He was buddies with Gaddafi - good riddance to the pair of them tbh...
And FWIW I don't see supporting the transition to democracy as a negative in either of those countries regardless of the short term fall out/problems caused by it.
Hugo Chavez has died
- Thread starter Chives
- Start date
He was buddies with Gaddafi - good riddance to the pair of them tbh...
And FWIW I don't see supporting the transition to democracy as a negative in either of those countries regardless of the short term fall out/problems caused by it.
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 7,004
- Location
- Thessaloniki
Gaddafi had good relations just before the arabic spring, especially European leaders...what do you have to say about this
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 Nov 2010
- Posts
- 16,513
- Location
- Swimming in a lake
[FnG]magnolia;23883074 said:
Unfortunately true. Hence why I figured a brief Wiki, and reading the 'human rights' section, would qualify me to comment
kd
Since when have we had democracy. A choice between getting shot in the left knee or the right knee is not really a choice. Neither is a choice between a moderately right and slightly authoritative party and another moderately right and slightly authoritative party a democracy when said parties are funded by the same interests to the same end to instigate the will of a minority on the majority.
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 7,004
- Location
- Thessaloniki
Dont stretch it too far, we do have a democracy with its weaknesses and ofcourse lots of space for improvements. I just fail to see how Chavez is our enemy because he didnt bent over for cheap oil, if he was good for his people then he was a good man, period. Venezuelans will have the last word..
No, I didn't say or imply that at all. I just said it could happen by accident...
Centrally dictated Party politics are, in my opinion incompatible with a true representative democracy.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Dec 2005
- Posts
- 12,488
- Location
- Bath
No, I didn't say or imply that at all. I just said it could happen by accident...
'Could'
No, it shouldn't.
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Feb 2006
- Posts
- 3,524
[FnG]magnolia;23883074 said:
Wait. There's a place on these forums where people talk about things as opposed to all being arm chair specialists. I was always amazed and the depth and deep knowledge of OCukers. Then I realised its just a bunch of **** talkers
Chavez upset big American money. In his first few years in power he changed foreign oil companies' cut from 84% of the barrel price to 70%, and he also reduced the amount of oil they were allowed to produce. ExxonMobil et all saw a dip in their profits overnight (at a time of unprecedented growth). He used the money the new deal raised to build houses for the poor (replacing shanties), and to provide free health care and education. In turn, this ensured he was a fairly popular figure among the poor (though not universally liked) and utterly despised by the rich immigrant elite who used to run the country. Then he set about reclaiming millions of acres of unused land, requiring landowners to sell it to the poor on the cheap. In response to an attempt to buy it's unused land, Heinz closed it's Venezuelan plantation and sacked all the workers. Chavez then sent the military to repossess the plantation and restore the workers to their jobs.
He upset the oil companies again when it came to heavy oil, proposing a guaranteed (but fixed) $50/barrel price on a 30-year contract. Venezuela would become rich, the oil companies would have a more stable income far from the worries of the Middle East and a vast supply of cheap Venezuelan oil would keep oil prices down. The deal was rejected. If Venezuelan heavy oil stays in the ground, and the US and Britain keep the middle east in turmoil, the price of oil (and oil company profits) will continue to rise.
It's the usual short termism. Venezuela is now China's largest foreign infrastructure investment - they've invested heavily in the country since around 2009, attempting to fix many of Chavez's failed infrastructure projects. As it stands, if Nicolás Maduro wins the upcoming election, it seems probable that the Venezuela's heavy oil will find it's way out of the ground via Chinese companies - it's China that's helping to build the infrastructure needed to make it happen. Time will tell if it will happen under the terms that Chavez wanted - if it does, then expect a steep drop in oil prices in a few years' time.
On the man himself; like every successful politician, he did good things and bad. There isn't a single one of them without blood on their hands. Measured against his peers, he was an idealist and an administrative failure. I do, however, admire his courage and resilience, his dedication to his ideals and principles. It didn't go to plan, but he gave socialism his best shot, and changed the lives of millions in the process (For better or worse? Either way, at least he tried to liberate Venezuela's poor).
He upset the oil companies again when it came to heavy oil, proposing a guaranteed (but fixed) $50/barrel price on a 30-year contract. Venezuela would become rich, the oil companies would have a more stable income far from the worries of the Middle East and a vast supply of cheap Venezuelan oil would keep oil prices down. The deal was rejected. If Venezuelan heavy oil stays in the ground, and the US and Britain keep the middle east in turmoil, the price of oil (and oil company profits) will continue to rise.
It's the usual short termism. Venezuela is now China's largest foreign infrastructure investment - they've invested heavily in the country since around 2009, attempting to fix many of Chavez's failed infrastructure projects. As it stands, if Nicolás Maduro wins the upcoming election, it seems probable that the Venezuela's heavy oil will find it's way out of the ground via Chinese companies - it's China that's helping to build the infrastructure needed to make it happen. Time will tell if it will happen under the terms that Chavez wanted - if it does, then expect a steep drop in oil prices in a few years' time.
On the man himself; like every successful politician, he did good things and bad. There isn't a single one of them without blood on their hands. Measured against his peers, he was an idealist and an administrative failure. I do, however, admire his courage and resilience, his dedication to his ideals and principles. It didn't go to plan, but he gave socialism his best shot, and changed the lives of millions in the process (For better or worse? Either way, at least he tried to liberate Venezuela's poor).
Last edited:
So great that he won't be missed by half his population.
What percentage of people in the UK will miss Cameron?
Satchef1, good post!
I was going to post something similar, although not as well written and thought out. He did quite a lot of good for the poor of his country, I just hope it doesn't destabalise the region and oil prices.
This tbh.
While political freedom may have been suppressed, exactly the same happens here but by the backdoor.
Part of the test of a government is fulfilling their obligations to the people - that includes welfare, healthcare, education, peace, rights & freedoms.
The real "test" is if overall the people would have been better off with a faux democracy (With no quality of life improvements) or a semi-benevolent dictatorship (with some quality of life improvements).
Personally, I don't really value the concept of democracy & choice - as giving people choice only gives them the choice to pick an inferior option.
Sad news, not every leader who doesn't bend over backwards to please the US is a tyrant, this guy was very good for Venezuela and the region in general, hence all the mourning and genuine emotion for his passing, they say new elections will be held within a month.