Bad News For Freedom
Marxist Hugo Chavez has won the Venezuelan Presidential election.
From The Devil's Excrement
CNE announces that with 78.31% of the tally sheets counted Chavez has 5.936.141 votes (61.35%), while Rosales obtained 3.715.292 votes (38.39%).
Not surprising, but not good. Thankyou to all in Venezuela who campaigned for Mr Rosales.
From The Devil's Excrement
CNE announces that with 78.31% of the tally sheets counted Chavez has 5.936.141 votes (61.35%), while Rosales obtained 3.715.292 votes (38.39%).
Not surprising, but not good. Thankyou to all in Venezuela who campaigned for Mr Rosales.
posted by Trevor Loudon at
12/04/2006 04:32:00 PM
29 Comments:
Venezuelan's take part in election that appears to be reasonably free and fair (according to observers so far). A victory for freedom. Well at least things in Venezuela are a heck of a lot better than in Colombia over the border but no one says anything about that do they?
Pinko 1 (Cameron)While not commenting on the fairness or otherwise of the election, the fact remains that Venezuela has elected a Marxist tyrant who plans to alter the constitution to make himself leader for life.
How is that good?
Pinko 2 (anon) While Venezuela is, in my opinion nearing the point where armed resistance would be justified, I hope it won't happen.
Sadly i think it would be crushed by troops from Cuba and maybe other local socialist nations, while the US would probably stand idly by.
I am not on the ground in Venezuela, so I have no real insight on what should happen next.
However I hope the Venezuelan opposition is strong enough and united enough to keep the resistance alive and somehow take back their country.Preferably peacefully.
I wish them good luck as they are in the front line for all of us.
It sure didn't take time for Chavez apologists to justify his reign. Chavez's Zimbabwean buddy-Mugabe came in power in a similar fashion.
I don't think Chavez is perfect. Indigenous people have protested against his government allowing coal mining on their lands. However, if Venezuelans want to vote for him shouldn't they be allowed to?
Uh, no comments on Chavez being cummy with Mugabe who came in power the same fashion and now he's a murderous tyrant? No parallels with that? Just simply sickening how blind you people really are.
What about Chavez and his militia? Surely this is going to be used to fight any political enemies in the future... and Chavez has made it no secret of his long term political ambitions.
Do you think the Pinochet coup was justified Trevor?
Great, just ignoring Chavez's cumminess to Mugabe who came in the same fashion. Btw, Pinochet was ousted by Soviet, Cuban ahd the armed wing of the Chilean Communist Party. Gee, way to go and support Soviet intervention and making that tyrant a favorite propaganda icon.
I'm not usually one to hedge my bets Anon, but that's a bit of a gray area.
If the stories I've read about Allende's secret police murdering and kidnapping opponents are true and Cubans and Soviets were as heavily involved as I believe they were, I would say yes.
Does that mean I support the atrocities allegedly committed by Pinochet's forces-No.
War is seldom black and white anon.
In this case I would pick the dirty gray over the extremely dark gray.
At the time I was an Allende supporter (I went through a socialist phase) then I admired Pinochet for his anti-communism and his free market policies.
Now, with more hindsight and the fact that Chile is led by former East German domiciled socialist, I am not so sure.
Pinochet overthrew a democratically elected government, murdered thousands (including peaceful student protestors) and sold his country out to foreign business interests.
Chavez was elected to power. The taxes there are similar to what they are in NZ. The Venezuelan govt relies a lot on oil revenue. I find it hard to believe that he's a tyrant. He didn't execute his captors for treason; and has since let them free.
Uh, wasn't Allende later found out to be exposed as a KGB assest along with his Socialist Party which Allende's protege currently sits at the head of the Chilean state? And how did the Chilean Communist Party exactly know the dictatorial apparatus of Pinochet's tyrannical government? Oh wait, they were taught what a tyrannical government looks like by their tyrannical pals in the USSR and in Cuba.
And as for Chavez, he's quite cummy with various tyrants like the one sitting in Libya along with the one in Zimbabwe (Robert Mugabe) which Chavez-apologists are quite blind on how Mugabe came to power in similar fashion Chavez has done.
I think this explains Chavez's full intentions on why he wants to remain in power:
http://once-upon-a-time-in-the-west.blogspot.com/2006/12/latin-america-file-chavez-re-elected.html#links
Observers from the Organisation of American States and the European Union have declared Venezuela's election result free and fair. The Venezuelan opposition has accepted the result and called for the decision of the people to be respected.
What a pity Act's vice President won't do the same. Trevor thinks that it would be acceptable to overthrow Chavez, with violence if necessary, even though a clear majority of Venezuelans voted for him.
Trevor claims that Chavez is altering the constitution to make himself President for life.
In fact, Chavez wants to alter the constitution to remove the limit on how many times the President may be reelected. If these changes are made, then the only way Chavez will be able to become President for life is if he is reelected every six years for the rest of his life. And if the Venezuelan people wanted to do this, then surely it'd up to them?
Somebody else has claimed that the fact that Chavez has had friendly relations with Mugabe proves that he will sooner or later emulate Mugabe's repressive policies. Therefore, it seems, he must be pre-emptively overthrown.
Yet the governments of the United States and Britain enjoy friendly relations with many repressive regimes. Only a couple of weeks ago, Tony Blair traveleld to Pakistan to embrace the military dictator there. Does this prove that Britain will soon be a military dictatorship?
Trevor has complemented his support for the overthrow of democracy in Venezuela with a mealy-mouthed defence of Augusto Pinochet, one of the most notorious dictators of the twentieth century. Act calls itself 'the party of freedom', yet its vice President does not seem to believe that the people of South America should be free to elect left-wing governments. If the party is still around to contest the 2008 elections it may find itself embarrassed by Trevor's anti-democratic comments.
I quake in fear anon.
Just so there is no confusion, I think it is every free persons right to fight against and overthrow a Marxist-Leninist, or any other form of totalitarian regime.
Tell that to who you like.
Uh, isn't it quite obvious how Chavez supporters turn a blind eye to the people who lost the elections of Venezuela who believe Chavez is subverting their nation into a dictatorial state?
Just like his buddy Mugabe, Chavez is taking down the same road of tyranny and the opposition is helpless to do a thing.
Trevor: since you consider Chavez to be a 'Marxist-Leninist', does that mean you support the overturning of the election verdict by non-democratic means? I find it extraordinary that you have so little respect for the views of a majority of Venezuelans.
mah: it is you who is turning a blind eye to the Veenzuelan opposition. Rosales, the leading the opposition journalist Teodoro Petkoff, and the well-known opposition blogger Alexandr Boyd have all said that the elections were fair and that their results should be respected. This contradicts your claims that Chavez is a dictator. If you have evidence that the poll was fraudulent, why don't you produce this evidence?
That anonymous person knows their stuff! Good work.
Anon-I don't "consider Chavez to be a M-L"- he says as much himself.
I think the US and other comparitively free countries should up their funding of opposition groups in Venezuela and if necessary impose sanctions on the country.
Hitler could have been nipped in the bud by such methods and so should Chavez.
You haven't answered my question directly Trevor, but I can only assume that because a) you say that it legitimate to use violence to overthrow 'Marxist-Leninists' and b) you consider Chavez a Marxist-Leninist you really are saying that it would be legitimate to try to use armed force to overturn the government that a clear majority of Venezuelans have voted for in free and fair polls.
This means that you are actually taking a position that is at odds with the Venezuelan opposition, which has called the result legitimate and urged that it be respected. Your absurd camparison of Chavez to Hitler goes beyond anything I have seen from even the most extreme parts of the Venezuelan opposition, and again suggests that you would support the overthrow of a democratically elected government by force. I think there is a very ugly, anti-democratic side to your politics which is emerging under the pressure of events in South America. I doubt whether the voters of Rakaia or anywhere else in New Zealand would find the advocacy of the overthrow of democratically elected governments appealing.
You are a dishonest sod anon.
You deliberately distort the Chavez/Hitler comparison and then you go on about violent overthrow.
Chavez is backed by Castro, so it is perfectly legit for the US to back Venezuelan opposition groups.
That might well backfire however, so I think economic and political sanctions are probably the best option.
Chavez has threatened the US enough, but military action against Chavez would also backfire.
The US needs to isolate Chavez and work to strengthen Mexico against Chavez/Castro supported insurrection.
What Trevor hasn't explained is why the recent election in Venzezuela was illegitimate. Does he know something about fraud that everyone else doesn't?
When did I ever say it was illegitimate. That's part of your dishonesty anon.
You seem to love putting words in my mouth.
"mah: it is you who is turning a blind eye to the Veenzuelan opposition. Rosales, the leading the opposition journalist Teodoro Petkoff, and the well-known opposition blogger Alexandr Boyd have all said that the elections were fair and that their results should be respected. This contradicts your claims that Chavez is a dictator. If you have evidence that the poll was fraudulent, why don't you produce this evidence?"
You know Chavez's pen pal from Zimbabwe-Robert Mugabe? Uh, didn't he came in a similar fashion like his buddy Chavez? Isn't that why the opposition leader to Chavez believes Communism is subverting Venezuela into a totalitarian state like how Mugabe did with Zimbabwe once he was elected? Uh, didn't another certain German dictator prior to World War II come to power in a similar fashion as Chancellor of Germany? Yea, there are no parallels to this going on in Venezuela. Not!
Trevor: if you agree with the opposition candidate, Teodoro Petkoff, Alexandr Boyd, the OAS observers, and the EU observers, who say that the election was free and fair, why do you think the verdict needs to overturned through extra-democratic means? If the Venezuelan people want Chavez and his policy programme, why can't they have it?
mah: neither Hitler nor Mugabe won a majority in an election. Do you agree with the opposition that the poll was free and fair? If so, how can Chavez be described as a dictator? If not, where is the evidence that you have which contradicts everyone else?
"mah: neither Hitler nor Mugabe won a majority in an election. Do you agree with the opposition that the poll was free and fair? If so, how can Chavez be described as a dictator? If not, where is the evidence that you have which contradicts everyone else?"
So let me get this straight. You perfectly ignore the coziness with Mugabe and Chavez? How about Chavez clamping down on the private media outlets? How about him abusing the Venezuelan Constitution? And of course you ignore how Mugabe and Hitler were elected along with attacking the previous government before them just like Chavez did in 1999. It's just quite sad to see how someone like you is so blind and dishonest that you are protecting someone who is certainly subverting his country into a dictatorship along with being laws against anyone who dares speak out against Chavez along with having the Hugo Chavez Show being aired on television.
How about Chavez's close relationship with Cuba? With Belarus? With Vietnam? With China? With Putin whose critics end up dead or in the most recent case, have a really bad case of radiation while people like you suggest it's "bad sushi"? Yea, those places seem to be quite free and have a contentful population. Not.
Let's not forget Chavez's friendly trip to Libya to which the dictator has "renounced" terrorism at the same time he is quite fond of Western neo-Nazi and neo-Fascist leaders who use Libya as a place of operations. What "nice" fellows your Comrade Chavez is being cozied up to.
Chavez might have positive dialogue with Castro but I doubt that he is financially backed by Castro. Venezuala has a relatively high population and has oil. Cuba wouldn't be able to afford significant financial contributions. All Castro can really do is have a doctors for oil deal.
"Chavez might have positive dialogue with Castro but I doubt that he is financially backed by Castro. Venezuala has a relatively high population and has oil. Cuba wouldn't be able to afford significant financial contributions. All Castro can really do is have a doctors for oil deal."
Uh, didn't Chavez take a photo with his mentor Castro on Castro's supposedly soon-to-be-death bed? Why is Chavez's favorite color always seemingly to be red? Hmm? How about Chavez even promoting solidarity to the Stalinist Communist North Korean dictator Kim Jong-Il but backed out at the last minute?
My Dear Mr Trev(Commies Give Me One)Hardon,
Big question - how do you define one who preaches democracy but then decries democratic outcomes - a la Venezuela ?
Well, for starters, a wahanui hypocrite, or to be kinder, a really thick person for whom intellectual honesty is just too tough a challenge !
For seconds - one whose every utterance ensures fibertarianism's rightful place on the lunatic fringe !
All power to the likes of ! Suits me (and, Thank God, about 98% of Kiwis) very, very well.
But since I'm such a Nice Guy (from Northland too), congratulations on your stunning photo gallery of "significant" folk, the ones who keep you guys awake at night.
There's one yuz're missing though. The 1984 shot of the loathsome war criminal Rumsfeld shaking the hand of the Butcher of Baghdad. He was there with a personal brief from Reagan: (1) revive diplomatic relations US/Saddam; (2) sell military weapons to "friend" Saddam.
But that's not all. Even as the fetid old fascist did this he and the Pres ALREADY knew (courtesy of a 1983 US congressional committee report), that Saddam was going hard out gassing the Kurds.
Ask yourself !
Ka Kite Fibertarians !
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home