In which Hugo Chávez re-discovers religion.
On Sunday night, shortly after he handily won reelection, Hugo Chavez, Venezuela's controversial President-cum-dictator surprised the world in a speech to his constituents by announcing, "The Kingdom of Christ is the kingdom of love, of peace; the kingdom of justice, of solidarity, brotherhood, the kingdom of socialism. This is the kingdom of the future of Venezuela." Not exactly the words one expects to hear from the mouth of a socialist.…
Article comments
326 - STM
If I'm a gerbil, moonraven is a screeching, squawking, multi-coloured crested Venezuelan parrot from what's left of the Maracaibo basin.
However, I prefer to think of myself as a wombat: eats, roots, and leaves.
Please note the importance of the placement of the comma in that statement, and the use of the word root as it pertains to the rude Australian vernacular, rather than the American.
Nevertheless, I can still put a red pin into Caracas on a map.
And in future, I'll pretend I'm sticking it into moonraven's head.
327 - Clavos
STM:
One of my favorite books is:
Eats, Shoots & Leaves: The Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation by Lynne Truss.
Truss is a Brit, and the book is, of course, about the importance of using proper punctuation when writing in the English language.
From your post, I take it you're familiar with it?
328 - STM
Hi Clav: Yes, I do know of the book (Moonraven should read it, too, methinks, given the comma debacle further up the thread. It was then I realised she doesn't take kindly to constructive criticism).
I digress, though. Eats, roots, shoots and leaves has been an in-joke here for eons - probably well before the Englishman wrote his book.
Emphasis in Australia, of course, as we are collectively of a rude, naughty and irreverent bent, is on the "roots" bit.
329 - Clavos
Stan,
As you know, I met a few Aussies in Vietnam. To a man, they fit this description:
we are collectively of a rude, naughty and irreverent bent
For me, these are some of your most interesting qualities (especially the irreverence), and you Aussies are an interesting and very likable lot.
330 - STM
Thanks old boy - we try our best to be good, but it never works. Why fight fate.
331 - STM
Geez mate, this story of yours has had some legs, hasn't it? Good effort
332 - Clavos
Thanks, Stan.
I've just written another, about Chavez' buddy, Evo Morales, in Bolivia.
He's trying to deport a dissident ant-Castro Cuban back into Fidel's hands.
333 - Clavos
The Venezuelan economy has hit several rough patches lately, according to an article in Bloomberg:
The country's inflation rate hit 1.8% for December, bumping the annual rate to 17% for 2006, according to the central bank.
The increased rate of inflation jeopardizes the government's ability to meet its forecast target of 10-12% inflation for 2007. It missed the target for 2006, and the 17% rate, the fastest in Latin America, was up from 14.4% in 2005.
Government spending is fueling the inflation, economists say, despite government price controls which affect about half the consumer price index, and which have been in place since 2003.
Farmers are among the worst hit. Prices for their supplies and machinery are not controlled, while the official prices for their crops are tightly controlled. Consequently, many are selling product on the unofficial black markets, while dairy farmers are diverting their products into making cheese, which is unregulated, and causing shortages of milk throughout the country.
The instability of the economy has brought other woes, as well.
According to Bloomberg:
Meanwhile, companies are reluctant to invest to increase production. Manufacturers, concerned that Chavez will deepen state involvement in the economy, have trimmed spending on new plant and equipment to the point that non-government investment equals no more than 4 percent of gross domestic product, the lowest among Latin America's 10 biggest economies...
...Foreign investors sold $778 million more in Venezuelan assets than they bought in the first nine months of 2006, according to the central bank; a decade ago, in the same period, they added $5.9 billion more than they disposed of.
It looks like Chavez is finding out the hard way that you can't pour money into an economy without negative results.
334 - STM
Clav wrote: "The Venezuelan economy has hit several rough patches lately, according to an article in Bloomberg"
This post is sure to draw our old sparring partner, moonraven, out ofthe woodwork.
And the more the merrier, I say!
335 - Clavos
I'm interested, too, Stan.
One of the linchpins of her pro-Chavez arguments has always been about all the economic good he's been doing for the country.
The issues I reported in #33, and the gist of Bloomberg's article are facts. They're not opinion (as she's accused us of in the past) or conjecture; their problems are real, and they stem from the enormous amount of government spending on the part of the Chavez administration.
336 - STM
One of the major problems of course is the reliance on oil. Chavez possibly needs to move away from it, perhaps using some of the revenue to set up more manufacturing industries capable of exporting consumer goods in large numbers to other countries in the region.
That of course provides jobs, both in the construction and manufacturing stages, adds more infrastructure, and the like. Not a problem either to have these done as joint government/private industry ventures where the government elicits some control over the process.
But I can't see them going anywhere until the economy moves away from its reliance on oil. Things are sweet now, but ultimately it's fraught.
Currently, many infrastructure projects in Caracas remain partly completed and will remain that way for the foreseeable future because the funds are goingb elsewhere - however, to his credit, Chavez has poured a lot of money into social programs: universal free hospitals/medical care, education, public transport and housing.
Perhaps once that stuff is sorted out finally, they can move on. In reality, given their vast supply of natural resources, they should be the powerhouse economy of the region.
Given my socialist leanings, I am all for Chavez trying to improve the lot of his people (and in truth, despite the fact I love to give the raven some stick about it, he has done quite well, all things considered), but it has to be done in a sustainable way so that if there are blips in oil, the slack can be taken up elsewhere.
It is worth noting that many countries outside Latin America have been able to provide great standards of living and protect workers' rights in accord
with private industry. There are lessons there for everyone.
Stopping the sabre-rattling would be a great idea too. Aligning yourself with regimes like Iran and China, especially if it's done just to give the two-fingered salute to the US, is just cutting off your nose to spite your face particularly when the real threat is from within, not from the US.
That, and only that, is why I remain sceptical of his motives - much of the rest of what he's done is quite admirable. In my view, it would be far more beneficial to him and to the country to open some constructive dialogue with the US.
337 - Clavos
Stan wrote,
One of the major problems of course is the reliance on oil. Chavez possibly needs to move away from it, perhaps using some of the revenue to set up more manufacturing industries capable of exporting consumer goods in large numbers to other countries in the region.
In order to diversify the economy and, as you say, create more jobs, I agree.
Not a problem either to have these done as joint government/private industry ventures where the government elicits some control over the process.
The problem here is that, so far, the Chávez government has not shown itself to be content with "some control." See below.
however, to his credit, Chavez has poured a lot of money into social programs: universal free hospitals/medical care, education, public transport and housing.
And in the process, has overheated the economy to a 17% annual inflation rate, while still having a substantial portion of the population living in poverty.
Given my socialist leanings, I am all for Chavez trying to improve the lot of his people
I'm not even close to being a socialist, yet I absolutely agree with you; that should be a primary function of any government (though I suspect that my idea of how government should do that will be different from yours).
But most of what Chávez has accomplished so far amounts to window dressing, and in the process he is severely curtailing the civil liberties of everyone in the country.
It is worth noting that many countries outside Latin America have been able to provide great standards of living and protect workers' rights in accord
with private industry. There are lessons there for everyone.
Especially Chávez.
As you know, last week he announced he will not renew the broadcast license of the primary opposition TV station, Radio Caracas Televisión (RCTV).
In his announcement, Chávez said, "There will be no new [television] concession for that coup-plotting television channel called RCTV," he pontificated, "No media outlet will be tolerated here that is at the service of coup-ism, against the people, against the nation, against national independence, against the dignity of the republic."
So, now he controls congress, the Venezuelan Supreme Court, the electoral commission, and a number of sate governments. His hold on the entire governmental infrastructure in Venezuela is almost total.
He's seizing private property, ruling by decree and, as seen above, controlling the press.
Dictator. And not a benevolent one, either.
338 - STM
"I'm not even close to being a socialist, yet I absolutely agree with you; that should be a primary function of any government (though I suspect that my idea of how government should do that will be different from yours)."
When I saw socialist, Clav, I probably should explain: I am a member of the Labor Party, which is the equivalent of the Democrats but probably more left in a different kind of way to how you'd understand it there.
It is one of two main parties here, the other being the Liberal Party (which ain't liberal - it's more like the British Conservatives and the Republican Party in the US).
However, I am what is known as old-Right Labor - very conservative, especially on issues like immigration, as they affect jobs. Since we already have things like universal free health care and education, my main focus is the protection of workers' rights under federal and state law, court-ordered abitration between workers/unions and employers and if all else fails in the collective bargaining process, the right to strike.
Of course, there's more. But the main factor here and yes, the lesson for people like Chavez, is that all these things here have been done in accord with employers and employer groups and for a hundred years have worked successfully. We have had a strong economy and in my view, the fairest and most free society in the world. We have not lived in fear, really, about anything.
It's about protection of jobs, wages/conditions and living standards while workers strive for optimum output to the benefit of both themselves and their employers.
It's possible for those things to happen, it's good for the country and for family life and makes for a nation full of happy little Vegemites. Our current PM has tried to change our industrial-relations system to a more Americanised style, giving more power to employers. People are very unhappy. If you've never had the rights we had, you don't miss them but it's a big deal here. It's a sleeper issue that may well cost him the next election. My test is the barbecue: this issue was the "barbecue stopper" on Christmas Day at our place.
It's not Iraq or anything else here that's a problem (many of us believe that we should continue to help America and Britain, because of our common values) - it's the erosion of people's rights that had taken a century to thrash out through the courts that Howard and his mob of arrogant right-wing bastards undid in one fell swoop.
339 - Clavos
STM sez:
it's the erosion of people's rights that had taken a century to thrash out through the courts that Howard and his mob of arrogant right-wing bastards undid in one fell swoop.
And they're doing it in a progressive representative democracy, without a coup, without suppressing the press, etc.
Which is exactly why Chavez is so dangerous; not only for Venezuela, but for the region as well. He's already given himself extraordinary powers, and is rapidly leaving the opposition without a voice and without power.
Soon, he'll be extremely difficult to stop.