unlike Bush and Uribe, who have killed many). He's doing his job--unlike just about everybody in our political establishment. He is safeguarding Venezuela and its industries, and greatly benefiting its people, and is furthermore absolutely right in his leadership role in support of South American SELF-DETERMINATION.

As Brazil's president Lula da Silva has said, "You can criticize Chavez on a lot of things, but not on democracy." Chavez is DOING THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE. He is not a "jackass." He is a public servant. Do you have any experience of what it is like to have a public servant as president--and not a jackass puppet for big business?

The "exposing" that needs to be done is of the Bush Junta's EVIL activities in South America, in the Middle East, here, and everywhere they can get their greedy talons into.

Chavez is protecting his people. The global corporate predators running Bush are sucking us dry, to the last dime. That is less likely to happen to Venezuelans when the Bush Crash comes. Why? Because they have TRANSPARENT elections. They actually count all the votes. They actually have a president who represents the majority.

And if your analysis of the leftist revolution in South America can't rise above name-calling, what good are you doing? Let us have your full treatise on the matter. Convince us. Lay all the facts that show that Hugo Chavez is a premier jackass. Educate us. Inform us. (Ya, like that's going to happen.)

[SteinbachMB]

25. Of course he was elected, so was Bush.

If he had his way Chavez would shut down media outlets in his country. ( oh wait)

If you want someone who will steal , I'm sorry, nationalize, his way to his socialist utopia, fine.

This wasn't a Bush article, but if you want to turn it into Bush-bashing, that's fine by me. And if you like a thug like Chavez as a leader, who appears top have a Mugabe-like persona, then good luck to you. BTW, Chavez is a major league name-caller himself, so there is no need to get high and mighty with me.

[harmonicon]

31. What alternate universe do you come from where Bush was elected?

I seem to remember him being appointed by the supreme court. Maybe I was really fucked up for several months in 2000/2001 and dreamt it?

[SteinbachMB]

33. Maybe you were

..who knows? Maybe in 2004, too.

[ljm2002]

58. "appears top (sic) have a Mugabe-like persona" -- ???WTF

If I didn't know better, I'd think someone was paying you to plant these little nuggets implying that Chavez == Mugabe.

Total horseshit, of course, but then that is how the memes are spread, by repetition, in any and every context possible. Say it often enough, and people will believe it. In fact that is why the majority of USAns believe that Chavez is a "dictator" and a "thug", because our disgusting press continues to shout it out in almost every article they publish about him.

Meanwhile he has improved life in Venezuela for the majority of the population. Perhaps he has made it a bit more difficult for the monied elites, which explains why they hate him and work actively against him.

Please -- if you are going to continue using the Mugabe comparison, perhaps you could share with us your factual basis for making the comparison.

[LanternWaste]

62. Care to edify us with the precise and relevant comparisons

There we go again-- the Chavez-Mugabe Connection (rated PG). Care to edify us with the precise and relevant comparisons between the two (read: avoid vague adjectives).

[tama]

86. Thanks for the ignorance

and oppornity to try to share and educate.

"If he had his way Chavez would shut down media outlets in his country."

This is so wrong in so many ways. The private goebbelsian media that exhorted and participated in a US supported coup still spreads its shamefull propaganda and has not been silenced - as it should have been IMO. So that fact makes Chaves - whose murder they have been calling for - a better man than I am.

"If you want someone who will steal , I'm sorry, nationalize, his way to his socialist utopia, fine."

If you want to speak about stealing, let's speak about neoliberal privatization policies, let's speak about rich stealing from poor to get richer, lets speak about your apparent credo "greed is good". But yeah, socialism is such a monstrous boogey man that in order to oppose socialism democracy can go to hell too, because sure as hell, people of Venezuela have no right to take back what your neoliberal friends stole from them.

[EFerrari]

102. Chavez hasn't shut down any media outlets.

And he hasn't stolen anything.

And he's not a thug.

You don't appear to know anything about him or about Venezuela besides what is printed in right wing rags. That's too bad.

[harmonicon]

29. he doesn't seem to be keeping any secrets

In what way could be be exposed? I know exactly what he is doing, and it's great. I support his actions and pray that our own country could have such a fantastic leader. VIVA HUGO!!!!!!

[SteinbachMB]

34. If you want Hugo

... you can have him. BTW, I'm in Canada, and I have a socialist as my leader: Premier ,Gary Doer. He's a far cry from Hugo, and I for one am very thankful.

[harmonicon]

37. unfortunately, I can't have him NT

[JohnnyCougar]

83. Have you even spent one second finding out the real story of Venezuela?

Or do you just read the Washington Post?

[fascisthunter]

36. Oh Oh... Now He Did It...

what will the privateers do now?

Answer: call him a dictator for taking their ability to making a profit off the backs of Venezuelans. Hypocrites.

[Judi Lynn]

40. Venezuela renationalizes iron, steel industry

Venezuela renationalizes iron, steel industry
www.chinaview.cn 2008-04-10 13:12:30

CARACAS, April 9 (Xinhua) -- The Venezuelan government announced Wednesday the renationalization of the Orinoco Iron and Steel (Sidor) enterprise, the biggest steel group in this South American country.

The measure is the second of its type affecting foreign capital this week after Colombian President Hugo Chavez announced on April 3 the nationalization of the cement industry.

Vice President Ramon Carrizales said Sidor's nationalization was decided by Chavez to defend the enterprise's workers.

"The president has instructed me to inform the company that the government is taking control of the business," Carrizalez said .

The rights of the enterprise's major stockholders, Italian-Argentine Ternium-Technit, will be respected, said Carrizales in reference to paying for their Sidor stocks.

Carrizales called Ternium-Technit directors to begin negotiations with the government to sell their 60 percent share. The government holds 20 percent and the workers hold 20 percent.

Sidor was privatized in 1997 by the previous Venezuelan government.

More:
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-04/10/content_7953022.htm

[fascisthunter]

71. We Should Nationalize Healthcare Here

[JohnnyCougar]

84. If only we could be so lucky.

[New Dawn]

131. Exactly, and that is what the majority of Americans want.

But our plutocratic overlords will not allow it.

[knight_of_the_star]

42. Control of the construction industry

Concrete and steel both having been nationalized this gives Chavez considerable control of the construction industry considering how extensively both are used in modern large-scale construction.

[mdmc]

54. PROTECT THE WORKERS!

:patriot:

[northzax]

75. yes, indeed

care to place a wager? Will the pay cuts be equal to, less than or greater than the 40% across the board cuts in the nationalized oil companies? You want the over or under?

[mdmc]

76. under

please

[hack89]

60. There goes any foreign investment. nt

[JNelson6563]

67. Oh that's it! He leaves us no choice.

No more fooling around with spooks and overthrow attempts. Time to break out the heavy artillary.

:sarcasm:

Julie

[bvar22]

69. VIVA Democracy!

VIVA Chavez!

I'm praying that the Bolivarian Reforms migrate to El Norte! :patriot:


"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans. I want us to compete for that great mass of voters that want a party that will stand up for working Americans, family farmers, and people who haven't felt the benefits of the economic upturn."---Paul Wellstone

[Q3JR4]

70. I know nothing about Hugo Chavez,

other than a few bits of information from the BBC.

In everything I've read about him (at the BBC website), he seems to be fighting for the cause of Venezualian workers everywhere. Today with all of the cited information presented here I have to say that Chavez' government is looking better and better.

I admit that I haven't taken the time to read everything I could get my hands on, so I issue an invitation to the Chavez deniers to give me citations for the list of dictator-like qualities you would like to attribute to Mr. Chavez. Why is his course of action bad for the citizens and workers of Venezuala? Please include U.S. references as well as references from the BBC and other foreign media outlets.

Thank you a head of time for any and all help in this matter.

Q3JR4.
It is only through education that we truly come to understand the world.

[Pastiche423]

92. Unfortunately

it appears only the sound of crickets have responded to your request.

Could that mean that the Chavez deniers can find nothing to support their claims?

A'yup. Five hours later, not a single reference to his "dictatorship" can be found.

VIVA CHAVEZ!

[Pavulon]

81. Burn it down and walk away

these guys are thieves. They are cutting foreign cash inflow off. Paying for something at a point in time does not cover the capital outlay required to build it. Most large infrastructure projects take decades to break even.

So if they step in and take it they punish whom ever put up the cash to build it. Probably some company you invest in in your 401k.

I digress, after 7 years and the system is all fucked up because no one out side the country will put a dime of investment into a market where the government will just steal it, they, the central government, will have to replace it.

Now who do you think is going to take that risk...No one.

So the government can not keep up because it can not replace expensive technology when it croaks.

A short explanation of why the third world stays third world. This shit fails all the time, they are not norway, or western europe.

The outcome is predictable.

[JohnnyCougar]

85. What the hell are you talking about?

The private sector of the economy has grown faster than the public sector, and Venezuela is about to be included in MERCOSUR. They are trading with other South Americans at never before seen rates.

[Pavulon]

88. VZ GDP vs Exxon revenue..

petty thieves. Not like it is a new process in LA...Nationalize, I mean that is new to chavez right?

[JohnnyCougar]

89. I'm sorry. I just can't make sense of what you said.

I'd love to respond, though.

[hack89]

90. I think his point was that compared to Exxon

Venezuela is an economic pygmy and that they will have a hard time maintaining and upgrading their economic infrastructure without foreign capital and expertise.

[JohnnyCougar]

91. I see.

Venezuela can go on without Exxon. There's plenty of other oil companies in this world. Anyways, it was Exxon's decision to leave Venezuela, not the other way around. Venezuela could become like Saudi Arabia or Mexico and fully nationalize all of their oil production, but Venezuela is giving foreign companies a 40 percent stake instead. That doesn't seem so extreme to me.

[hack89]

94. It is more than Exxon

what company is going to invest in Venezuela when they risk losing everything due to a whim by Chavez?

What other oil company is going to risk alienating their share holders by risky investments in Venezuela?

[JohnnyCougar]

101. They're not losing everything, and it's only a few industires.

The government of Venezuela is buying them out for fair prices. Even Verizon said they got a fair deal when Venezuela bought their stake in a TV channel down there.

[hack89]

106. We'll see .. nt

[Pavulon]

152. Think of it this way, it is really simple

it is theft. Even if "fair market price" is payed out.

Say you build a business. Take out a loan, put in your time and energy. Pay startup costs and begin making money.

At some point you will become profitable or fail. Once you are profitable, for the sake of discussion in year 3, you plan on years of income to pay back the risk you took to go into business.

If I step in and FORCE you to sell at year 4 at a PRICE I SET you will lose future income from your investment.

When this happens to small business we call it getting fucked over.

When it happens to large companies we dont care, however the companies take that loss and write it down.

They just pass the loss they took on to customers.

[eridani]

93. They will have a very EASY time of it with the help of--

--Statoil, Total, BP and Chevron.


From Peace Patriot's post--

Chavez has negotiated a 60% share for Venezuela--a deal that Norway's Statoil, France's Total, British BP and even Chevron agreed to.

[hack89]

95. Except if Chavez keeps nationalizing businesses

at what point do companies realize that a deal with Chavez is meaningless? Trust is the issue - why risk a long term venture if there is a good chance the rules will be unilaterally changed down the road?

All I am saying is that he is playing with fire - there are lots of other places where companies can make money with less risk. He will turn Venezuela into Iran if he is not careful - an oil rich country with aging infrastructure and declining production. All because no one is willing to do business with them.

[eridani]

96. Lots of oil companies apparently think that the risk is actually less

If you have an educated and empowered work force and less structural inequality, you have a far more stable society. It looks like quite a few oil companies are willing to bet on this outcome. Also, Statoil and Total obviously have no problem with the idea of nationally owned industries.

[JohnnyCougar]

100. I think there were about 40 or so oil companies that renegotiated their deals.

The only two that didn't were Exxon and ConocoPhillips. And India's oil company just stepped in and took Exxon's place.

Sorry, but there are plenty of countries around the world, including US allies Saudi Arabia and Mexico, that have FULLY nationalized oil production. But I don't hear a peep out of you about those countries economically endangering themselves. What gives?

[hack89]

105. Perhaps because they have proven themselves

to be trustworthy business partners willing to uphold an agreement? Perhaps because those decisions were not the capricious whim of one individual?

This was a labor dispute that he settled by nationalizing the company. Is that threat how he plans to bully every foreign company to toe the line?

[JohnnyCougar]

108. The previous agreements...

...were signed during the sham democracy before Chavez. I don't think any one of them should really be considered legit. People get so mad at Saddam Hussein for hoarding all the oil money from the oil for food program, but that's exactly what the Venezuelan government before Chavez was doing. Taxes on oil companies were a) artificially low, and b) not even enforced. Many oil companies, when it came down to tax time, simply decided not to pay the chump change that they owed. And the Venezuelan "leadership" didn't care because they were getting their kickbacks. This all happened while well over 50% of the nation was suffering from poverty, most of it being extreme poverty.

I think people underestimate how horrible it was over there before Chavez was elected. It has gotten MUCH better already, and that's despite a US-backed coup attempt that overthrew the first real democracy Venezuela has seen possibly ever, national oil worker strike organized by the US and the right wing that lasted many months that severely crippled the economy, and the right-wing Venezuelan media's incessant misinformation and propaganda campaign down there. That's despite right-wingers car-bombing members of the Chavez administration. That's despite all the shenanigans, the aristocrat-owned TV stations using airwaves to organize overthrows of the democracy, boycotts of the elections that were fair in the first place, the US sending money to Chavez opponents, that's despite right-wing protests where bleached blonds with Gucci purses and high heels jump out of their boyfriends' Jaguar convertibles and march down the streets and shout "Chavez, dictador!" as if their ability to go shopping for shoes is in danger of being taken away...meanwhile the Venezuelan economy has hit an all-time low in unemployment, consumer spending is at unheard of levels, and millions of poor and middle class people are for the first time seeing SOME of the oil wealth used to educate, feed, and provide healthcare for them.

And in the middle of all this, it's a HUGE deal in America if Chavez wants to nationalize the cement and steel industries to do something about the Venezuelan housing crisis. Big deal. Let him build some public housing so that those people living on the hillside barrios that are prone to mudslides can live somewhere decent.

[Better Believe It]

111. Bravo Chavez! Now Let's Nationalize Big Oil Here!

and sell gas and oil products at cost!

[Warren Stupidity]

118. He will turn Venezuela into Iran

Iran's major economic problem is that we continue to embargo their economy. It is the Cuban problem as well. We set out to deliberately cripple their economies and then turn around and use their deliberately crippled economies as proof that they have a structural problem that can only be solved by the 'democratization' of neoliberal economic pillage. There are plenty of wrecked neoliberalized nations around the planet, somehow they don't count when it comes to analyzing structural deficiencies of economic systems.

[ronnie624]

112. With that one, I have often found that to be the case.

His "messages" are usually vague and cryptic, or even indiscernible.

[Pavulon]

121. Pretty simple

this game has been repeated in LA for decades. Che..Chavez Jesus as he is looked upon here is nothing new. Nationalization spirals into a fat mess. Eventually this infrastructure requires repair. Countries and industries who have had their money stolen will not reinvest without substantial upfront guarantee the fat man in a red shirt will not take their stuff.

[JohnnyCougar]

129. You're doing a good job of discrediting yourself with all your lying.

You have yet to produce any evidence of anything being stolen.

[Pavulon]

153. Read the article

If I hold a gun to your head and offer you a "fair deal" for your watch you are getting robbed.

You are going to meet my price because you have no choice.

See the upstream post on how a point in time price is theft when future earnings are erased.

You think any of these companies will reinvest a dime there while Chavez is above ground? No way. So when it comes time to fix generators and microwave relay gear it is a cash transaction. He is just screwing everyone over in the long run.

[JohnnyCougar]

155. LOL

Every other company that has been nationalized has come out and said they got a fair deal from Venezuela. No one thinks a gun was held to their head. Again, your wild exaggerations and half-truths are just going to cause more people not to take you seriously. So keep posting...you're helping my cause.

[Pavulon]

157. What cause it that?(nt)

[tama]

160. neocolonialism n/t

[Pavulon]

158. Like Exxon,

not all the companies came out with a big grin after having their business taken over.

[tama]

148. True believer, aren't you?

Privatization of profit and socializing cost spirals into a fat mess, as you can see in also US now that debt bubble economy is bursting and it is falling wictim of neoliberal policies of plain greed. Eventually failing US infrastructure requires repair. Countries and industries who have had their fruits of labour stolen will not reinvest without substantial upfront guarantee that the corporate fat cats (who Pavulons of this world show greater compassion than ordinary people) don't steel it upfront.

[JohnnyCougar]

103. Chavez's Statements on the Nationalization

http://www.hindu.com/2008/04/11/stories/2008041153921300.htm

Asked if the process of nationalisation of certain assets was a step in the right direction, Mr. Chavez said what he was doing was in favour of his people and the country. “It was a step towards stability. We need cement in order to build houses but that was being exported by multinational companies and sold to us at expensive rates. It belongs to us and we are buying it at a higher price which was one of the reasons for nationalisation.”

He said the nationalisation was to solve old problems his Government had inherited. “All this was bad business for Venezuela. Now we are doing something good for Venezuela,” he said.

Mr. Chavez said all agreements signed with Indian companies or government would be honoured.

“We are making this commitment today. Because business signed with India will not generate monopoly but will export oil, which is of common interest for the two countries. We have the largest oil reserves in the world. We are determined to diversify our market. Nationalisation is to recover the strategic areas that have been subjected to exploitation,” he said.

President Chavez said his country and government would always give preference to government-to-government deals because the government represented the people.

“The Government of India represents the great people of India. Our government represents the great people of Venezuela. So we are not doing business to make money or to benefit a tiny minority or to make rich people richer. We are doing business to benefit our people,” he said.

[classysassy]

114. The greedy vs the needy

President Chavez, is returning some of the stolen stuff to the people,the natural resources that the euro thieves,maimed and murdered to get.VIVA VIVA CHAVEZ.

[xioaping]

124. Venezuelan ecomony will tank. Chinese can tell them

state owned factories don't work. China has been trying to shed its state owned factories for more than a decade. Venezuela will soon be an economic basket case.

[JohnnyCougar]

130. The Venezuelan economy seems fine, now.

We will see how it does in the future.

[Pavulon]

154. All tied to oil

unlike the US or China to an extent, they are not diversified. They do not export anything of value to any market other than dead dinosaurs.

Single threaded economy.

[JohnnyCougar]

156. And it was Chavez that did this?

Or was it like that well before he came into office? All the education he is giving people seems to be a step in the right direction for diversifying the economy. Of course they only have oil, everything else was ignored for generations before this. That's not Chavez's shortcoming.

[New Dawn]

132. Many of the fastest growing economies are mixed economies.

They have high percentages of public owned industry, like China.

[xioaping]

134. We shall see

Like I said, China's public owned companies are basket cases, unproductive. I may be making a simplistic comparison. Like the other poster said, we shall see. For certain, there will be no new private investment in the country.

[Johnny Harpo]

133. Hugo Should Take The Bushco Approach

don't seize control, just send the jobs out of the country. Look how well thats worked for us.

[muryan]

142. Not a fan

of Chavez, never have been. I'm also against nationalizing industries because they show arrogance. Private property rights come to mind

[Judi Lynn]

143. Maybe you'll be kind enough to explain how nationalization of industries shows arrogance.

Venezuela's oil and steel were both nationalized until 1998, when they were privatized. What does the act of privatization show you, if you would be kind enough to explain.

[Texano78704]

145. Nationalizing indusries

Mexico nationalized its oil industry in 1938. Half the top twenty oil companies are national companies. How is that arrogance?

[ohio2007]

144. When do the pay raises et handed out ?

Will the govt deal with the union more effectively at the next round of talks?

When are those talks scheduled ?

[tama]

146. Soon, I guess

The workers have been striking and calling for nationalization, as negotiations with the capitalist have failed. Here some background:

"Located in the state of Bolivar in the south of Venezuela, Sidor was privatized in 1997. Argentina's Trechint now owns a 60% controlling stake, 20% belongs to workers and retirees, and the remaining 20% is owned by the Venezuelan state.

Since privatization the company has reduced its number of permanent employees from 18,000 to 5,400 and increased outsourced labour from 3,000 to 9,000. The union says working conditions have decreased dramatically and 18 workers have been killed in workplace related accidents over this period. They also said the outsourced workers, who earn significantly lower salaries than the permanent workers, suffer inferior working conditions and are victims of 65% of workplace accidents. The company "has applied a policy of savage neoliberal capitalism for more than 10 years," Rodriguez said.

Last year, in the framework of President Chavez's call to "re-nationalize everything that was privatized," sections of the Sidor workforce called for the company to be nationalized and put under worker's control."
http://upsidedownworld.org/main/content/view/1117/35/

Reading these discussions makes me wonder why so many DUer ideologues take the side of capitalist rather than working man. Perhaps their true ideology is just plain and simple (neo)colonialism...

[Judi Lynn]

147. Interesting they've got their opposition media doing the back seat driving on this, condemning the

process of working toward better working conditions for Venezuelan workers than the dangerous, and unstable arrangement Sidor has thrown together in a rush to get maximum work out of the fewest people. Assholes!

Maybe Sidor should consider simply building a new operation in Colombia, where the government permits, at the minimum, snuffing pesky union organizers, after a period of terrorizing them, and sometimes torturing them physically, who even dream of working for better conditions than the living hell they get from these parasites.