If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Venezuela: The Next Zimbabwe?
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
As the socialist revolution takes hold of Venezuela, two arguments are starting to emerge from the re-distribution of land.
One side says the land is idle and wasted and so should be given the peasants to create jobs and raise money with in the economy.
The other side says the land is not idle but being used and taking the land away from its owners who have invested heavily in the development and maintainance of that land for farming is actually the waste, and is purely in the name of the Government remaining popular.
Comments have been made on the news and in the papers that Venezuela is going the same way as Zimbabwe did. I am not sure if it is yet, or even which side is right. Though i do think the people who own the land and have farmed it, in some cases for generations should not have to give it up if they do not wish to.
One side says the land is idle and wasted and so should be given the peasants to create jobs and raise money with in the economy.
The other side says the land is not idle but being used and taking the land away from its owners who have invested heavily in the development and maintainance of that land for farming is actually the waste, and is purely in the name of the Government remaining popular.
Comments have been made on the news and in the papers that Venezuela is going the same way as Zimbabwe did. I am not sure if it is yet, or even which side is right. Though i do think the people who own the land and have farmed it, in some cases for generations should not have to give it up if they do not wish to.
0
Comments
I think I'll need more information about what is planned and so on. It would be interesting if the Government was buying the land for the going price, then selling it for a knockdown one for those who earn under a certain wage. But if its done under Eminent Domain, then that is theft pure and simple.
theres oil there ...
Yup. Thats why the 2002 coup happened.
Quite likely. Chavez is building up militias since the reports over the summer of another attempted coup, this time by the rich landowners and Colombian mercenaries (apparently), with possible CIA collusion.
Last time, Chavez was saved because he had popular support among the masses and certain segments of the military. He is doing exactly what Machiavelli would advise, using the people's admiration for him as his main protection. This will really get the peasants on side.
It is also for that very reason that all sorts of bogey man stories are likely to appear about him. The US doesn't take kindly to people standing up to him. Already some right wing congressmen have spoken of Chavez and two other left wing Latin American leaders (can't remember from which countries) as a ''new axis of evil''. :rolleyes:
I like the way things are going in Latin America. Indigenous presidents, land redistribution, left of centre governments... very refreshing.
Not only that... it isn't, contary to popular beleif, getting that bad. Indeed... it has done many countries some good, if not all of them are sucess stories (which, they aren't).
South America has come a long way in the past 20 years...the only problems I can see is that Chavez seems too powerful internally, which is never good, lets just hope he can weather it and not let the power go to his head.
America wanted an OPEC boycott busting country, in case their middle east adventures against terrorism meant they came under energy attack, a concern of Wolfowitz in particular. Unfortunately, Venezueala, who had done this in the past, was now run by Chavez who had renationalised the oil industry and used profits to help education and building projects. So he had to go. The coup was carried out by Venezueleans, but had tacit CIA support. Especially as it was backed by the big business of the country, who immediately set about privatizing the oil industry, given America the OPEC boycott buster it would need in coming years.
But then there were riots on the streets, and some badass Paratroop General threatened to assault the capitol unless Chavez was reinstated, so it failed. I'm certain the invasion of Iraq was accelerated precisely because of this failure, to secure American energy security. Whoops...
Fair play to Chavez for standing up to the yankee cunts.
With my nation's capitol long run solely for the interests of big business, the welfare of the average joe be damned if it gets in the way of hegemony and profits.
I hope he can help the poor without screwing business and the country doing so but I'm not totally convinced.
The very image of my own country, in point of fact. Since the ascendence of the recent cabal, Id go so far as to say that true democratic process has been quite effectively reduced to a mass media PR-reinforced sham altogether.
Oh and by the way, noone suggested Chavez was "perfect". He has, however, been much more socially just to the bulk of his nation's citizens (rather than the longrunning Washington-serving corporate oligarchy which ruled Venezuela for so long).
Id suggest you take mainstream punditry on him with more than a mere grain of salt.
And he first came to public attention when he tried to lead a military coup against the democratic government
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venezuelan_coup_attempt_of_1992
Lets maybe try and have one thread where neo-cons arent mentioned.
I wasnt saying he's a monster, but purely because he 'stands up' to the US doesnt make him great either.
Like I said, I hope he does good for the poor while not buggering his country but I'm not sure he will.
If the fact that the neo-cons and their array of heavily financed think tanks have successfully established the mainstream paradigm of thought according to which even the international debate is defined (and subsequent labels applies), then perhaps you should avoid the discussion altogether.
Understanding geo-politics requires more than taking as "fact" every 1 minute sanitised tv news report or the soundbites and rhetoric of media-spotlighted "spokesmen".
No, like it or not, I will point out those who are orchestrating mainstream opinion whenever and whenever it applies.
Do be so kind as to refer to any such claim made by myself. Thanks.
That aside I wasn't specifically refering to you, I mean in a wider context, he seems to have become the champion of the under dog and I'm not sure he deserves all that much praise.
From their point of view he's better than having "US" thugs install MNC's to turn everyone into serfs. He still is cut from the same cloth as the rest of them though.
I don't know - a lot of his initiatives in Venezuela do geniunely seem to be aimed at improving the lives of the poor, and he's helped inspire changes for the better in Bolivia, and hopefully in more Latin American countries soon.
The fact he gets up Bush's nose is just a nice little bonus.
Chavez is giving the land to peasents who are already substiance farmers, so know more of farming than those that took the land in zimbabwei.
Chavez is also trying to do it legally and at a appropiate pace, starting with unused land. I dont think he's taking land from large farmers who get their hands dirty such as the white farmers in Zimbabwei.
Mugabi was either very stupid or wanted famine to starve to death those who didnt vote for him, he has wrecked his country Chavez wontdo the same.
I have to concure that Chavez has been more successful then this. He has redistributed land to people who are able and knowledgable in farming. The only issue i have is the forced method he has gone about it. In some situations he negotiated to buy the land at its value then handed it out fairly. In other cases he has allowed the land to be seized, then once it was taken offered a pittence of its value. Still a lot of money i concede, but compared to what it was valued at, usually less then a third of its value, and in those cases he only paid out once political and legal pressure from the courts of human rights, etc intervened and demanded some form of compensation be paid.
If he was buying all the land at cost or negotiating with the land owners, who already had full fledged working farms with no wasted land, to take on more farmers or switch to other forms of crops and so on, i doubt i would even remotely have anything to be concerned over in this case, it is the arrogance and state power to take as desired in certain cases, usually with foreign land owners that is my concern here.
Chavez is not perfect, but yes, he is much better then Mugabi.
I would like to say, lets not dismiss all mass media news reports, because if i hadnt seen a news report on it, i wouldnt have even bothered to look deeper into the story and find out mor eon my own. Though it was a poor news story.
Finally, i had no idea America had such involvement in Venezuela, then again i was unaware they had oil there.