Was Hugo Chavez a dictator ?

Was Hugo Chavez a dictator ?

(or) are beliefs of Hugo Chavez being a dictator corporate propaganda ?

 

One can have the form of democracy without having the reality of it. Getting to vote does not mean that you live in a Democracy or that you have unbridaled freedom. One shouldn't forget that Chavez at least twice tried to ahve himslef made ruler for life. As it turn out it would have made much difference had he succeeded, but the fact that he made the attempt tells you all you need to know.

 

"Corporate propaganda"? You mean like Intel or Coca Cola tries to make people falsely believe that Chavez was a dictator??? I'm not sure how that would help them sell their products buy hey, what do I know?

 

you won't mind supplying links to back up that claim...

 

He is portrait as a dictator by the capitalist bloodsuckers and their dogs , fun part is that some idiots believe them ...
He did won the latest elections in his country .

 

Seems like Hugo Chavez was a democratically elected leader - the people of Venezuela are at fault here. They desire a socialist economy by and large.

Democracy only works when the people believe in liberty.

 

No, he certainly wasn't a dictator. Chavez was a populist, and I mean that in mostly a good way. Chavez will be remembered in Venezuela for working to improve the average person's life, and for managing to defeat a US backed coup - if the coup went through then Venezuela would in all likelihood be as horrible for the average person now as Cuba was before their revolution. Venezuela is better than is used to be, and Chavez helped make it this way.
Chavez was not the only person in the Venezuelan government, and bureaucracy in Venezuela remains a problem. Chavez's movement has been monumental for helping the people of Venezuela, even as the bureaucracy in the lower levels of their government maintains a strange distance between the population.
Overwhelming in Venezuela Chavez will be remembered positively, as he very well deserves to be. I fear that in the West he'll barely be remembered at all.

 

No, I mean corporate propaganda like,

Americas corporate CEO's lying and saying "tax cuts for the rich increase government revenues"
Or lying and saying "low tax rates on dividends increase government revenues."

Or Wall Street CEO's lying and saying "Social Security is about to run out of money" (so they can privatize Social Security and take $750 billion dollars in fees)

Or ExxonMobile lying and saying "global warming is not happening" (so Exxon can make more money.)

ex.ex.ex.ex.

The above corporate propaganda network does (not) like socialism.



The following Australian made documentary explains this "corporate propaganda" network.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSAzYWmsiwI

 

He was to dictatorship as the average US rightwinger is to reality.

I think that works for everyone?

 

I did a research project on him in college.

He passed an enabling powers act not long after he became president.

The same kind of enabling act that made hitler a dictator.

So to answer your question, yes he was a dictator, to be politically correct

 

People thought they were voting for him. Considering all the corruption, he would always be voted back in, until he was dead...and that's what's happened. Sheep are very easy to manipulate and the whole country is full of desperate sheep. Its hard to blame them when people who have very little are given a little more. Its the same tactic Obama and the Democrats are using now...preying on weak people. That's why they want amnesty. That's why they want fear. Guess who those people will vote for for? More votes, more power....all due to sacrificing the well being of the entire country. But don't worry. Democrats in power will NEVER suffer, but they'll promise over and over again that if you vote for them, your lives will be better, BECAUSE of them. Its brilliant. But you need REALLY stupid people for it to work and Democrats are banking on 10-12+ million REALLY stupid people becoming citizens in order to essentially become just like Chavez. They'll just keep voting, because they will be lied to that if you vote for anyone else, your life will be worse off. STUPID people.

 

It is their CHOICE, they are an independent and proud nation who have their own destiny we have no right to dictate to other nations and what matters the people are happy with the government isn't that most important?

 

Chavez was somewhere between what Sean Penn and Sean Hannity thought he was.

 

Democracy and government in America is much different than what people think. It's quite silly. We are not a political nation. Not at all.

We exist for money and profit solely. Government is really a tool for more... And more...

Maybe people realize this. If they don't, they need to know.

 

Does that mean we're free to declare a democracy invalid if it doesn't suit our interests; or to impose 'democracy' on others when it does? See, that doesn't sound much like democracy to me; much more like fascism. We, in our bastions of fairness, freedom and democracy have been guilty of the latter more than once.

 

He aspired to be a dictator and was working on it...not quite there.

The world is a better place without him.

 

Just as a point of interest/thought, relevant to discussion of whether dictators can be "elected" by the populous...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-142949/Saddam-elected-candidate-vote.html

 

Chavez was a wart on humanity.....who, had it not been for oil, would have never been heard of.....the riches from which he, like all tyrants, squandered on his own dangerously egotistical political aspirations....

Venezuela's murder rate quadrupled during Chavez's reign....to about 54 per 100,000.....and 140 per 100,000 in Caracas....

but let's pretend the "average" citizen's life improved.... right along with the expansion of poverty and dangerous slums these murders largely occur ...

 

From Wikipedia - On Venezuela and Chavez..

In Venezuela

In mentions 'highly controversial' decrees, which were..

-Allowing him to run for multiple terms for president past the limit set by the Vene. constitution
-Nationalizing ..... everything
-Turning media outlets into State-run outlets
-The report also found "blistering" concerns with freedom of expression, human rights abuses, authoritarianism, press freedom, control of the judiciary, threats to democracy,[174] political intimidation, and "the existence of a pattern of impunity in cases of violence, which particularly affects media workers, human rights defenders, trade unionists, participants in public demonstrations, people held in custody, 'campesinos' (small-scale and subsistence farmers), indigenous people, and women",[175] as well as erosion of separation of powers and "severe economic, infrastructure, and social headaches", and "chronic problems including power blackouts, soaring crime, and a perceived lack of investment in crucial sectors"

Hiel Chavez?

What about the good things he did...

-Subsidized heating oil to the poor in the US
-A 2010 OAS report[171] indicated "achievements with regard to the eradication of illiteracy, the set up of a primary health network, land distribution and the reduction of poverty",[172] and "improvements in the areas of economic, social, and cultural rights



Two sides of the coin

Looks like this man had good intentions but was clearly, clearly, a dictator

Also, women from Venezuela are the most beautiful in the world. My own 2 cents.

 

I'm gonna have to say dictator in light of the above.

 

I don't think interfering in other nations is a good idea. I think the Venezuelan people should make the decision to get rid of their coercive state, just like how I think all people should. That doesn't mean I want to force them into it through war, etc.

I'm free to declare whatever I want whatever I want, it's called freedom of speech. I'm not for forcing liberty on any country. As long as I have it for myself I'm fine. All I'm saying is that Democracy is an inherently coercive political system and Venezuelans should overthrow their government to achieve liberty for themselves. Whether they do or not is up to them.

I think individuals in Venezuela/anywhere who aren't alright with being forced around by the state should seek to overthrow/minimize it wherever possible through voluntary means.

I don't get why people are making such a big deal over this.

 

He was certainly a dick. I suppose the tater part is up for some debate.

 

Controlling the press is enough in my book to say "dictator". A quick check with most of the watchdogs that decide how free a nation is seem to lean towards that verdict as well. Many American leftists like to praise him while enjoying their relative freedom a thousand miles away but I imagine their tunes would change fairly quickly if they had to actually live under his rule.

 

Of course he was a dictator. Just that peculiar Latin American version locally called a "caudillo."

 

If Chavez was not a Dictator, please explain how he accumulated 2B$??? A third of the people live on 2$/day, GDP growth has hovered around -0- for years, oil/commodity productions are down http://www.tradingeconomics.com/venezuela/gdp-growth and he has picked his own successor, who will probably win a predetermined election.