The difference is that one is Stalinist, one is not. Neither of them have anything to do with Marxism.
Jimmy Carter's statement was kind of nicey-nicey and ambiguous. He seemed to be saying "Good on with the social programs, but boo to the dictatorship."
you see no material differences between material conditions and political structures of venezuela and the material conditions and political structures of north korea. really?
Let's hope the selling of oil cheaper to neighbours continues, as do the programmes in place to aid the people. But perhaps more of the nation's oil wealth going to the people would be nice given that unemployment and poverty are still widespread.
That's certaintly an understatement! Compared to what went on in the past, Bush was pretty hands-off. I don't think Chavez was evil, but he was certainly not a saint. (My favorite moment was when the King of Spain told him to shut up. Heh)
Why? Just because we make nice with one objectionable régime doesn't excuse the other. Nor does his economic nationalism (should you be in favor of such) excuse his other shenanigans.
When discussing "objectionable regimes" it does well to critically compare them. It's not apples and oranges, it's closer to night and day. As for his other shenanigans, well, I wholeheartedly approve of the charity he showed to some of the more impoverished Native communities here in the US, like the Cheyenne River Lakotas. Our own government sorely lacks in that department. Even the Cobell settlement is rather tawdry by comparison.
I guess what I don't get is why there has to be a comparison. If you want to argue for relative awfulness, fine, but that's different from saying that "so-and-so shouldn't be criticized because somebody else is much worse." And the shenanigans I refer to were his so-called constitutional reforms, better known as "illegally dismiss/intimidate all the judges that don't agree with me."
I can respect that. I guess I was referring to what you referred to as relative awfulness, and I truly believe the level of suck and the level of good should be measurable and valid considerations.
Franklin Roosevelt schemed to pack the Supreme Court and interned thousands upon thousands of Japanese Americans, and yet he is (rightfully) considered the greatest American president of the last century. Chavez was indeed no saint, but he improved the living conditions of impoverished millions while telling the international cartels to take a hike. For this, he has my respect.
Prices at Citgo stations are lowered to halfmast in memorial, which means a gallon of gas is now only roughly 15% higher than the stations across the street.
FDR was also a tyrant who had no respect for those who disagreed with him, no regard for checks and balances, and a man who viewed the constitution as akin to toilet paper. His positive achievements absolutely should not make him above criticism. My point about Chavez is simply that the complaints against him have merit and should not be ignored because of unrelated factors.
Thanks for reminding my why I hate Jimmy Carter so much. Yeah, that billionaire sure cared about his people oh so very much. EDIT. Here's the thing with Chavez: has he stood up to foreign countries and company's who would have plundered his country's oil reserves for their own profit? Clearly yes, and that would be commendable. But has he actually improved living conditions for his country's poor, or has he in fact only shifted his country's wealth away from those foreign "plunderers" and his own country's wealthy and into his own pockets?
Wait are you being serious about CIA cancer? I've heard some crazy people so I can't tell if you're being serious
That's what Venezuela's VP accused the US of doing: Giving cancer to Chavez through poison and then kicking out the last two US attaches from the country via this accusation.
'Plundering' implies theft without recompense. Pretty sure that mining companies of all kinds pay royalties to the government. Thus, it is not plundering.
Yeah I know he said that, was just wondering if anyone here - a real, seemingly sane, person - thought that was a legit. It's all a bit Watchmen film, isn't it?
