Isn't it interesting that when we see something going on in the world that we don't like, we compare it to Nazism? People on the far left & far right have done it. Liberals call anyone with even one conservative viewpoint a "Nazi." Staunch conservatives who oppose abortion have compared it to the Nazis rounding up Jews & sending them to concentration camps. People somehow feel morally superior if they can get away with calling someone they don't like a Nazi. If you're one of these people, then I'm going to have to burst your bubble. While the Nazis were bad, they weren't the ultimate form of evil in the 20th - and even the 21st - century. The ultimate evildoers were communists. Consider:
During Joseph Stalin's reign, it is estimated that 20 million Russians were rounded up and murdered. Soviet gulags were not completely unlike Nazi concentration camps. The concentration camps existed for about 12 years. Gulags were around for much, much longer. Stalin tends to get a free pass, probably because the Soviets were our allies during World War II.
Opium addiction had been a major problem in China for about two centuries when the communists seized power there in the late 1940s. The communists wiped it out virtually overnight. How did they do it? The communists rounded up all the opium addicts - sometimes entire families - and executed them. Quite an effective drug treatment program, huh? The true number of those who were murdered is unknown, but it has been estimated that between one-quarter & one-third of China's population was addicted to opium when the communists took over the country.
During the mid-to-late 1970s, Pol Pot, the leader of Cambodia, ordered city dwellers to be rounded up & sent to "re-education" camps. At these camps, they would be indoctrinated in the "ideals" of communism. Anyone who didn't conform was executed. It is estimated that 2 million people died in what became known as the Cambodian Killing Fields.
How many thousands of Cubans have been murdered by Fidel Castro? How many Cubans were willing to risk their lives by escaping Castro's tyrannical reign? How many perished travelling through the 90 miles of shark-infested waters between Cuba & Florida? Do you remember the Cuban Boat People of the early 1980s? Ask around in Little Havana in Miami & find out what the people there think of Fidel Castro.
Today, there are many people who revere Hugo Chavez, the Marxist dictator of Venezuela (just ask Sean Penn & Danny Glover). "Little Stalin," as I like to call him, has maintained power by intimidating political opposition. There is no more free press, and private ownership of the nation's industries / resources has been stripped away. These are all communist tactics. Everything is owned by the state, including the people. To the communists, human life has very little value.
The bottom line is that the greatest mass-murderers of the 20th Century were the Communists, not the Nazis. So remember, when you see something evil going on in the world, the first words out of your mouth shouldn't be, "That's just like what the Nazis would do." The first words should be, "That's just like what the Communists did."
This isn't a matter of Communism, honestly. This is a matter of a corrupt leader. Communism is a classless society where everyone is considered equal (note the root word - communion or community). On paper, it's probably one of the best models of society out there.
In reality, thanks to "the human factor" that's not the case. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. People are greedy and self-centered. They won't work their ass off after a while when they know that Jim next to them is getting paid the exact same thing for sitting on his ass and doing nothing. The person in power will also see that they have power to do pretty much whatever the hell they want, and will abuse that.
-- quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Okay, I'm going to ask you to defend a few of your statements:
1. "There is no more free press [in Venezuela]." Please defend this statement with facts.
2. "Everything is owned by the state, including the people." How so? Hugo Chavez is perhaps one of the only leaders in Central America who has come to his position through fair and democratic elections by a majority of the people. The majority of the people in Venezuela like what Chavez is doing and wants him to continue. As for your statement that "everything is owned by the state" - in any governmental system, the "state" is the people. So the fact that the people themselves are benefiting from the resources - which belong to them, anyway - rather than a handful of self-serving private interests ... this is a bad thing?
Several television stations & newspapers in Venezuela have accused Chavez of intimidation tactics. Some have even stated that he uses gangs to intimidate reporters. In 2002, there was an attempted coup in Venezuela. Chavez accused one of the nation's television channels - RCTV - of supporting it. In 2006, Chavez announced that the station's broadcasting license would not be renewed. It went off the air ealier this year. Does this sound like a place where freedom of the press exists?
If you believe Hugo Chavez was elected fairly and squarely, then please give me some of whatever it is you're smoking, because that's some damn good stuff!!!! Some people think Chavez was fairly elected because Jimmy Carter monitored the election, and Carter said it was an honest election. Jimmy Carter is not to be trusted. He was one of the worst - if not the worst - presidents in history. I lived through Carter's presidency, so I know what I'm talking about.
Hmm...I might actually agree with you on this. Nazism and Communism might not be that different after all. Then again, can you really judge they way a government runs itself. No matter how you look at it, it's still corrupted in some ways. North Koreans, for example, love their leader to death. To us, it seems almost ridiculous. But to them, their leader is like their God. They probably a reason to think so. I shall go do research on this. Thanks for posting this.
I'm sorry, but I am unmoved - you supply vague allegations with no references or sources. You supply not a single name or cite a single source. These are anecdotes, not facts.
As for RCTV participating in the lead-up to the coup (and subsequent media-blackout of his return to power), hard videotaped evidence from the televised broadcasts of RCTV (and Globovision) can be seen in several documentaries - the Irish documentary "Chavez: Inside The Coup" (the filmmakers were actually inside the Presidential Palace when the coup took place and caught it on film), and a documentary which deals solely with RCTV's participation in the coup, "La Señal Es De Todos" by Angel Palacios.
The fact of the matter is that RCTV did participate in the coup - a fact that they discussed quite plainly live on the air the very next day, verbally patting each other on the back as they discussed RCTV's role. If you don't believe me, perhaps you'll believe your own eyes. The Irish documentary is available on Google Video (http://urltea.com/1m4q) - go to exactly 43 minutes into the film and watch for yourself. In fact, watch the whole thing and see how RCTV blatantly manipulated footage and camera angles to give viewers the impression that Chavez supporters were firing on opposition marchers, when footage from an angle the station chose NOT to use clearly shows that the Chavez supporters were firing back at snipers who were firing at them and that the road was empty because the marchers had been rerouted.
If you want to support a private media enterprise that has been proven to be a co-conspirator in an illegal coup and a deliberate misrepresenter of facts, then you're certainly free to do so. I would, however, strongly suggest that you investigate further and not rely on speculation, hearsay and anecdotal evidence.
As for RCTV not having its license renewed ... well, if a TV network engages in an illegal overthrow of an elected government, that certainly falls into the category of "failing to operate in the public interest". Chavez could have yanked them off the air immediately after returning to power - but he did no such thing. He simply allowed them to continue broadcasting for the duration of their license and did not permit it to be renewed. To permit RCTV to broadcast for five years after their participation in the overthrow of the government hardly sounds dictatorial to me. In most countries, treason - a crime against the state - is worthy of imprisonment or execution. The owner and employees of RCTV simply lost their ability to renew their license to utilize the public airwaves, and rightly so - they abused that public trust.
"Jimmy Carter is not to be trusted?" On what basis? I grew up during the Carter Administration. I remember. But Carter was on the right track. If we had stayed the course and weaned ourselves off of dependency on fossil fuels - and Middle Eastern oil in particular - we probably wouldn't be in the mess we're in today.
Ah, it makes sense now. I suspected it, but I didn't want to say anything unless I could find evidence to validate my suspicion.
You're a Republican.
Looking on Google's cache, I see that one of your earlier (deleted) posts consisted of nothing but a shrine of quotes attributed to Ronald Reagan. (http://urltea.com/1m4x)
Why you choose to blog on a progressive/liberal/leftist website is anyone's guess, as it would seem that a place like Free Republic or Little Green Footballs or any other of the multitudinous right-wing websites would be more your speed.
*shrug*
Jumping to conclusions, aren't we? My political views are mixed. Some are liberal, others are conservative. For example, when it comes to abortion, I'm pro-choice. I'm all for developing alternative fuel sources. I support stem-cell research & campaign-finance reform. I don't have a problem with gay people. I'm also an Atheist. If I were running for president, do you think I'd get the Republican party nomination? If social conservatives have a problem with Rudy Guiliani, wait till they get a load of me!!!! But I also recognize evil in the world, & Communism & Islamic fundamentalism are at the top of the list. And Democrats like Ted Kennedy, LBJ, Jimmy Carter & Bill Clinton have only weakened this country instead of confronting that evil. I'm also no fan of George Bush. He makes trade deals that harm American workers. Bush has run up record deficits. The Department of Homeland Security is an abomination. Plus he's totally mismanaged the Iraq War.
As for the Reagan quotes, I was trying to remind people of a man who believed that you didn't need government programs to help you get through life. And remember, he couldn't have accomplished what he did without "Reagan Democrats."
As for why I'm on this website, I was recently laid off from my job & decided to go back to school. I was the victim of outsourcing, another Bush pet peeve of mine. He says outsourcing is good for America - what a crock. Besides, aren't all viewpoints welcome here?
I can't believe you're defending Jimmy Carter. Don't you remember waiting on line to buy gasoline? And you could only buy gas on certain days based on your license plate number. Our economy went into the tank on his watch. What was Carter's response to the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan? He decided America wasn't going to participate in the 1980 Summer Olympics in Moscow. Wow, that was a real deterrent to the Soviets, wasn't it? Withdraw your troops now or we won't participate in your games!!!! Oh, and let's not forget Carter's overwhelming response to Islamic fundamentalists in Iran seizing our embassy & taking hostages. He really led America with a sure & steady hand, didn't he?
If you disagree with what I've said about Hugo Chavez, then fine, don't take my word for it. Just ask Human Rights Watch about what's going in Venezuela.