[Sixstrings]

Trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qoRjmYm6ry4

Just saw this on Netflix the other day. It's available on instant viewing, I think the whole thing is on Youtube too if you want to search for it. Several Netflix reviewers warned to keep in mind it's propaganda, but then again what isn't these days right?

So anyway it's worth a watch. Bush is long gone now and this isn't a hot topic but I learned a few things. Chavez comes off as pretty likeable. Oliver Stone makes a strong case of outright lying in the US media, where they mixed up footage to tell stories that aren't true, etc. But again, nobody has clean hands anymore and I'm sure Chavez must have his skeletons too that weren't mentioned in the documentary.

Anyhow, I've never had the sense Chavez was some evil dictator and the film confirmed that. Is he really a dictator at all? I think he's won 11 straight democratic elections. He meddles with the media down there, but then again politics is complex in Latin America -- the media are all controlled by the business oligarchs, who'd rather the poor keep right on suffering.

Stone also flies all over South America interviewing the presidents of Boliva, Ecuador, Paraguya, Argentina, and Brazil. I wasn't quite aware of this before but practically the whole continent is a Chavez power bloc now. They're all socialist presidents, all friendly with Chavez. As far as American national interests go, it's pretty clear Bush did a lot of damage to our influence over that continent.

And what right do we have to "influence" anyway? Should poor people starve and live in the dirt while we support coups and real dictators, all so that we can be 100% certain the oil will flow?

There are some funny moments in the film.. Chavez jokingly tells Stone he's going to show him the place where they're building the nuclear bomb for Iran. It turns out it's a cornmeal plant that Iran built for them.. they sell the cornmeal at low prices so the poor don't go hungry. Overall, he seems like a good president for his country.. works very hard, cares about self-sufficiency. They used to import all their corn, but since he first took office he's now got it built up so that they grow all their own corn and don't need to import it.

The interviews with the other presidents are interesting. They universally dislike both Bush and the IMF. The IMF didn't want Brazil to pay off its loans, but the president insisted and now they have around a $260 billion annual budget surplus -- that's more than we can say, with our gargantuan deficits.

The most shocking thing was something the former Argentine president said.. he casually mentioned that Bush told him the best way to improve an economy was through war.

Oh.. and Chavez explains to Stone that Bush's plans were all about oil. He meant to go after Venezuela first, and then Iraq. There was a brief coup after his first election.. the IMF rushed in and offered money to the new dictator, and the US told the coup leaders to get a letter of resignation from Chavez. The army rebelled against the IMF supported dictator, and reinstalled Chavez. (keep in mind he was democratically elected in the first place)

So anyhow I realize this could all be propaganda.. maybe there's horrible things Chavez has done that's not in the film. Although the Fox News clips are a laugh they're so over the top.. they accuse the Bolivian president of being a cocaine pusher when in reality the native Bolivians have chewed coca leaves for thousands of years to help them live at high altitude -- and coca leaves aren't processed cocaine in the first place.

[Plantagenet]

...So anyhow I realize this could all be propaganda.

Good thing. I was starting to think you were being pretty naive and gullible.

[mos6507]

Oliver Stone I guess is trying to follow Michael Moore's footsteps.

I would do some extra research before forming your opinion of Chavez solely on this.

[Sixstrings]

Good thing. I was starting to think you were being pretty naive and gullible.

Well I always keep that in mind of course. Propaganda is useful though, you learn about another culture and their point of view.. there are always some grains of truth there.

If anyone knows about any human rights abuses Chavez is responsible for, post it in this thread. To my knowledge though he's not "worse than Saddam" as Fox News has said.

Ultimately, I'm critical of everything these days. The more you follow politics, the more you learn about geopolitics and what goes on in other countries, the more you realize nobody has clean hands. It's historical fact that our own country has done a lot shady things in South America.

Bottom line is.. most Venezuelans seem to like Chavez, and they keep electing him. Even if they're all crooks you can't blame folks for picking one they like.

[Sixstrings]

Ok I was being lazy.. here's what I could dig up on Wikipedia:

Amnesty International has criticized the Chávez administration for targeting critics following several politically motivated arrests.[145] Freedom House lists Venezuela as being "partly free" in its 2009 Freedom in the World annual report, claiming that women's rights and indigenous rights have improved, but that press freedom has been threatened.[146] A 2010 Organization of American States report found concerns with freedom of expression, human rights abuses, authoritarianism, press freedom, threats to democracy,[147][148] as well as erosion of separation of powers, the economic infrastructure and ability of the president to appoint judges to federal courts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_chavez#Human_rights

and

In 2008, Human Rights Watch released a report reviewing Chávez's human rights record over his first decade in power.[153] The report praises Chávez's 1999 amendments to the constitution which significantly expanded human rights guarantees, but notes a "wide range of government policies that have undercut the human rights protections established" by the revised constitution.[153] In particular, the report accuses Chávez and his administration of engaging in discrimination on political grounds, eroding the independence of the judiciary, and of engaging in "policies that have undercut journalists' freedom of expression, workers' freedom of association, and civil society's ability to promote human rights in Venezuela."[154] The report also mentioned improvements in women's rights and indigenous rights. Subsequently, over a hundred Latin American scholars signed a joint letter with the Council on Hemispheric Affairs criticizing the Human Rights Watch report for its alleged factual inaccuracy, exaggeration, lack of context, illogical arguments, and heavy reliance on opposition newspapers as sources, amongst other things.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_chavez#Human_rights

and

Venezuelan Judge Maria Afiuni was arrested in 2009 on charges of corruption, after she ordered the conditional release on bail of banker Eligio Cedeño, who had been held on charges of fraud and other crimes due to alleged illegal currency trading activities. Some human rights officials allege the arrest was politically motivated; Cedeño "had been in pretrial detention for nearly three years, despite a two-year limit prescribed by Venezuelan law".[159] Cedeño later fled to the U.S. to avoid prosecution. Following Afiuni's arrest, several groups, including the United Nations, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, the Episcopal Conference of Venezuela, Human Rights Watch, the Law Society of England and Wales, the U.S. Department of State, and the European Union Parliament accused Chávez of "creating a climate of fear" among Venezuela's legal profession.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_chavez#Human_rights

Hm.. pretty mild, by South American standards. I'm sorry, I just don't see any "evil dictator" stuff here. I'm not reading anything about average folks not having the freedom to travel, or tens of thousands of political prisoners in jail. Nothing here about massive embezzlement -- to the contrary, the oil money is being shared with the poor.

As far as human rights go our good friends in China and the middle east are much worse than the Chavez regime. I guess we'll know for sure if he ever cancels elections.. he does seem to be consolidating power.

[mos6507]

My problem with Chavez from the vantage point of the US, even if you're willing to write-off the country's oil, is his foreign policy.

He has a very immature approach to foreign policy that goes something like this.

US bad, therefore the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Venezuela MUST spite the US, therefore we will form alliances with Iran, say "nicey nicey" stuff about Kim Jong Il, etc...

There's no diplomacy here. It's all shaking his fist and holding grudges. All he ever does is whine and complain, not just about the US but about other countries as well. That's why the king of Spain told him to STFU. He's like the Al Sharpton of latin america. He who presumes to speak for his downtrodden people, but who is in fact just an egomaniac with delusions of grandeur.

When Obama went to South America, Chavez was at least not hiding under his desk afraid of some assassination plot like the schtick he usually pulls, but he handed Obama a book that is all about the evils of US imperialism. The problem is, Chavez has no real roadmap to bury the hatchet with the US, and it certainly isn't going to make matters better by continuing to strengthen its bonds with Cuba and Iran.

It's no stretch of the imagination that Venezuela will eventually be a benefactor of Iran's nuclear program, and once that happens, all bets are off.

I wonder what Chavez's hero, Fidel, would think of that, considering that a) Fidel is still a fan of Obama, and b) he wants his legacy to be nuclear disarmament.

[Dezakin]

Hm.. pretty mild, by South American standards. I'm sorry, I just don't see any "evil dictator" stuff here. I'm not reading anything about average folks not having the freedom to travel, or tens of thousands of political prisoners in jail. Nothing here about massive embezzlement -- to the contrary, the oil money is being shared with the poor.

The point is, Chavez is being lionized by leftists even though he is little more than an megalomaniac who paints himself as the messiah of Venezuela. His largest evil is his incompetence. What he's doing now is systematically taking a country that has had problems with transparency and democracy historically and making it worse. In his drive to protect the 'Bolivarian Revolution' (ie, his own personal power) he has compromised the judiciary, crushed the cohesion of political opposition, and bought off the electorate while mismanaging the countries resources.

He has made Venezuela even less attractive to foreign investment than before, which makes monetizing Venezuela's vast oil reserves even more difficult.

My largest objection to him however is that his supporters don't seem to notice his governing style is nearly identical to an ideological opposite, Silvio Berlusconi. He bends government rules, even ones he devised, when he finds them inconvenient, he's bombastic and entirely immature with regards to foreign policy. He acts like a more spoiled brat than a world leader.

As far as human rights go our good friends in China and the middle east are much worse than the Chavez regime. I guess we'll know for sure if he ever cancels elections.. he does seem to be consolidating power.

Well, no one pretends that middle eastern autocratic states or the PRC are heroes. I doubt he will cancel elections, his ego requires legitimacy. If the votes don't go his way however, who knows? But its not who votes that matter, its who counts the votes.

[Sixstrings]

he has compromised the judiciary..

The right wing Latin American governments we support and prop up all have compromised judiciaries, and / or they're dropping like flies from the entrenched narco mafias. How is that better? Is it OK just because the governments are right wing capitalist oligarch? My point here is that I don't see how we can criticize since we've gotten worse results in the right wing governments we prop up.

crushed the cohesion of political opposition, and bought off the electorate while mismanaging the countries resources.

For the first time, the poor are being treated like fully enfranchised voters and not just dark skinned peasant slaves. You call it "buying off the electorate," but aren't they just actually getting results in exchange for their vote? Sounds like democracy to me. As for mismanagement.. I assume neither of us know all the details enough to pass judgement. My criteria would be to question whether their debt slavery to the IMF has improved or worsened.. I know socialist Brazil has gotten out of debt and runs a surplus. That's success, not mismanagement.

With Chavez, at least the poor now share in the nation's oil wealth rather than just just the oligarchs. What he's doing with agriculture sounds smart.. Venezuela is now self-sufficient on corn. That's no small achievement; that means the poor don't need to go hungry now in a world of diminishing food supplies. A US friendly right-wing oligarch government would have just kept importing all the food. That's how countries like Haiti end up having starvation if we Americans suddenly decide we want to turn our corn into ethanol and then they're screwed because they were importing it to eat.

He has made Venezuela even less attractive to foreign investment than before..

I think South Americans have suffered so much they don't really want to be "attractive to foreign investment." For example, the previous right wing business-friendly government in Bolivia sold the country's water utilities to an American company. Part of the deal was that Bolivia had to pass a law making it illegal for the poor to collect rain water in cisterns -- the foreign water company wanted max profit and no competition.

The poor rose up in protest.. their leaders were jailed and tortured off and on, but eventually Evo Morales won the presidential election and changed all that. You talk about governments not being "foreing investment friendly," but from the poor's point of view they just don't want to be treated like dogs anymore. They want the right to collect rainwater if they want to, a basic sort of right we Americans have and take for granted.

Well, no one pretends that middle eastern autocratic states or the PRC are heroes.

Well why don't we try sorting our friends out before we go looking for new enemies? It's just hypocrisy, we Americans have weakened our position to fight for human rights while we prop up brutal dictatorships and monarchies, and rather than stand up to China we keep becoming more and more like them.

What this all boils down to is basic common sense that all of us on this forum, who are thinking people, realize. There are no "good guys" and "bad guys." There are sphere's of influence. There is us, the superpower and then there are rising powers and regional powers. Geopolitics is all about power, control, and money not what is right and wrong.

The socialist governments of South America, for whatever reason, aren't on our "team." Mexico and Columbia are firmly in our camp -- whether they're doing better by their own people than Venezuela or Brazil is irrelevant, all we care is that they do what our government and business interests want.

And then there's Israel.. since the fall of the USSR our whole foreign policy seems to be about Israel, and the enmies we have from that mess makes us nervous about our oil supply and so any country who's too friendly with an anti-Israeli country becomes our enemy too.

And so, I realize that Chavez is "a bad guy" just because he's on the other team, the anti-Israeli team. He's also a bad guy because he's on the anti-oligarch and predatory capitalist team.

Bottom line, we're a right-wing hypercapitalist free-trading globalist country that strongly supports Israel. Anyone who doesn't match up with that is our opponent. China's cultural genocide in Tibet, all the Tibetans still being tortured and living under arrest, China's ban on free speech (in cahoots with Google) and their myriad human rights abuses and environmental destruction -- none of that matters now that they're hyper-capitalist totalitarians and not "communists" anymore.

[mos6507]

My point here is that I don't see how we can criticize since we've gotten worse results in the right wing governments we prop up.

It is human nature to criticize. You think those countries don't criticize?

For the first time, the poor are being treated like fully enfranchised voters

The jury is out on the long-term welfare of the people Chavez claims to be helping out. Communism has a poor track record and few here other than Eastbay are proponents of it, outside of highlighting the Cuban special period. There are signs that the bloom is already off the rose with Chavez's popularity with the plebes anyway. Time will tell. It's their problem.

With Chavez, at least the poor now share in the nation's oil wealth

And how will that work after the oil wealth goes away? About as well a it's working in Mexico. It's not a sustainable situation to build a petro-welfare-state.

Well why don't we try sorting our friends out before we go looking for new enemies?

I don't see a lot of Americans seeing Venezuela as "the enemy". Obama went down there and took that propaganda book from Chavez rather than stick a gun in Hugo's ribs. What the world needs is some measure of diplomacy from Chavez's end in order to stop perpetuating this perceived animosity. That can't happen because it's too politically useful for Chavez to portray the US as the great satan and to continue to shift the country towards the Cuban model.

I can say that if Chavez continues to ingratiate himself with Iran and start his own nuclear program then the blame rests with him for inflaming international tensions. The international community will turn on him just as it did Iran, for not taking any olive-branches.

And so, I realize that Chavez is "a bad guy" just because he's on the other team

If Chavez reintroduces nukes into the western hemisphere he will create a situation not unlike the cuban missile crisis. At that point I'm willing to stick my neck out and say he's "the bad guy".

Does it mean we should invade Venezuela? No. But he's on my sh*t-list for pursuing the same sort of paranoid belligerence of Iran and NK which is a recipe for disaster.

Bottom line, we're a right-wing hypercapitalist free-trading globalist country that strongly supports Israel.

I don't know why you are inserting Israel into the debate.

Anyone who doesn't match up with that is our opponent. China's cultural genocide in Tibet, all the Tibetans still being tortured and living under arrest, China's ban on free speech (in cahoots with Google) and their myriad human rights abuses and environmental destruction -- none of that matters now that they're hyper-capitalist totalitarians and not "communists" anymore.

I hated that right after Tiananment Square that Clinton put China on most favored nation trading status. Two wrongs don't make a right, though.

[Dezakin]

he has compromised the judiciary..

The right wing Latin American governments we support and prop up all have compromised judiciaries, and / or they're dropping like flies from the entrenched narco mafias. How is that better? Is it OK just because the governments are right wing capitalist oligarch? My point here is that I don't see how we can criticize since we've gotten worse results in the right wing governments we prop up.

I'm sorry, I'm not comparing Venezuela to some puppet state that fits some national interest of the US. I'm saying Chavez has undermined the rule of law so he can consolidate power. And hell, yeah I can criticize because honestly I wasn't involved in or advocated any of the operation condor stuff that you seem to be alluding to.

I don't advocate any sort of intervention into Venezuelan internal affairs. That's their business. I only observe, and what I see is embarrassing and sad.

crushed the cohesion of political opposition, and bought off the electorate while mismanaging the countries resources.

For the first time, the poor are being treated like fully enfranchised voters and not just dark skinned peasant slaves. You call it "buying off the electorate," but aren't they just actually getting results in exchange for their vote? Sounds like democracy to me. As for mismanagement.. I assume neither of us know all the details enough to pass judgement. My criteria would be to question whether their debt slavery to the IMF has improved or worsened.. I know socialist Brazil has gotten out of debt and runs a surplus. That's success, not mismanagement.

Where was I criticizing Brazil?

He has made Venezuela even less attractive to foreign investment than before..

I think South Americans have suffered so much they don't really want to be "attractive to foreign investment." For example, the previous right wing business-friendly government in Bolivia sold the country's water utilities to an American company. Part of the deal was that Bolivia had to pass a law making it illegal for the poor to collect rain water in cisterns -- the foreign water company wanted max profit and no competition.

There's a difference between making stupid or corrupt deals and becoming completely unattractive. Going on a spree of nationalization without compensation makes it very unlikely that any foreign capital will decide to invest time or money in such an unstable environment. I just think that's dumb, even if it does appeal to pride.

Well, no one pretends that middle eastern autocratic states or the PRC are heroes.

Well why don't we try sorting our friends out before we go looking for new enemies? It's just hypocrisy, we Americans have weakened our position to fight for human rights while we prop up brutal dictatorships and monarchies, and rather than stand up to China we keep becoming more and more like them.

Neither Venezuela nor China is an enemy, no matter what you might hear on Fox News. The only side doing any antagonism is Chavez, because his entire platform is based on the 'US is bad' idea.

And so, I realize that Chavez is "a bad guy" just because he's on the other team, the anti-Israeli team. He's also a bad guy because he's on the anti-oligarch and predatory capitalist team.

For Venezuela he's a bad guy because he's creating a one party state under the flag of populism while antagonizing vehicles for Venezuelan prosperity. That's not any national interest concern. He'll sell the oil either way because he has to, which is all we care about. For national interest concerns, the only thing that affect us is his constant childish diatribes against the US or his trade with states that are diametrically opposed to US interest.

I'm just annoyed with how so many leftists are seduced by this guy, when he's so enamored with himself and power. On the left there are apologists for Hugo Chavez and on the right there are apologists for Silvio Berlusconi, but they're essentially the same man.

[Sixstrings]

double post

[Sixstrings]

Where was I criticizing Brazil?

The documentary is about more than Venezuela; also Brazil, Argentina, Ecuador, Bolivia and Paraguay -- they all have "Bolivarian" socialist presidents, they're all good friends with Chavez. But you're right I shouldn't have switched mid argument to talking about Brazil.

You know what, I've drifted too far in this thread into sounding too supportive of these guys. Chavez isn't perfect, I just don't see how he's that bad all things considered. I really just like to have an open mind with this stuff and look at things objectively. And there are other issues too, maybe the main one being how South America has gone socialist, anti-IMF and much cooler towards the US than in the past.

In the documentary the former Argentine president says he hopes that with all the hispanic immigration into the US, maybe South American style socialism will spread up through Mexico and then into the US -- by the time it reaches us, Latinos will be a decisive voting bloc. The first Latino president of the US may well be a "Bolivarian" socialist.

[Sixstrings]

There's no diplomacy here. It's all shaking his fist and holding grudges. All he ever does is whine and complain, not just about the US but about other countries as well. That's why the king of Spain told him to STFU. He's like the Al Sharpton of latin america. He who presumes to speak for his downtrodden people, but who is in fact just an egomaniac with delusions of grandeur.

It doesn't sound like you've made an effort to understand both sides, but at the end of the day we're Americans and foreign policy isn't up to us so it doesn't help anyway to have understanding or empathy for your own nation's adversaries.

As a civic responsibility, I think average folks should only start paying attention and asking questions when there's a drumbeat for war.

Reading over this thread, I realize it looks like I'm "enamored" with Chavez but that's not the case. I just find the other viewpoint interesting. I don't know enough of the facts to have a concrete opinion to really argue either side, plus I'm American not Venezuelan anyway so it doesn't concern me.

Biggest problem I see with Chavez is that he may be in the process of *becoming* a dictator. Dictators often start out with good deeds and intentions. He is meddling with the media, and that's a big no-no even if their media is awful like our Fox News. We learned that lesson a long time ago in this country with the Alien and Sedition Acts -- you have to respect free speech and free media, or else democracy can't work.

The other big problem is that it's all about Chavez there.. that can't work long term, at least as a democracy, since democracies need to be based on the rule of law and INSTITUTIONS, not one man. Then again you can't quite apply American civic standards to South America -- we've already been stable with strong institutions for a long time whereas South America has been a big mess.

Hope that clears it up so nobody thinks I'm a total radical.

[Plantagenet]

Biggest problem I see with Chavez is that he may be in the process of *becoming* a dictator. Dictators often start out with good deeds and intentions.

Chavez is a great admirer of Castro, dictator of Cuba for the last 49 years.

[pablonite]

Loyal servant of the empire.

Loyal servant too!

He is moving out to the sidelines now after his block buster World Trade Center?
Bah! garbage! Watched a little bit of it but that stuff is really just a mess of half truths. South America, especially Paraguay is where communism or socialism - whatever you want to call it - was perfected by 1700, they called them reductions, implemented by the Jesuit missionaries to finance Spanish armadas into England and crush the Reformation. Nothing much has changed down there. If you want to see a good, reality based South American movie watch Tropa de Elite, 2007.