BF2S Forums DAST Chat

Uzique The Lesser wrote:

you can't be disingenuous - from an economic point of view, chavez's conversion of the country's vast oil wealth into actual economic results and public wellbeing was... not-so-great. he was a kooky dictator with, well, the sort of idiosyncrasies that such a position of public eminence and power always seem to bring. but he at least represents, still, an idealist position on the left of the political compass. thesedays, with everyone falling into a bland-bureaucratic middle, or a conservative capitalism, it's refreshing to see countries still going it their own way, against international pressure. a socialist latin america is pretty much the best thing for them at this historical moment, and you've got to hand it to people like chavez for sticking it to 'the man', who would rather conveniently have the world state-of-affairs otherwise.

Well, I'm glad that he fucked up the lives of millions of people just so that you could think the world was a bit more interesting and diverse...

Yes, he fucked up the lives of millions of people. When he took office, the price of a barrel of oil was around $10. When he died the price was around $150/barrel. Anyone can win office if they buy elections, and that's essentially what he did. He gave money to the poor and they loved him for it. Nevermind that the money he was doling out was becoming increasingly worthless, that the price controls he instituted to combat the massive inflation he was the direct cause of caused massive shortages of consumer goods (stuff like food). The hospitals have crumbled, the schools have crumbled, there is a much higher crime rate now. What good did he do exactly? His legacy is a massive Soviet-style black market, ridiculous crime rates, and an economy that is now completely and utterly dependent on oil exports because he ran everything else into the ground with nationalization projects that inevitably failed.

Just saying 'teehee he was just an amusing dictator in a third world country' ignores the fact that the people who live there now are far worse off than they would've been had he not taken power. Sure, the poor loved him, but that had more to do with taking class warfare to the extreme than anything he actually did to help them.

Uzique The Lesser wrote:

yeah except i never said he was an "amusing dictator". i said he had idiosyncrasies, sure. what i said was he formed a valuable counter-weight to regional politics. thanks for recycling whatever synopsis you read on the economist or whatever, though. mouthpiecing someone else's obituary critique. yawn.

I don't care about his politics. I don't care that he was buddies with Castro and Gaddafi and Adghurhgivdnbjad. I don't care that he badmouthed America at every opportunity and blamed us for all of his countries ills. None of that shit bothers me. It bothers me that he completely fucked over millions of people who viewed him as their economic savior by being a total moron. It bothers me that they would've voted him into office again if given the opportunity. Actually, no, scrap that, if the people are that stupid, they deserve the government they elect. They'll keep selling us oil because it's the only thing keeping the country from turning into a giant bonfire, and that's all that really matters to me as an American.

Uzique The Lesser wrote:

greg palast, again

http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/vaya-con … ituary-oil

First thing that comes to mind is Useful Idiot. I have no doubt that our corporations were down there exploiting the crap out of the country, and I don't have an issue with renegotiating fees on natural resource extraction. But to say that everything is hunky dory when it's clearly not strikes of Michael Moore going down to Cuba, or Wendell Wilkie in the Soviet Union. The country is completely and utterly dependent on the price of a barrel of oil now, as well as the whims of whatever dictator replaces him. The people are not better off than they would've been without him.

Uzique The Lesser wrote:

it's pretty funny you talk about "the people", as if an american-friendly ruler or the neo-colonial elites would look after "the people". but wait, that's just a silly issue of "class warfare", right? no.

No, they wouldn't look after the people either, as was proven before his regime.

The only way people can move up in the world is if there is a strong economy that allows for greater social mobility. An exploitative economy is just as limiting and debilitating as one that is built on government whims, hyperinflation, rampant unemployment and transfer payments. He set the economy back, and thus he set his people back. There's no argument.

You can call it a fair election, except he controlled the media. He was on air for an hour every day making speeches. When elections rolled around he allowed the opposition 5 minutes of air time per day. If anyone working for the government was caught voting for the opposition, they were sacked. But yeah, the elections were completely fair.

Besides, anyone can get elected by a landslide if they offer free shit to an underclass as large as Venezuela possesses.

Jay earned his free shit. Those Pell grants are a lot of paperwork I hear.

He does have a point re: open and fair unbiased media. Of course a guy who participated and was the target of a coup would feel threatened, not to mention the US essentially validating coup attempts in violation of OAS agreements. Wouldn't be surprised if the US gave cancer to chavez, castro AND bob marley.

Stand up for your rights! Heeeeyyyy

Jay wrote:

Uzique The Lesser wrote:

and why is that a bad thing? doing something for the underclass - now there's a shocking idea for an american.

Because it doesn't do anything to make them better off in the long run. You can't go robin hood forever, eventually the money dries up and the people are worse off than they were initially. If he really wanted to help the people he would've created a better environment for business so that they could find jobs. He did the exact opposite. Those people are now wholly dependent on the government for support.

but hero of the underclass man, like mao was the best guy ever helping out those farmers against their oppressive landlords.

i'll say this for Chavez - he was the first foreign leader to tell the world how stupid W was.

to glorify him for creating a cult of personality is stupid. To do it in the western hemisphere was unique. To think he wasn't building a base and perpetuating personal power is naive. To think Venezuela won't experience a backlash is wishful thinking.

jays mad venezuela beat the mets

get off his nuts

Dilbert_X wrote:

Jay wrote:

Yes, he fucked up the lives of millions of people. When he took office, the price of a barrel of oil was around $10. When he died the price was around $150/barrel.

What does that have to do with Chavez?

And if Venezuela is a net exporter surely the price of your export increasing is a good thing?

Obviously its bad if you have a 10mpg SUV and you're too fat to walk.

Is this my education in how pulling quotes out of context can change the message? He had nothing to do with the price of oil, but all that money he spent buying votes is because the price went up $140 while he was in office. Such a heavily oil export dependent economy should've and most likely would've done much better for the people if his government hadn't become so damn authoritarian regarding the economy. An oil boom like that, when it occurred in America, propelled Texas and California to where they are today. Sure, not everything is perfect here, but we're not bragging about turning tin shacks into cinderblock shacks as a sign of progress either.