Single Venezuelan party planned

[dipsydoodle]

Source: BBC News

Plans to form a single political party in Venezuela have taken a step forward with the first activists' meetings.

Six million people have signed up to become members of the President's United Socialist Party.

They have been formed into battalions. More than 1,000 of these have now met for the first time.

Mr Chavez says the battalions will be centres of debate which will drive the socialist revolution.


Read more: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6910472.stm

[Selatius]

1. Personally, I would be against forming one political party.

It tends to cause too much discord when one lumps together several different disparate groups into one form. When you do that, you get the Democratic Party where free trade corporate-friendly types are in the same party as unionists and environmentalists and other groups.

[1932]

10. Rest assured, that's not what is happening. Read Judi Lynn's post below.

[robcon]

2. Chavez has learned well from Kim Il-Jong and Castro.

The state is the party; the party is the state.

[lastknowngood]

4. As well as Bush and Rove

n/t

[1932]

9. Are you fooled by the spin or are you spinning?

For years, two parties traded power back and fort -- Copei and Accion Democratica. They were both corrupt. Dozens of parties on the left formed and could not break the stranglehold on power of those two parties (whic was preserved by a moribund constituion) until Chavez's ad hoc MVR won the presidency, but even that party had to work with a coalition of left parties. Do you know that many members of Chavez's cabinet and government are not members of MVR?

Now, Chavez is pulling all the parties on the left into a single party.

It's like if Labor, the SNP, the Lib Dems, and all the other non-Tory parties in the UK came together, or if the Greens, Democrats and the Working Families Party all came together.

Do you think American democracy would be threatened if the Green Party and the Democratic Party decided they were on the same page and could form one party?

[Warren Stupidity]

14. Well the BBC sure got you fooled. nt.

[bemildred]

3. I don't see why Hugo should not organize a political party to support him.

As long as he is not trying to prevent anyone else from doing so too. We only have two main parties here in the USA - or some think one party with two "wings" - everyone seems to consider that to be fine.

[clixtox]

8. Absolutely not everyone believes...

That the so-called two party system is a good model for ours or any government.

It is a sad and unfortunate system that maintains the status quo at the expense of true representation.

It does produce a lot of exemplery sheep, let's hear some spirited baas and some perpetual baaing.

Baa, baa, baa!

That's a good Democrat (or Republican).

Clinton, Obama or Edwards, baa, baa.

Our corporate masters have decided who our "viable or electable" choices will be. The other possible nominees are not backed by the big money players so just forget about them. They are obviously just frivolous and unworthy of anyones support... Get it? Got it? Clinton, Obama or Edwards, no one else...

[BushOut06]

5. Wake me up when he actually bans opposing political parties

Nothing I have seen so far indicates this. Instead, it just looks like several smaller political parties are consolidating into one unified party. But the way it's being portrayed in the media, it makes it look like Chavez is trying to eliminate all opposition. Even the headline of this thread is highly skewed - "Single Venezuelan party planned" - makes it sound like there would only be ONE political party. Further comparisons to Cuba and North Korea further exacerbate this grossly misleading statement. Maybe you people should try reading the ENTIRE article:

<snip>
"Three key parties have so far refused to dissolve their groups and they have expressed concerns that this new style of politics could lead to one way of thinking."
<snip>

So please, wake me up when Chavez decides to ban these other political parties, and has their leaders thrown in jail.

[bemildred]

6. I think it's got more to do with "consolidating his legacy" and like that.

Which is always a problem with these major revolutions and political reforms. People tend to get fat dumb and happy and revert to the old corrupt ways.

[1932]

11. Read Judi Lynn's post. That is not what is happening.

No offense, but the pattern that seems to repeat itself is the people get fooled by lies they read in the press.

[bemildred]

16. You don't think he wants to consolidate his legacy?

Why should he not? His attempts at democratization won't be allowed to proceed without resistance, that ought to be clear. And he can't expect, or want, to hang around forever, if he really wants to democratize Venezuela "permanently". This move is entirely in line with that sort of intent.

[1932]

32. If his legacy is a unified left, and a more democratic Venezuela...then sure

I'll accept that characterization.

But, you have to realize that this would have happened no matter who the president was. This is the result of a party heading the executive which is implementing policies with a broad base of support and which is addressing a lot of issues around which a lot of people on the left can rally.

Imagine if the Democratic Party were able to give the Green Party and whatever other fringe left parties no reason to exist. It wouldn't be because one individual willed it. It would because the party itself started representing a lot of people's interests in an efective and compelling manner, which is what is happening in Venezuela.

[originalpckelly]

37. What about that whole thing where Chavez thought Venezuela's two party system was corrupt?

Surely, dissent is a democratic thing? Why isn't it good for people whom are clearly on Chavez's side to have dissenting views? Why would a unified voice be needed? Wouldn't a true democrat want more parties than fewer? Diversity of opinion?

[1932]

12. Read Judi Lynn's post. That is not what is happening.

No offense, but the pattern that seems to repeat itself is the people get fooled by lies they read in the press.

[Judi Lynn]

7. The spin doesn't fool anyone who can be bothered to keep up on his/her reading.

This has been discussed for a long time.

The spin is designed to bolster the confusion of the mouth-breathers who just can't find a way to think things over until they understand them.

From an article written earlier this year when it was also discussed:

Venezuela: Chavez pushes forward with united party

Stuart Munckton
22 March 2007

~snip~
Although the US-backed right-wing opposition, and commentators in the corporate media, immediately attempted to claim this signified a move in the direction of a “one-party state”, the plan for a united party of supporters of the revolution does not involve any moves to ban opposition parties, and Chavez has emphasised that the decision for any organisation to join the PSUV is entirely voluntary.

Chavez said the rank and file should be able to democratically control the new party, including the selection of candidates for elections, arguing, “The grass roots will elect genuine leaders”. A lot of the forces that dominate the main pro-Chavez parties are seen by the grassroots as undemocratic cliques, functioning in a bureaucratic and sometimes corrupt fashion. A particular source of frustration has been the behind-closed-doors selection of electoral candidates, meaning many pro-Chavez candidates are unknown or distrusted by the ranks.

Almost immediately after Chavez’s speech, the president’s own party, the Movement for the Fifth Republic (MVR), announced it was willing dissolve into the new party and place its assets at the PSUV’s disposal. The MVR is easily the largest pro-Chavez group, holding over two-thirds of the seats in the National Assembly. A number of smaller parties have since announced their willingness to dissolve into the new formation.
(snip/...)

http://www.greenleft.org.au/2007/704/36540

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
As always, there are right-wingers happy to stagger forward to give us the benefit of their gifts of news analysis (already handed to them pre-digested, hard-spun, and sorted for simplicity by their corporate media), but we know they are meager: right-wingers only have the ability to hold the right-wing spin in mind while closing down their brains altogether. God help them should they grow the #### up and discover how wildly off track they are.

Struggle to keep up, wing-nuts, and you, too, can understand what is going on around you.

[EFerrari]

20. Great post, Judy Lynn. n/t

[Judi Lynn]

24. Hi, there, and thanks. Wouldn't it be like the end of the world if one of them actually

read it and became a contributor, instead? Like THAT'S going to happen. They're too old to learn new ways, it would seem, and too lazy to do their homework.

[EFerrari]

25. Imho, DU is starting to wise up to the unrelenting BushCo campaign

against Chavez. John Perkins (Economic Hitman) has weighed in on it. He recently said that we'd be in Venezuela were we not so overextended in the Middle East.

This is a link to his site. I like the clear way he describes the tactics BushCo uses against foreign governments who won't fork over their country's resources to American corporations.

http://www.johnperkins.org/Moreaboutthesecret.htm

[Judi Lynn]

27. Thanks! That book MUST be read, so much to offer! At the link, there's a good clip

by the author which should awaken people who simply DON'T KNOW that Venezuela's siatuation is going on all over the place: Venezuela is only one part of a much larger picture. Trying to isolate Hugo Chavez and pretend that if he disappears everything will be "good" again is INSANE.

When people protest the "revolution" in Latin America they unwittingly expose themselves far more than they are aware. It's an absolutely necessary step in Latin America's overcoming the injury done to it already, and kept in place by the oligarchy.

The clip to hear is #3 on this page of the site you linked:
http://www.globaldialoguecenter.com/collections/moi/john-perkins-moi.shtml

I'm going to listen to the rest when time allows.

Thank you for reminding us to get that book read! We don't need to cling to ignorance so hard, by golly. That's for the right-wingers among us.

[MarkR1717]

59. Isn't a one party state undemocratic?

"Venezuela's parliament, the National Assembly, is made up purely of politicians who support the president.

But they come from a number of different parties.

Activist battalions

Hugo Chavez is changing that by creating one united party, which he says will be constructed from the bottom up."

[Judi Lynn]

60. Didn't you notice the "one party" is a coalition of the parties of the LEFT?

Try to get back to the article and read it again.

This has nothing whatsoever to do with the right-wing in Venezuela, nor independents, etc.

[Warren Stupidity]

13. Headline needs edit: single Bolivarian Socialist Party planned.

Opposition parties are not being abolished. Chavez wants to unite all of the many parties on the left supporting his regime into one party of the left. Headline is complete and deliberate bullshit as usual.

[dipsydoodle]

15. The BBC have changed the header

since I posted the original. The BBC have no motive to post bullshit headlines apart from that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC

[justinaforjustice]

17. Western Press Repeatedly Smearing Venezuela's Chavez

The western media, particularly in the U.S. and Britain, has been enthusiastically distributing the U.S. State Department's false propaganda about Venezuela's current government, in line with the intention to depose socialist Chavez from office. Venezuela may have greater oil reserves than those in the Middle East, but President Chavez does not dance to the tune of the Bush-Chaney neo-conservatives, so they want him removed and replaced by reliable puppets.

To accomplish the removal of Chavez and his government,the U.S. has been contributing millions of dollars to a coalition of opposition parties hoping they will oust him. (See Eva Golinger, "Code Chavez" (2005] and "Bush v. Chavez"(2006) for documentation of these efforts.) The U.S. virtually created this coalition of previously divided opposition parties and is funding efforts to destabilize the government. They hope to scare investors and tourists away by falsely charging that Chavez is encouraging the illegal drug trade. Venezuelan police are constantly seizing drugs coming into Venezuela from Colombia, where U.S. DEA programs are supposedly suppressing them. The UN recently heralded the efficacy of Venezuela's anti-drug programs.

The U.S. State Department also claims that the Chavez government is suppressing free speech. In fact, almost 90% of the press and media are privately owned and the majority are controlled by vociferous Chavez opponents, who criticize him daily.

No journalists in Venezuela have been fined, jailed or suppressed because of their views. One TV station, RCTV, was refused extension of its broadcasting license because it had repeatedly violated anti-cigarette and liquor and pornography advertising restrictions as well as used its channel to publicly call for insurrection against the duly elected government, supporting the coup against Chavez in 2002 and attacking the election results of 2006 as fraudulent before the vote was even announced. RCTV has just recommenced operations in Venezuela on a cable channel.

The U.S. State Department maliciously call Chavez a dictator, when he has won four national elections in the last 8 years with over-whelming majorities. These elections were all monitored by international observers and found to be honest. A national poll in the last two weeks put President Chavez's support at 72%.

Chavez won the past four elections based on the support of a coalition of different parties. In the last six months, Chavez and his supporters have asked all supporters to join the new Socialist Party, believing that it is important to express a unified view to the nation in carrying out the development of the socialist policies of their Bolivarian Revolution. No one is required to join this party and other parties are not affected in any way. To suggest that Chavez is forming a "single party" state is completely false.

To date, over six millions voters, out of a total voter population of approximately 15 million, have joined the Socialist Party.

It is indeed ironic that Bush-Chaney administration, the most bellicose, undemocratic,and secretive in U.S. history, dares to charge President Chavez with undermining democracy in Venezuela.

On the contrary, the Chavez government is committed to building true democracy to every level of Venezuelan society, from the neighborhoods, with the creation of community counsels to make decisions about development and execute them, to encouraging, with funding, the building of worker owned and run cooperative businesses.

President Chavez has been using the profits from the country's vast oil resources to fund mass literacy programs, bring free medical, dental care and new hospitals throughout the country, and to massively extend free university access and technical training to Venezuelan citizens.

The extension of university access throughout the country has engendered great hostility from the private university sector which fears loss of its academic hegemony, and some of the private university administrators, activists in opposition parties, have been leading street demonstrations against the Chavez government as a part of the U.S. supported destabilization campaign.

It is very sad that many Democratic politicians in the U.S., who long ago learned that the Bush administration lies repeatedly about wars, disasters and its executive actions, should so naively believe the State Department's lies about political and social conditions in Venezuela.

I've been living in Venezuela for the last six months. Democracy is thriving here, I only wish it were doing as well in the United States.

[Judi Lynn]

19. Excellent appearance you've made on a Chavez thread, justinaforjustice!

Wonderful points made. While reading your remarks on the university kids and their "protest" on behalf of RCTV (until they were invited to debate leftist kids and WALKED OUT), it occured to me that they would resist and hate the Chavez government's new strides in public education as it makes education available for poorer Venezuelans up to, including the university level. In democratizing education, the new government removes the exclusivity and priviledge they have enjoyed, all alone as members of the wealthier, European descended community. It must really bother them to envision a Venezuela with EVERYONE eventually having a fair chance at a much better education.

So glad to see your comments. Welcome to D.U. :hi: :hi: :hi:

[EFerrari]

21. Welcome to DU, justina!

I'm jealous that you get to see that right up front! :hi:

[dipsydoodle]

26. Given that this was a BBC News item

specifically concerning South America then if you're including them in with the general statement "The western media, particularly in the U.S. and Britain" perhaps you would be kind enough to enlighten all of us with similar examples where the BBC have knowingly distorted the facts there.

[1932]

33. BBC coverage of African politics is miserable. Their coverage of former colonies

is generally atrocious.

They use that extreme right winger who wrote Dogs of War as a regular commentator on African politics.

[dipsydoodle]

34. Fine

All you need are sound examples of that. Feel free to list as many as you can find.

You appear to have a mistake regarding Frederick and the BBC. Maybe check your facts next time.

[originalpckelly]

36. What you observe is the cult mentality, it is used in Scientology...

to delegitimize the very people in the very position to show the world how wrong the cult is. They delegitimize psychiatrists in Scientology, because those are the precise people who'd tell the Scientologist how damaging their auditing and sec-checks are.

In this case we observe members of Chavez's personality cult will delegitimize any source of information that might possibly suggest Mr. Chavez is "up to no good".

[dipsydoodle]

38. I can't quite grasp

what that's got to do with either the BBC or the price of eggs. Did you intentionally comment on a sub post ?

[originalpckelly]

39. It has everything to do with the BBC...

it is not considered a legitimate resource for these cultists, hence the challenge by the Chavez cultist.

[1932]

57. Okely dokely.

[OilemFirchen]

50. Why did they change the headline?

Or, better yet, why did the original headline read as it did? If it wasn't an accurate depiction of the story, how did it make it to print? Just an unfortunate accident?

[eridani]

67. Getting left wingers to agree on anything is not easy

Maybe he'll have some luck in figuring out how to herd cats--who knows?

[Judi Lynn]

18. It would be good to become acquainted with the reasons for merging the leftist parties.

~snip~
... it should be noted that the opposition press, radio and TV stations, still run by the oligarchs and the local bourgeoisie, are misinforming the public about the creation of this unity party, the PSUV. “Same as Cuba – one party”, screams a headline, implying that the opposition parties will somehow be illegally forced to disband. Nothing could be further from the truth. The PSUV will be a unity party of all 24 parties which supported Chavez in the 2006 presidential elections. The opposition parties will continue as they have always done – or hopefully more democratically and legally.
(snip)

One of the major hangovers from the dominant parties of the IV Republic was the lack of internal democracy within the political parties themselves. Candidates were chosen by the leadership rather than being elected by the grassroots, which caused discomfort in many sectors. The MVR held internal elections in June 2004 to elect candidates for local councils but not much more than that.

Chavez has stated that all candidates of the PSUV will be elected internally at local, regional and national levels, and this will effectively undermine the power being wielded by political leaders in arbitrarily nominating candidates and effectively excluding grassroots opinion. This is a necessary step since it is a glaring contradiction to state in the Preamble of the 1999 Bolivarian Constitution that democracy in Venezuela is “participatory and protagonistic”, and not apply it to the internal elections of the political parties.

In addition, participatory democracy is from “the bottom up”, and not from “the top down”. The creation of the Communal Councils in April 2006 where the population from a barrio can elect its spokespersons (note: NOT representatives) in a citizens assembly, the decision of which is legally binding under the 1999 Constitution, is the starting point. In the coming constitutional reform, the Communal Councils and their role will be legally strengthened and they will replace local councilors and perhaps even the town halls and mayors, which are a throwback to Spanish colonial days.

It is this aspect of the wider economic and political changes that the party is being proposed and created. It is also this aspect which links in local people at grass roots having the opportunity and power to determine local priorities and resources who are also being invited ( and are likely to take up) to create the party and elect its leaders. With this true devolution of power, within a national revolutionary situation, the creation from the base of a new party, with strong internal democracy and full transparency – alongside a firm commitment to building social justice under socialism, the age old problem of corruption can be broken. Chavez calls corruption a cultural problem, however this is being tackled at a fundamental rather that cosmetic level with the increased vigilance of the tax collectors, gaining control of the oil company, PDVSA, and general large scale decisions clearly being taken for the general social good. With numerous good examples of effective mega infrastructure projects and effective management, this shines an uncomfortable light on those areas where the money ‘disappears’.

More:
http://venezuelasolidarity.org.uk/ven/web/2006/articles/psuv_thoughts.html

[Bo]

22. CHAVEZ IS NEVER LEAVING POWER...I thought everyone knew that

I fly to South America regularly and it is very obvious to all other countries there that he has no intention of ever leaving power. He is a DICTATOR. Why is it so difficult to accept this?

[Judi Lynn]

23. Obvious to the countries which turned out into the streets to loudly protest Bush's visit?

Are they the countries you claim believe Hugo Chavez is never leaving power?

If he is never leaving power, why is he doing everything he can to democratize the country, turning the power TO THE PEOPLE, rather than the oligarchy, for the first time since the Spanish assault on the Western Hemisphere? That would work against him.

That's the point of the consolidation of the leftist groups, if you'd only take your head out long enough to bring yourself up to date on the FACTS.

[SayWhatYo]

45. Based on what I've seen, you seem to follow Latin America affairs pretty closely.

How long is Chavezes term? As in, when is the next election there?

[Judi Lynn]

62. Didn't see your post until now. How long is Chavez' term?

Didn't you know he was elected in December of last year for 6 years?

It would do you far more good to start keeping up on events on which to offer us the benefit of your wisdom.

Hugo Chavez was originally elected in December of 1998, sworn in on February 2, 1999.

Venezuelan Presidential terms are 6 years.

[ProudDad]

64. Because

There's no proof that it's true... :shrug:

[originalpckelly]

28. I can't seem to find the checklist from "How to Be a Dictator for Dummies"

Although, I'm pretty sure "consolidating support by suppressing intra-movement dissent" is on it.

[Judi Lynn]

29. Doesn't sound like suppressing dissent when some of the groups don't want to join,

and aren't shy about discussing it, and very well may not participate. Nor does it seem like suppression when the power is going to the grassroots, AWAY from the top of the organization.

You really have to know what you're doing if you're going to attempt to mislead.

[originalpckelly]

30. Sometimes suppressing dissent doesn't have to involve locking someone away.

Sometimes, it just involves making their dissent powerless.

[Judi Lynn]

31. Hey, DEEP! I'm gonna write that down, to carry in my wallet!

[originalpckelly]

35. I'm not going to argue with you about this, to do so would allow you to think...

it's even a legitimate position to support this.

[SoxFan]

40. L'etat, c'est moi!

More egomaniacal crap from everyone's favorite dictatorial thug.

[UTUSN]

41. Post #22: CHAVEZ is NEVER leaving power!!1

Yeah, I haven't read all the books JudiLynn has, OR Mika. AND I love them both for being SO idealistic.

I won't say more. I LOVE you Judi/Mika AND SFPATEX!!1 N/T

[Name removed]

42. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Pavulon]

43. And the water warms a bit more for the froggies

they are just about boiled now. No dissent, media controls, consolidation of power....There has never been anything like this in Latin AMerica before, oh wait.

The BBC is just making all this stuff up.

[ProudDad]

65. You might try actually READING the posts on a thread

before jerking your easily jerked knee...

You might actually learn something...


Although, that would get in the way of your mindless hate of someone you know very little about...

Never mind...

[eridani]

68. If you think it's so bad, go down there and start a radio station

Low-power community radio is 100% legal for anybody who wants to try it, unlike here, where it's called "pirate" radio.

[Doctor_J]

44. Rove already tried it here, and the jury is still out on whether it

will work or not. So far the "opposition" isn't putting up much of a fight.

[SayWhatYo]

46. My question would be...

Would this become the only allowed party, or will others still be allowed? The article doesn't really make any mention of that, and that seems to be a critical in determining possible motives.

From the outside looking in, based on this and other events that have been reported by the media here, it would sound as if he is trying to become a dictator of sorts. However, I'm well aware that propaganda is not something governments are afraid to use. So, I tend to take things with a grain of salt. Of course I don't just mean from the US and other western countries, but also from the pro-Venezuela sources too.

It should be interesting to see how things go over the next few years...

[David__77]

47. Parties have more freedom in Venezuela than in the US.

Even small parties can have a big impact thanks to Venezuela's electoral laws. There is absolutely no attempt to ban the right-wing parties. This article is describing the efforts to unite the progressive parties into a single force so that they can become more politically viable in the long run, including after Chavez is no longer around. They're doing this precisely because they DON'T want to the personality of Chavez to be the glue to hold that movement together in the long run.

[ProudDad]

66. Exactly

"They're doing this precisely because they DON'T want to the personality of Chavez to be the glue to hold that movement together in the long run."

This sounds like Chavez...

[Judi Lynn]

48. Article written on the original article and its author:

BBC distorts Venezuela news
The BBC’s Caracas correspondent has been at it again. 'It' being the use of clever journalistic tricks that leave the reader with the impression that the Venezuelan president, Hugo Chavez, is a dictator-in-waiting.

Correspondent James Ingham doesn’t tell lies. He’s way too subtle for that. What he does instead is omit crucial facts, and report actual facts as mere "claims" or "accusations".

Take the case of RCTV, the Venezuelan TV station which failed to get its licence renewed because, as a matter of incontrovertible fact, it participated in a coup against the elected government of Hugo Chavez.

Ingham’s reporting introduces an element of doubt in the role played by RCTV:

"He {Chavez} says they were involved in a coup that nearly toppled him five years ago." ('Venezuelans protest over TV issue,' BBC Online, May 27, 2007) http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6695769.stm

Here, Ingham has relegated a hard fact to the status of an opinion. You might choose to believe what Chavez says. Or you might not. One of the reasons you might not is because the Western media has worked hard to discredit anything Chavez says.

In yesterday’s BBC Online, Ingham reported on what he said was Hugo Chavez’s “plans to form a single political party in Venezuela .”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6910472.stm

This was followed by a warning that “critics worry about the threat to plurality” and later by the factual statement that “ Venezuela 's parliament, the National Assembly, is made up purely of politicians who support the president.”

Readers were left to draw the obvious and damning conclusion that Venezuela was set to become a one-party state, one in which opposing voices have already been effectively silenced.

More:
http://21stcenturysocialism.com/article/bbc_distorts_venezuela_news_01513.html

[Pavulon]

49. All fine and good, but it is CLEAR where

he is going. His actions taken as a whole point in one direction. Consolidation of power. As long as gas stays high, he gets to play animal farm. If the us starts demanding more ethanol jacking up the price of corn, bad news for these guys. Funny how those markets work. We can afford for corn to double and double again, some of these petro states..Not so much.

Seems like a great cross isle initiative, increase demand for biofuel here, redirect wealth to the agricultural community here.

[ProudDad]

52. You are ABSOLUTELY RIGHT

Chavez is all about "Consolidation of power"...

He's all about the consolidation of power in the hands of the PEOPLE instead of a tiny, unelected oligarchy -- the one that HAD all the power before Chavez...

[Pavulon]

54. Yes a perfect little world

where all the people are equal. And the benevolent chavez to keep the whole thing running. No dissent, one party. Sounds familiar, oh yeah the Soviets tried it, didn't work that well.

May be if he tries hard he can be the next Kim Jung il..

[ProudDad]

58. I firmly believe that Venezuela

has a better chance at "a perfect little world" than we do here in the belly of the beast...The mighty, mighty, We're Number One (debtor) in the World - U. S. of Freakin' A...

[ProudDad]

51. It's just like here in the Good Ole' U.S. of A.

We have the two right-wings of the business party...

Not much choice...

At least in Venezuela they are likely to have a decentralized grassroots democracy where everyone's voice can be heard.

You don't need a couple of alleged different "national parties" for that...

[ProudDad]

53. I'll bring the dip

Seriously, I may be visiting Venezuela next year.

I'll report back if I do...

[Pavulon]

55. I have visited..

several times. Last in '04. Interesting place, but it is a developing nation. Lots of foreign business in place. European and American corporations have massive manufacturing there. Non petro (auto, etc).
Amazing poverty was still there. All this bull aside, people are nice, food is great, nice place. Hot and humid in Caracas.

[ProudDad]

56. I've found that people are pretty much nice

everywhere.

I've been to at least 15 different "foreign" countries in Europe, Central America and Africa and most people are pretty damn nice everywhere...

"Hot and humid in Caracas", why am I not surprised :) That would be a contrast to very hot and not humid here in AZ...

[KillCapitalism]

61. Chavez is merely trying to protect his socialist programs/reforms.

I don't see this move as totalitarian. It's a defense mechanism to protect the people against pro-capitalist parties who would destroy all of Chavez's work and re-privatize industries, etc.

[Larry Ogg]

63. Oh sure, like we really have a two party system in the US with Democrats and Republicans.

But a funny thing happens when you change the words to just Liberal and Conservative, and put Conservatives on the right side of the isle and liberals on the left side of the isle, we the people would see that the Conservatives side has made the Liberal side so insignificant that the US basically has gone too a one party system.

Here is another way to look at it. Our system of government is like a coin, you have the Republicans on one side and the Democrats on the other, but it is still the same coin, and the coin is Conservative… Conservatives will not stand in the way of or oppose another Conservatives.