Hugo Chavez has died

[Squiggy]

stj wrote:

---

Chavez played a role in Venezuelan society far close to Franklin Delano Roosevelt's, except without pussyfooting around with Jim Crow politicians and their lynch mob supporters. Or double dealing in world politics.

Now that he's gone, most likely the US will succeed in organizing a military coup. After Chavez' opponents succeed in regaining power, the mass of the population (which has seen poverty sharply reduced) will be put into its proper place. This will require murder, torture, and all manner of mere political corruption. But the return of these American spiritual values to foreigners who never harmed a citizen of this country will delight all right thinkers here.

Um...didn't Chavez try to take power via a military coup?

[Locutus of Bored]

Unsuccessful coups don't count. They just get an asterisk next to them in the history books. It's like the Barry Bonds of coup attempts.

[stj]

A welfare state is not socialism. Ask Herr Bismarck. Chavez did not institute socialism. Period. Any discussion presuming that is purely ideological raving. This is also shown by the way the oil industry keeps on trucking, somehow defying all the evils wrought by "socialism" on every other form of economic activity by its unholy defiance of the God-given laws of the market. Demonic powers making a evil but miraculous exception? Standard academic economics is incoherent and irrelevant. Like the Trinity, it doesn't seem like madness because familiarity and moral cowardice keep people from examining it.

Yes, Chavez did unsuccessfully attempt to seize power. The economic failure of Venezuelan capitalism to satisfy the material needs of the people, and the de facto monopolization of the political system by a minority, had created a system so rotten that the large majority of people were eager to see someone who really meant to make a change, i.e., Chavez. Chavez of course has taken power solely by winning elections, repeatedly. The greatest increas in his power came after the antidemocratic coup against him. Inevitably, the stink of failiure weakened the US puppets, increasing Chavez' power. Nonetheless, when Chavez lost an election, he abided by the results.

But this is all moot. When the freemarket democrats start killing trade uinionists and community leaders and opposition political leaders as a part of business as usual, their supporters here can be satisfied that the world is once again as they enjoy it.

[Squiggy]

stj wrote:

---

Yes, Chavez did unsuccessfully attempt to seize power. The economic failure of Venezuelan capitalism to satisfy the material needs of the people, and the de facto monopolization of the political system by a minority, had created a system so rotten that the large majority of people were eager to see someone who really meant to make a change, i.e., Chavez.

So a coup is dandy if you agree with the reasons behind it?

stj wrote:

---

Chavez of course has taken power solely by winning elections, repeatedly.

Only because he failed to sieze power using less-than-democratic means.

It's like saying an attempted rapist isn't really that bad because the girl got away.

[Kai "the spy"]

Squiggy wrote:

---

So a coup is dandy if you agree with the reasons behind it?

Uhm, .. kinda?! Like, isn't a coup just another word for armed rebellion against the government? Which is, basically, any civil war?

I mean, Claus von Stauffenberg and his co-conspirators are considered heroes, nowadays, for trying to kill Hitler, but in the end, what they were trying to accomplish was a coup.

So, yeah, the reasons behind a coup do matter.

[Locutus of Bored]

Elton John's Candle in the Wind is SOOOOO overused at state funerals.



And in case that gets pulled, here's another link:
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/timberlak...%80%99-on-snl/