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.

 

Thousands demonstrate over Venezuela education law

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Thousands demonstrate over Venezuela education law


news.yahoo.com

CARACAS, Venezuela – Police dispersed opponents of President Hugo Chavez's government on Saturday as thousands demonstrated both for and against an education law that critics fear will lead to political indoctrination in schools.

Officers fired tear gas, a water cannon and rubber bullets to scatter opposition marchers as they tried to break through a police barrier. Protesters including Miguel Rivero, a 43-year-old lawyer, said they requested but did not receive permission to march to the National Assembly.

"It's totally unjust," Rivero said, wiping tear gas from his eyes. "This r
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 04:02 PM
link   
What Chavez is doing is correct, the people of Venezuela needs to be educated to the point of being a patriot to their own country instead of concentrating on other subjects. Think about it, its the perfect weapon against any possible intervention by the CIA's attempt to influence the populace and turn against the Venezuela's govt.

news.yahoo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Aug, 22 2009 @ 04:11 PM
link   
Not Venezuela again... whats the purpose for this propaganda anyone? Suddenly out of no where i start seeing anti Venezuelan articles left right and center!



posted on Aug, 23 2009 @ 05:56 AM
link   
reply to post by deltaboy
 


You find it as correct the indoctrination of children to a party line since childhood?.....

Obviously you have never experienced that sort of indoctrination, but I have, and it is nothing good for the Venezuelan people, no for the country.

Hitler also indoctrinated the youths of Germany, he made REFORMS in healthcare, and education among others, and children were being indoctrinated into accepting the NAZI party line and to turn in their parents for small transgressions, which in many instances culminated on the execution of entire families....

And you claim this is good?.....


I advise you to go to the library and start reading on the education reforms made by communists...chavez is a Communist in case you didn't know...



posted on Aug, 23 2009 @ 06:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

I advise you to go to the library and start reading on the education reforms made by communists...chavez is a Communist in case you didn't know...

Not only he's a communist: he tries to spread HATE towards United States as some virus. That's way worse than simply being some communist whatsoever. To be communist by itself is not a fault: it's a way to see stuff, same works for capitalism, which end is now well known worldwide, FIAT bought CHRISLER go figure were we're going, not exactly what you would call some successfull plan, right? What's really concerning is the way that all this is happening in Venezuela
Whenever people can't express their disagreement, FREEDOM is litterally being KILLED.
One can manage his country how he does prefer, but to stop the freedom of speech, including expressing disagreement, pertains to middle ages, and middle ages ended on 16th century if i'm correct.



posted on Aug, 23 2009 @ 07:46 AM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 


Taught history in the first years of school always has a bias. It's always some form of indoctrination. Did Colombus really 'discover' America ? How indoctrinated is it to parallel communism and nazism when they fought each other until death ?

You may be intellectually opposed to these reforms (not explained in the article) by ideology.



posted on Aug, 23 2009 @ 08:01 AM
link   
reply to post by internos
 


When Fiat buys Chrysler, it's not a successful plan. How did you feel when American companies were all around buying everything everywhere ?
That's one critic of the American (or Western) hegemony. They advocate free market in the name of people's liberty and welfare when they win the game, they hassle countries whose market is not open enough to them, but when it's the other way round, they retreat to isolationist positions.

I note the article says that thousands demonstrated both for and against the law but I agree the people should not be deprived from the right to express a political disagreement without being molested.
Sadly, my friend, tear gas, water cannons and rubber bullets are also commonly used in the West to disperse demonstrators. I see no difference here. I am unhappy at the situation but I won't use double standards.



posted on Aug, 23 2009 @ 09:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Manouche
reply to post by internos
 


When Fiat buys Chrysler, it's not a successful plan. How did you feel when American companies were all around buying everything everywhere ?
That's one critic of the American (or Western) hegemony. They advocate free market in the name of people's liberty and welfare when they win the game, they hassle countries whose market is not open enough to them, but when it's the other way round, they retreat to isolationist positions.

Free market is one thing, WILD market is another one
And US companies are selling right now mate, not buying. This is why you can get some phd in economy: because there's much to know, including the difference between the two, my friend. FIAT is from Italy, i should be theoretically happy for the joint-venture, but i do know that is a choice driven by desperation (from both sides, but the story is too long and complicated to be explained right now): i am uindecided to whether be sad for Fiat for having done such a bad deal, or for Chrysler for having sold itself for a bunch of dollars. All in all, it's a shiny example of the failure of the capitalistic system
Isn't it?
Not saying that communism is better than capitalism (i would LOL at myself rather), just saying that capitalism has serious issues, and many hundreds of thousands of jobs got lost because of that, i don't even need to source this claim because all that you need is to read some serious newspaper whatsoever in order to find out that i'm spelling the truth.


[edit on 23/8/2009 by internos]



posted on Aug, 23 2009 @ 09:41 AM
link   
Too bad that guys with good ideas often get crazy once they are in power.
Its quite understandable that the Venezuelan government would want to take steps to counter the American influence and pump up a little awareness and pride of their own history and culture.
Bravo!
But then comes the crazy part. By shooting protesters with rubber bullets and tear gas just makes them look more like the bad guys they are supposed to be against.



posted on Aug, 23 2009 @ 09:56 AM
link   


All in all, it's a shiny example of the failure of the capitalistic system Isn't it?


No, you are using the wrong word. The system in the USA is NOT Capitalism and has not been Capitalism for a LONG time. What it is, is Corporatism




corporatism

The central core of corporatism is the notion of a system of interest intermediation linking producer interests and the state, in which explicitly recognized interest organizations are incorporated into the policy-making process, both in terms of the negotiation of policy and of securing compliance from their members with the agreed policy. However, one of the characteristics of the debate in the social sciences from the mid-1970s onwards about corporatism was the failure of the participants to agree about the meaning of the term..... www.encyclopedia.com...


People who like capitalism HATE the system we are under because it stiffles true capitalism as well as giving capitalism a bad name. If you think about it the dislike of "corporatism" is one point on which both true capitalists and socialists AGREE!







posted on Aug, 23 2009 @ 11:10 AM
link   
reply to post by internos
 


Ok. I have misunderstood your posting



posted on Aug, 23 2009 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by crimvelvet
 


Your one was a very balanced and enlighteening post, I would be double-faced if i wouldn't acknowledge that your post is a sober analysis of the situation. Now, a point needs to be made before discussing about economy related to the US: one (in my VERY humble opinion) of the problems of USA are lobbies: firearms lobbies, tobacco lobbies, drug lobbies, whatever ya want lobbies and so on: in one word, corporations. The problem is that if you get their support before being voted, then after you have to pay somewhat back. This unavoidably will jeopardize every political system, and rise doubts about the intellectual honesty of every single decision being taken by the white house, regardless whether it has been influenced or not by some external individuals. Here comes the factor that you have mentioned, here Capitalism becomes Corporatism: the difference between the two gets almost always unnoticed, and actually to call US economic system Capitalistic is NOT technically wrong: corporatism is an expression (some extreme one) of capitalism, with the difference that instead of having some huge amount of rich dudes ruling, you have some pre-determined and limited amount of ones:
capitalism=rich dudes rule
corporatism= SOME rich dudes rule



posted on Aug, 24 2009 @ 01:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Manouche

Taught history in the first years of school always has a bias.


I don't know what you are trying to say in the above statement. You taught history in the first years of school? What first years of school?


Originally posted by Manouche
It's always some form of indoctrination. Did Colombus really 'discover' America ?


You can only teach history by what you know, and for hundreds of years the only thing that was certain was that Colombus, and his crew discovered the Americas.

The Viking colonies which were supposed to have travelled to parts of America vanished, hence what they knew was lost.

The Chinese also claim they discovered the Americas first, but how do we know this is not a hoax?

If you are to believe everything you read online, then you better believe in everything and not use one ounce of common sense.

In this instance we are talking about a political group wanting to indoctrinate only their views on future generations. That is indoctrination.



Originally posted by Manouche
How indoctrinated is it to parallel communism and nazism when they fought each other until death ?


Both Nazism and Communism are Socialist ideals, they had many similarities and some differences. Just like Lenin, Stalin, and Trotsky all had different ideas about Communism. There are even rumours about the possibility that Stalin murdered, or ordered the death of Lenin, just like Fidel castro sent Che Guevara to his death, and it is know that castro gave up Che. Even in Cuba this is a known fact, at least among the Cuban people.



Originally posted by Manouche
You may be intellectually opposed to these reforms (not explained in the article) by ideology.


You need to finish your above statement. What exactly is your point?



posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 07:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
I don't know what you are trying to say in the above statement. You taught history in the first years of school? What first years of school?


I mean whatever history you are taught at school all over the world, it's a manipulation of facts in order to arouse patriotism, pride, civil obedience, create social unity, a national hero, shared principles, etc...
It's not necessarily malevolent. I believe it's needed to unify a civil society with people of different ethnics or social backgrounds. Tough it's always dangerous waters when you try your hand at manipulation.

I reacted to your use of 'indoctrination'. I would agree it's indoctrination but I suspect to you it's only indoctrination in this case because it's Chavez. The article doesn't say what will be taught in school or what will change, you apparently assume it's indoctrination to a party line. May I ask you too to clarify your thoughts ?


Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
You can only teach history by what you know, and for hundreds of years the only thing that was certain was that Colombus, and his crew discovered the Americas.


I was not refering to Vikings. When Colombus 'discovered' America, the land was inhabited and by some glorious civilisations. So whether they popped there from nowhere or they did actually discover this land before Colombus.
From the point of view of the Europeans of the time, they have discovered a new land. From the point of view of the inhabitants of the land, they were invaded by another people. Different perspectives, different history.
The date is so important to OUR history we have largely celebrated its 500th anniversary. It was not celebrated in all cultures.
There is also a political intent in claiming it a discovery like it was a brand new land waiting to be picked up by the first to find it. It legitimizes the land-grabbing, we discovered it, it's ours.
We were talking about how history is always told from a perspective and thus can always be called indoctrination by those who don't accept this alien perspective.

Since you have talked about the Vikings, for long, European historians didn't pay much attention to Scandinavian sagas which described Vikings settlements in America but it's almost two centuries now the sagas have been studied and given credency well before archeological traces of the settlements were found. But to date, the general casual knowledge is still that Colombus was the first European to land in America.
I still give him and his crew credit, it was a daring voyage.
Vikings settlements were may be forgotten but Groenland's were not although the contacts with Europe were lost. It has always been considered that Vikings could have continued a little bit further.
You can only teach history by what you know ? You don't select information and facts ?


Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
Both Nazism and Communism are Socialist ideals, they had many similarities and some differences. Just like Lenin, Stalin, and Trotsky all had different ideas about Communism. There are even rumours about the possibility that Stalin murdered, or ordered the death of Lenin, just like Fidel castro sent Che Guevara to his death, and it is know that castro gave up Che. Even in Cuba this is a known fact, at least among the Cuban people.


For you and your education, I use this term on purpose but it's not meant to be a judgement or to be disrespectful, it may look like the same soup but for others it's not. In some part of the world, it's the usual way to make a confusion of the two. Heck, what you need to know is they are both evil, why the hell go further ? Again, there are political obvious reasons to shape your cultural ideas in such way.
Usually, National Socialism is described as totalitarian, fascist and xenophobe. The true socialism of the doctrine and the reason of the choice of this word by Hitler is disputed amongst political scientists, ideologists and historians. Nazis were funded by corporations because they feared the raise in power of the KPD, the German Communist Party. Certainly those corporations were not funding one side of a coin against the other, right ? Large sections of the economy and land property remained private. Communists and Nazis found so much differences between themselves that they politically fought each other from the beginning. And killed each other almost from the beginning. It's your right of opinion to express your view 80 years later they had many similarities and some differences.
There is no need here to explain the differences in their political, economical and social views because what you want to underline is not their supposed shared socialist ideal but their totalitarism. So why didn't you go straight to the point ?

With my comment on how indoctrinated it was to parallel nazism with the reforms in the OP, I wanted to point you were not free from strong political activism by raising the Hitler card in an instant.
It's still not a judgement, I won't send you back to a library like you said to deltaboy, it's rude. Please accept a little disagreement if you are not a hard liner and despise and fight the totalitarism of ideas like I do.


Originally posted by Manouche
You may be intellectually opposed to these reforms (not explained in the article) by ideology.

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
You need to finish your above statement. What exactly is your point?


I meant you are opposed to Chavez and its political stance. Anything he could do, you would denounce it.

[edit on 25-8-2009 by Manouche]



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join