It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The Invisible Laws of Capitalism
by Ernesto "Che" Guevara
The laws of capitalism, invisible and blind for most people, act upon the individual without his awareness. He sees only the broadness of a horizon that appears infinite. Capitalist propaganda presents it in just this way, and attempts to use the Rockefeller case (true or not) as a lesson in the prospects for success. The misery that must be accumulated for such an example to arise and the sum total of baseness contributing to the formation of a fortune of such magnitude do not appear in the picture, and the popular forces are not always able to make these concepts clear. (It would be fitting at this point to study how the works of the imperialist countries gradually lose their international class spirit under the influence of a certain complicity in the exploitation of the dependent countries and how this fact at the same time wears away the militant spirit of the masses within their own national context, but this topic is outside the framework of the present note).
In any case we can see the obstacle course which may apparently be overcome by an individual with the necessary qualities to arrive at the finish line. The reward is glimpsed in the distance and the road is solitary. Furthermore, it is a race of wolves: he who arrives does so only at the expense of the failure of others.
I shall now attempt to define the individual, the actor in this strange and moving drama that is the building of socialism, in his two-fold existence as a unique being and a member of the community.
I believe that the simplest approach is to recognise his un-made quality: he is an unfinished product. The flaws of the past are translated into the present in the individual consciousness and constant efforts must be made to eradicate them. The process is two-fold: on the one hand society acts upon the individual by means of direct and indirect education, while on the other hand, the individual undergoes a conscious phase of self-education.
Look at the Chronicle/AP photo of the anti-Chavez marchers in Venezuela. Note their color. White.
And not just any white. A creamy rich white.
I interviewed them and recorded in this order: a banker in high heels and push-up bra; an oil industry executive (same outfit); and a plantation owner who rode to Caracas in a silver Jaguar.
And the color of the pro-Chavez marchers? Dark brown. Brown and round as cola nuts – just like their hero, their President Chavez. They wore an unvarying uniform of jeans and T-shirts.
[...]
Why am I explaining the basics of Venezuela to you? If you watched BBC TV, or Canadian Broadcasting, you'd know all this stuff. But if you read the New York Times, you'll only know that President Chavez is an "autocrat," a "ruinous demagogue," and a "would-be dictator," who resigned when he recognized his unpopularity.
Odd phrasings – "dictator" and "autocrat" – to describe Chavez, who was elected by a landslide majority (56 percent) of the voters. Unlike our President.
[...]
On April 12, 2002, Chavez resigned his presidency It said so, right there in the paper – every major newspaper in the USA, every single one. Apparently, to quote the New York Times, Chavez recognized that he was unpopular, his time was up: "With yesterday's resignation of President Hugo Chavez, Venezuelan democracy is no longer threatened by a would-be dictator."
Problem was, the "resignation" story was a fabulous fib, a phantasmagoric fabrication. In fact, the President of Venezuela had been kidnapped at gunpoint and bundled off by helicopter from the presidential palace. He had not resigned; he never resigned; and one of his captors (who secretly supported Chavez) gave him a cell-phone from which he called and confirmed to friends and family that he remained alive – and still president.
[...]
The U.S. papers got it dead wrong – but how? Who was the source of this "resignation" lie? I asked a U.S. reporter why American news media had reported this nonsense as stone fact without checking. The reply was that it came from a reliable source: "We got it from the State Department."
[...]
For who is the autocrat? Today, there are hundreds of people held in detention without charges in George Bush's United States. In Venezuela, there are none.
This is not about Venezuela but about the Virtual Venezuela, created for you by America's news wardens. The escape routes are guarded.
[...]
Lesson: If you want to get accurate news in the United States, you might want to learn a language other than English.
Friday, January 3, 2003. The New York Times ran a long "News Analysis: Venezuela Outlook." Four experts were quoted. For balance, two of them don't like Chavez, while the other two despise him.
The Times reporter wrote that "the president says he will stay in power." "In power?" What a strange phrase for an elected official. Having myself spoken with Chavez, it did not sound like him. He indicated he would stay "in office" – quite a different inference than "in power." But then, the Times' phrasing isn't in quotes.
That's because Chavez never said it.
Link
You have voted ANOK for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.
RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE
-- Take the Power Back!
So called facts are fraud
They want us to allege and pledge
And bow down to their God
Lost the culture, the culture lost
Spun our minds and through time
Ignorance has taken over
Yo, we gotta take the power back!
Bam! Here's the plan
Mother# Uncle Sam
Step back, I know who I am
Raise up your ear, I'll drop the style and clear
It's the beats and the lyrics they fear
The rage is relentless
We need a movement with a quickness
You are the witness of change
And to counteract
We gotta take the power back
Yeah, we gotta take the power back
Come on, come on!
We gotta take the power back
Is Washington planning a bloodbath in Caracas?
Stuart Munckton
The Venezuelan government headed by President Hugo Chavez repeatedly accused the US government of planning a “new aggression” against Venezuela, including a plot to assassinate Chavez, despite pro-Chavez forces winning nine national elections in six years. Caracas claims to have information of an assassination plot to be carried out “within 100 days” against Chavez, although the government has refused to reveal its sources.
[...]
Rodriguiz went as far as to set out possible scenarios. He said that an air-strike aiming to kill Chavez was one possibility, pointing to the bombing raid then US President Ronald Reagan ordered in 1986 to kill Libyan President Muammer Qadhafi (Qadhafi survived the raid, but his daughter was killed). The Cuban news agency Prensa Latina reported on March 15 that in the interview Rodriguez had stated that he personally expected to participate in a CIA operation to kill Chavez.
[...]
The United States openly supported a military coup against the Chavez government in April 2002, which was reversed two days later by a popular uprising. Since then, however, the US Congress-funded National Endowment For Democracy has poured millions of dollars into the groups that supported the coup.
[...]
While the US is planning an attack on Venezuela, it is unclear whether it will be able to carry it out, and, if it does, whether it will be successful or not.
From Green Left Weekly, April 6, 2005.
Venezuela Solidarity
Hands Off Venezuela
Originally posted by ghostsoldier
................
CHAVEZ CANNOT BE A TOTALITARIAN DICTATOR – HE WAS VOTED IN UNANIMOUSLY BY SEVENTY PERCENT OF THE PEOPLE OF VENEZUELA!!!
ELECTION RESULTSAround 6:20 p.m. on July 25, the CNE issued its first bulletin on the election results tabulated up to that time (more than 60 percent). The document indicated that Polo Patriótico candidates had gained the majority in nearly every region of the country, and that voter abstention had exceeded 50 percent.
One hour later, the Deputy Secretary General of the OAS and the Chief of Missionmet in the CNE pressroom to give their preliminary impressions of the mission. Ambassador Christopher Thomas indicated that a free and transparent process had been conducted and that the minor difficulties encountered had not affected the validity of the elections. Santiago Murray emphasized that the election day had gone in accordance with established procedures, despite a few minor problems observed in setting up the bureaus, the limited supervision of witnesses, and the low voter turnout.
Originally posted by ghostsoldier
How dumb must you be to not get that trough your head… All your information is either from FoxNews or the privately owned news stations in Venezuela (WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN SHUTDOWN!!!) … He allows those Right Wing bigamists to exist because they have TRUE freedom of speech… The Venezuelan privately owned media is full of propaganda against Chavez because it does not suit their Capitalistic desires. And yet, 70% of the people STILL WANT HIM THERE! This is a growing majority might I add, not a declining majority
"Hatred is an element of struggle; relentless hatred of the enemy that impels us over and beyond the natural limitations of man and transforms us into effective, violent, selective, and cold killing machines. Our soldiers must be thus; a people without hatred cannot vanquish a brutal enemy."
Che Guevara (message to the Tricontinental; 1967)
Originally posted by ghostsoldier
Workers of the world Unite!
Feed the poor, eat the rich!
Some of the international press (2) has been quick to accuse Chávez of being a "radical-left authoritarian", of "drifting towards autocracy", and of "paving the way for a modern form of coup d’état". Yet despite the impassioned atmosphere in Venezuela, where the discussion and political debate going on all around reminds one of France in May 1968, there has so far been no serious violence, no victims, nor any kind of censorship of the political opposition or of the journalists and broadcasters who do not shrink from occasional vicious criticism of the new president.
Originally posted by ANOK
Where are you getting this from Muabbid?
Could you supply a linc to this so we can decide for ourselfs?
Originally posted by TheBandit795
Personally I think this whole nonsense has to do with race. Chavez is the first non-caucasian Venezuelian president.
[edit on 21-4-2005 by TheBandit795]
Originally posted by TheBandit795
Believe me race has some to do with it.
Originally posted by TheBandit795
I've seen personally how those people act to people of a different race. That's enough for me.
Originally posted by TheBandit795
I am talking about the wealthy Venezuelians. I thought it was obvious that I meant that.
Originally posted by Muaddib
oh... i see.... So the millions of Venezuelans (there have been many demonstrations against Chavez, some of the protests numbered the demonstrators around 200,000 up to almost 2 million in some demonstrations) that took to the streets to protest against Chavez were all millionares..... riiiiight......