Have a look at what happened to Nicaragua, Honduras in a similar situation in the 1950s.
Look at what happened in Guatemala when a White House spokesman said "The Guatemalan people can't be trusted to have democracy at this time." 1954_Guatemalan_coup
Look at what they've been trying to do in Venezuela, against a progressive popular Socialist like Chavez.
If you were Cuban, would you trust America? I dont think so.
Yes, just like Chamberlain was tainted by appeasement, but he was still a worthwhile political activist, so was Che.
Besides, Castro hasn't done much that America hasn't done in bigger ways. So I can't see association with him tainting someone. We're not talking a Stalin or a Hitler here, possibly a more agressive Chavez.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Primord  US imperialism won't be satisfied until the Cuban revolution is destroyed and capitalism is back on the island. That is a fact. |
Funny it was Guatemala where a young Che was, and it was the bombing that prompted him to become the revolutionary as he was surrounded by the dead.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Primord You do know that Chavez has won about 11 democratic elections? Despite this, the US imperialists continue make farcical statements like "Chavez the dictator". |
It says a lot when the CIA remove someone from office, and the ordinary people of the country rise up to overthrow the puppet and put back their happily elected leader.
The Americans don't like Chavez because he is Socialist, has oil and isn't a big nasty person they can legitimately get away with disposing of (they tried it, it doesnt work). Plus, he acts up on them and is one of the biggest critics of American policy around.
Look at the Venezuelan lining up the tanks on the Colombian border as a warning sign and an act of protection for their allies. It got reported in America and thus worldwide as "another agressive manoever from Chavez" when in fact was a counter to any future problems.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Britney-Spears Difference of Perception or Brain Wash of non cultured population? Anyway there is allways a iconic leader that seeks power, hidden behind a socialist that doesn't work but implementing totalitarism. (as in capitalism, but at least in capitalism it just seeks power per definition) |
And people think Castro has been sythening off the cash because Forbes claimed he was richer than the Queen. Which was, as it turns out, a lie. Still, tell a lie enough times and make it big enough and people will believe you. Geobbels proved it so, current goverments are still applying that method.
He's in his 2nd term as President and fully intends to step down at the end of his current one. Last year he tested the waters to see if he could continue beyond that, but the Venezuelan people were strict in their No in the Referendum.
11 manipulated scams. If that was so, ask me this. Why did the Venezuelan people rise up to return him as leader when the CIA overthrew him in 2002?
And chavez is popular with the Venezuelan people because he has
- cut child morality rates by nearly 20%
- increased education and literacy rates dramatically
- brought in free health care for the poor
- brought in free food and housing subsidies
- spends nearly 50% of the budget on social improvement
-protected the rights of indigenous Venezuelans
Which seems fair enough to me.
The opposition were removing the very social reforms Chavez and the Bolivarians put forward. Little wonder the masses repelled them.
We're talking trying to replace an FDR type with a Nixon type. No question who the better choice would be, in terms of living standards.
Those literacy/intelligence rates have been going up since Chavez took over. Bit dangerous, if you want a dumb populace. And I have found ordinary Venezuelans, on the whole, to be extremely intelligent and likeable.
Yes, he did shut down the state TV (well, stopped the funding) but then you encourage people to read instead. It was as bad as ITV a mercy killing!
I'd hardly call the Pan American Health Organisation and international vote checkers to be manipulated by him.
Calling a democratically elected person a dictator (especially one who is leaving office in 4 years) seems a bit silly, especially when you have had proper dictators a lot closer to home. Besides, the opposition have only themselves to blame if it is a popularity contest as you claim. I'm sure working with the CIA to overthrow democracy in the country in 2002 really made a good impression on the typical Venezuelan.
Its a beligerant, self-grandising, pretentious, snobbish, horrible bigoted otherisation. That's what we were like in Britain in the 1800s. If you can claim yourself to be superior to the poor "idiot" lower classes, then really, thats the first step on the road to round them all up. After all, we can't blame every government everywhere on stupid, poor ethnic people.
Hell, if the whim of the people is to have a dictatorship or religious leadership, then good for them. It was Churchill who said "Democracy is the worst type of government that exists, 2nd only to everything else we've tried."
My appalledness was at the snobbery in the "We have the vote, but those dirty poor uncivilised people shouldn't have it because they dont know how to use it properly." That's what I was appalled at.
I may be biased because my family worked their asses off and strove for decades to get where we are now, from low class to reasonably middle class with university history and job prospects, and I've faced a lot of these attitudes head on from people who assume superiority over me. My mum got it worse, being the first female from her school to go to uni. All snobbery irritates me.
No comments:
Post a Comment