son of witless wrote:
If Socialism is so super wonderful fantabulous, why, why, why, do it's practitioners always seize absolute power ???? WHY ??????? How can you defend the Socialists who will not allow any political opposition ? How ???????
Do you have the audacity to say that America is the reason Venezuela is an economic failure ? I was going to call it an economic basket case, but it would have to rise 10 levels to get to an economic basket case. Are you actually aware of what Hugo Chavez did to his country ? How he totally eliminated his political opposition ? Well ??????? Audacity is a big word I learned in the one rood school house where I was a model student.
If Socialism is so super wonderful fantabulous, wh... (
show quote)
First, let me say I am not defending or advocating "socialism". What I AM trying to expose is the truth of the situation. And no one here can deny that this sounds just like what the corporations in America have done. They control the food supply, oil production, the mass media, and control over the largest military force in the world...the military industrial complex that is fueled by constant illegal, unConstitutional, immoral war, regime changes, and economic subjugation of the citizens of countries they have invaded for the benefit of their corporate masters, of course, always done in the name of spreading democracy or for the sake of "national security".
Just what is it that Chavez did? From the article: "Chavez took office on a platform advocating a path between capitalism and socialism. He restructured the government-owned oil company so that the profits would go into the Venezuelan state, not the pockets of Wall Street corporations. With the proceeds of Venezuela’s oil exports, Chavez funded a huge apparatus of social programs."
Oh, did he piss Wall Street corporations off? He was certainly no friend of GW or obammy.
"In 1998, Venezuela had only 12 public universities, today it has 32. Cuban doctors were brought to Venezuela to provide free health care in community clinics. The government provides cooking and heating gas to low-income neighborhoods, and it’s launched a literacy campaign for uneducated adults.
During the George W. Bush administration, oil prices were the highest they had ever been. The destruction of Iraq, sanctions on Iran and Russia, strikes and turmoil in Nigeria — these events created a shortage on the international markets, driving prices up."
Oil accounts for about 95% of Venezuela's export revenues and was used to finance some of the government's generous social programmes which, according to official figures, have provided more than one million poor Venezuelans with homes.
The lack of oil revenue has forced the government to curtail its social programs, leading to an erosion of support among its core backers."
http://www.mintpressnews.com/us-led-economic-war-not-socialism-tearing-venezuela-apart/218335/From The Nation:
"Yet there is clear evidence that the economic war is real, and is one of the factors behind the current crisis. This suggests that, as pro-government sources have claimed, there are parallels between Venezuela’s current situation and the crisis that confronted Chile in the early 1970s due to Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger’s efforts to “make the economy scream” to bring socialist president Salvador Allende down.
The second facet of the economic war is the damage to Venezuela’s economy wrought by US government actions. The most visible recent example (but by no means the only one) was President Obama’s March 9, 2015, executive order declaring that “the situation in Venezuela” poses an “unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States.” This order, which was renewed this past March, placed sanctions on seven high-ranking Venezuelan government officials accused of human rights abuses and corruption.
According to Alex Main, a senior associate for international policy at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, “Contacts in the financial sector have noted that the U.S. Treasury Department has strongly urged investors and bankers to avoid making loans to the Maduro government. Recent U.S. sanctions targeting Venezuelan officials also serve to discourage U.S. and European banks from doing business with Venezuela.” Recent US actions have had a considerable and highly detrimental impact at a time when Venezuela is in desperate need of dollars but is prevented from gaining access to them by Washington, which has made little secret of its support for Venezuela’s anti-government opposition.
Chavistas believe the opposition is reluctant to reveal its true plans because they would be so unpopular; they’re rumored to include full-scale privatization of the economy and a painful agreement with the IMF. It is far from clear that such actions are what Venezuela needs to get back on track."
Counterpunch:
"Any country that has oil or the pipeline routes, and a government that is in noncompliance with the U.S. Empire oil policies, then that government is a marked government for regime change. It really does not matter to the Empire’s foreign policy objectives if that marked country is capitalist, fascist, totalitarian, or theocratic; an oligarchy, monarchy or a democracy. Nor do the human rights record of any country matter to U.S. foreign policy objectives.
Any government that uses its oil wealth for the benefit of its own people will sooner or later become a marked government for regime change. Any government that decides to sell its oil in other than U.S. dollars will be a marked government by the Empire. By definition any oil rich socialist government will be marked. Venezuela has a socialist government that controls its own oil, uses that oil for the benefit of its own people and does not sell that oil exclusively in U.S. dollars. Its government is marked for regime change, it has been for a long time and it is under siege now by the Empire.
Looking at U.S. oil policy one realizes that there is no Empire foreign policy contradictions. It does not matters to the Empire if the country is Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Nigeria, Mexico or Canada. The policy is the same and there is no squawking about democracy and human rights as long as a foreign government stays compliant. That is why there is no contradiction for the Empire if a marked government for regime change is a democratically elected governments such as Syria in 1949, Iranian in 1953, Guatemalan in 1954, Chile 1973, Haiti 1991, and Honduras 2009.
A democratically elected socialist government of an oil rich nation that uses its oil for social programs and sells that oil in other than U.S. dollars will definitely be on the Empires hit list. That is why the U.S. Empire has Venezuela in its crosshairs, under siege, and is using overt and covert forces to overthrow the government of Venezuela’s Nicolas Maduro.
The form of government and human rights only enters the Empire’s foreign policy equation when it is dealing with a marked government for regime change. A marked government will never be democratic-enough, and their human rights will always have the spotlight shined on it and criticized. Democracy and human rights are only important if they serve a propaganda purpose, no matter how democratic the government is or what its human rights record. The Fake News is the Empire’s best and faithful propaganda horn that will toot that the marked country is not democratic-enough and violates it peoples human rights.
Once U.S. foreign policy objectives are understood vis-a-vis oil, then one can have a rational understanding of why Venezuela and its oil is so important to the U.S. Empire. It is not about democracy and human rights. Get that straight in your mind.
The only reason the Empire has Venezuela under siege is because of the oil. Are there any questions?"
http://www.counterpunch.org/2017/07/21/venezuela-under-siege-by-u-s-empire/Chavez didn't and Maduro isn't playing by the rules of the Empire. Socialism is not Venezuela's problem.
When all else fails, the empire will invade militarily to enforce it rules...is that next for Venezuela?