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.

 

Venezuelans reject Chavez's socialism

page: 1
7
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 01:22 AM
link   

Venezuelans reject Chavez's socialism


www.cnn.com

Venezuelan voters narrowly rejected a constitutional referendum that would have bolstered President Hugo Chavez's embrace of socialism and granted an indefinite extension of his eligibility to serve as president, the National Electoral Council reported early Monday.

(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 01:22 AM
link   
Well, it would seem that Hugo's dreams of a socialist Venezuela were not shared by at least 51% of his people today. This also means that at the end of his next term, barring his reintroducing his reforms at the next elections, he's out of there. Venezuela has term limits and among his goals was to do away with said limits and extend each term to 8 years.

As happy as I am personally about this, I'm even happier that the people of Venezuela chose to stay free and democratic.

www.cnn.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Related ATS discussion

[edit on 3-12-2007 by Damocles]



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 03:09 AM
link   
I'm not sure if it was socialism the Venezuelans rejected so much as Chavez's blatant bid to increase his personal power.

I have to agree with the Venezuelan majority: Chavez should not be granted more power than he has already.

Chavez is not, sadly, some hero of the oppressed and downtrodden.
He is another in a long line of ambitious demagogues seeking to gain power by posing as heroes of the oppressed and downtrodden. (hello, Fidel?)

I will drink to the Venezuelans tonight, lets hope they nipped a tyrant's reign in the bud


[edit on 12/3/07 by xmotex]



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 05:44 AM
link   
Ifs & Buts ......

If the vote was just for the socialism, i think it may have narrowly passed

but, when the vote was linked to Chavez being President-For-Life
that's when the voters said No Way Jose'...
(he ain't no Bolivar that he might imagine himself to be)



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 05:52 AM
link   
well thats why i said "chavez's socialism" becuase to me at least, it was quite apparent that most of his referendums were pretty self serving and would have put the country on the path to going from "president chavez" to "supreme dictator and living god for all eternity chavez"

but thats just me.



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 06:19 AM
link   
The Chavez haters can't have it both ways. Which is it now is he an elected president or a dictator? Wouldn't a dictator have 'won' this referendum?



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 06:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Raoul Duke
 


Exactly, if Chavez was a dictator there wouldn't have been a referendum in the first place. He would of simply taken whatever power he wished to acquire.

The simple fact that a fair referendum was allowed in the first place and Chavez is honoring the result speaks volumes for Chavez and puts the dictator myth to bed.



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 07:18 AM
link   
reply to post by paul76
 



Originally posted by paul76
Exactly, if Chavez was a dictator there wouldn't have been a referendum in the first place. He would of simply taken whatever power he wished to acquire.

He's not out of office yet, so I wouldn't be so quick to congratulate him. He could just as easily manufacture a "crisis" and impose martial law whenever he chooses.



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 07:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky

He's not out of office yet, so I wouldn't be so quick to congratulate him. He could just as easily manufacture a "crisis" and impose martial law whenever he chooses.


So you're going to try and have it both ways then? He's a dictator, yet he loses referendums. Interesting, I wouldn't have thought one would be so brazen as to make this argument...



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 07:34 AM
link   
As much as it kills me to admit this, im going to. you guys are correct in saying that he's doing an honorable thing by accepting the outcome of the elections.

My point of view in this was that he was attempting to move things in a direction that would have favored and benefitted him more than they would have the people of Venezuela and would have set the stage for him to take more and more power under the guise of it being legitimate.

So, score one for the people of Venezuela today, and score one for Hugo doing what he said he would. Short of him finding another way to get what he's after or finding a way to seize power by force before his term is up, he's out at the end of this term.

So, we have a couple years yet to see if he's really as upright a guy as he's claiming to be.

AND should he leave office peacefully at the end of his term and he hasnt figured out a way to keep himself in office by then, you hugo supporters are more than welcome to come back and give us a big ole' "i told you so" while flipping us the bird. i wont even take offense.



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 07:38 AM
link   
That's right, I think that we should give a credit to this man as he doesn't seem to protest against the results and admits his defeat. That's very good of him I think.

[edit on 3-12-2007 by Leevi]



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 07:38 AM
link   
reply to post by paul76
 


sorry for the double post but i had to reread this one for a minute.

i see where youre coming from but isnt it the same old "frog in the pot of water" analogy?

if he just takes all the power he wants he's thrown the frog into boiling water and his people rebel.

if he turns up the heat slowly by getting them to pass a few laws here and there over the course of his time in office then before they know it he has his workers paradise and the frog gets cooked without even realizing it.

is it so far fetched? people claim thats what bushco is doing to the us all the time



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 07:55 AM
link   
Let me know when the US becomes a workers paradise..

Chavez has done everything out in the open and nothing without the support of the people, even accepting defeat in this referendum with only a 2% margin and 12% of the votes still to be counted. Seems like we could learn something about honor in politics from the man.



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 08:01 AM
link   
reply to post by mythatsabigprobe
 


heh, well if ive come across as trying to defend our current administration or vilifying chavez COMPARED to our administration, im truely sorry as that was in no way my intent.

just thought id make that clear.



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 08:10 AM
link   
i am far more inclined to the left than the right,yet ive never trusted chavez,not because of us propaganda but because he seems to revel with pride in his power believing he alone has all the answers.

mind you,i would rather see him in control than some us puppet.

glad the people made the right choice,nowone should be given indefinite tenure,except for me



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 08:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Raoul Duke
The Chavez haters can't have it both ways. Which is it now is he an elected president or a dictator? Wouldn't a dictator have 'won' this referendum?


Saddam Hussein used to get 99.9% approval ratings too, of course the alternative was torture or death.



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 08:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by BlueRaja

Saddam Hussein used to get 99.9% approval ratings too, of course the alternative was torture or death.


I don't understand your point. This vote was 51% to 49...



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 08:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Raoul Duke
 


You're correct. By definition, Chavez is not a dictator because he can't implement his policies. It might be argued that he is a populist dictator in the mold of Pinochet and Peron, but obviously he's not that populist.

But you gotta admit: dictator, president, potted plant, whatever his title is, the guy's not a good dude.



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 08:57 AM
link   
My point was that just because these guys are "elected" doesn't necessarily mean as much as the stats might show. Chavez' popularity is because he's basically bribed the lower class, and pitted them against the professional class, trying to make himself out to be the modern day Robin Hood.



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 09:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by BlueRaja
My point was that just because these guys are "elected" doesn't necessarily mean as much as the stats might show. Chavez' popularity is because he's basically bribed the lower class, and pitted them against the professional class, trying to make himself out to be the modern day Robin Hood.


Maybe, no one's election means as much as it might show. Look at Bush's approval rating since his re-election (I believe he stole Ohio btw)... This is paternalistic on your part. "Oh, those dumb poor Venezuelans don't know what a 'bad man' they've got leading their country".




top topics



 
7
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join