Hugo Chavez...According to Gary Vance
Hugo Chavez is often painted as a dangerous demagogue or tyrannical dictator by his many detractors. The bigger picture that is often overlooked about Chavez is that el Norte is primarily responsible for this man's rise to power. The US involvement in the nations south of our border have been historically atrocious and basically under reported. He is the first national leader I know of to break free of the overwhelming oppressive influence of US western hemisphere policies and his example is causing other South American nations to lean toward socialistic democracies. It is no secret that American policy has grossly exploited the vast resources located in the south as we have assassinated and overthrown duly elected leaders and replaced them with real dictators that would cater to our greed. Look it up.
Then Hugo Chavez shows up and legitimately rises to power after serving his time in prison for an unwise coup attempt. He busted Shell oil and other US corporate interests there who had long held lopsided and unfair contracts that exploited the vast oil reserves Venezuela is blessed with. Nationalizing their most strategic asset was essential for them to begin building a nation that is now providing health care for all and has now basically eliminated illiteracy along with developing many other benevolent polices toward their South American neighbors.
America on the other hand, stoops to preemptive war to steal the oil of Iraq for the same companies Chavez busted in Venezuela. This incredibly brazen act is still going unaddressed as we, the American people, continue to drive our SUV's and cry bitterly about the price of gas. Meanwhile, I find it totally unacceptable that our newly elected President and Democratic Congress have yet to pointedly say that crimes committed by Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, etc. will be fully investigated/prosecuted for the sake of justice.
Chavez shook hands with George W. Bush on their first meeting and said, "I want to be friends." Bush replied, "Me too."
At one point, Chavez offered to fix the price of oil for the US at $50 per barrel and we rebuffed his offer, preferring to let the market set the prices. How well did that work out? Following Katrina and the subsequent price gouging by US oil companies, Chavez helped thousands of homes in the north eastern states with discounted heating oil as a humanitarian gesture and would have provided more had our state department not blocked him.
The US was complicit in a 2002 failed coup attempt of Chavez and then Pat Robertson and others advocated for his assassination. Is it any wonder that Chavez would stand in the UN the day after Bush spoke there and declare that el Diablo had left the stench of sulfur at the podium...especially given Bush's adolescent penchant for rudely farting in the presence of staff and others?
Venezuelan media that has been restricted or nationalized were openly advocating for insurrection and overthrow of Chavez. I don't think that type of journalism is allowed in any nation, yet Chavez is declared a dangerous dictator for shutting them down. He is criticized for nationalizing various Venezuelan industries even while our nation is quaking from a greed driven economic disaster that is resulting in the nationalizing of our financial industry. Who knows where this trend will end? Chavez's bigger than life flamboyant persona, is an easy target for critics in the north, but his South American counter parts generally find him to be a good neighbor.
I hope that Obama brings a new approach and philosophy to the table with Venezuela...one that offers equitable partnerships in trade and security. There are now legitimate national security concerns about Chavez and Russia. Unfortunately, this development is the result of Bush's stiff arm non-diplomacy. It is counter productive to continue turning a blind eye to his bully cowboy policies toward Venezuela that has contributed to the growing partnership between Chavez and Russia. It is time to bring remedial changes to our foreign policies that could yet produce prosperity and peace for all parties concerned.
Does Chavez have flaws in his personality and policies? Of course he does and his worst traits have only been exacerbated by our current policies toward him and the good people of Venezuela. It is time to repent.
(1 vote)
- Gary Vance's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Comments
Chavez and Obama
Steve,
Below is another telling statement from Hugo Chavez taken from the article you cite...
Mr. Chávez said: “If Obama respects us, we’ll respect him. If Obama tries to keep disrespecting Venezuela, we will confront the North American empire.”
This is a grand opportunity for our nation to undo some of the harm to relations with Venezuela created by the previous administration. Chavez has been amenable to reasonable relations with the North and has so far been rebuffed and continues to be demonized by much of the media. He does suggest for Obama to do some reading on these matters and I agree.
Steve, you keep using words like "tyrant" and "dictator" about someone who is democratically elected and loved by the majority of the voters in his country. He continues to operate within the bounds of their constitution. I don't consider myself a blind apologist for Chavez. Nor do I claim to have studied his biography extensively, but what I have learned about him does not seem to fit the image you hold. Do you have any links to articles that would help me understand your disdain for him?
A Chavez highlight
Mr. Chávez said he had been ready to name a new ambassador in Washington, but put it on hold after the new American president accused him of “exporting terrorism” and being an obstacle to progress in the region.
“At least one could say, ‘poor ignorant person,’ ” Mr. Chávez said on his weekly television and radio program, adding that Mr. Obama “should read a little bit so that he learns about the reality.”
REALLY? Obama is a poor ignorant person who is exporting terrorism? Being an apologist for this SOB is really not where the American left or progressive Christians ought to be.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/23/world/americas/23venez.html?_r=1&scp=3...
I can find nothing that says
I can find nothing that says Chavez accused Obama of exporting terrorism as you state (can you post a link if you have one with this quote). Chavez did call Obama a " poor ignorant person" after Obama accused Chavez of exporting terrorism.
Evidence does seem to point to Chavez supporting Columbia guerillas. Columbia is in our pocket, they are very representative of the old guard Latin American country that we like to deal with. They are very right wing, oppress the peasants, take from the poor and give to the rich, beat the masses out of land and water rights, and literally murder union activists. They provide cheap labor in sweat shops for the empire and give freely of their natural resources. We in turn reward the wealthy white ruling elite .This is the same policy that has so miserably failed all over Latin America and has gave rise to such classics as Gustavo Gutierrez's "Liberation Theology". It is the policy that has sparked the "pink revolution" in Latin America. I don't think Progressives, Christian or otherwise, ought to support countries like Columbia.If Chavez or anyone other Latin American country wants to help the people of Columbia throw off the yoke of repression and de facto colonialism, who are we to judge? Do we stand with the wealthy oppressors ? How Christian is that?
Chavez also said he is willing to talk and negioate anytime with the U.S.A.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/15/world/americas/15venez.html?fta=y
good point
i misread, but Obama is the type of progressive leader like Lula or Bachelet that we ought to be supporting.
Chavez is a tyrant not worthy of our support.
Support Obama
I support Obama but not blindly.I pretty much stand with the Progressive Caucus in the House, Progressive Democrats of America in their attempt to push a progressive agenda within the Democratic party, and Senators like Bernie Sanders in the Senate. A lot of progressive leaders were telling of the pitfalls that could be encountered with the bailout, and some didn't suport it. The Democrats really are a big tent and we often don't follow blindly and in lock step as do most of the Republicans. I suppose that is both a blessing and a curse, depending on the situtation.
I support the Progressive Caucus too
That's a good comment about the Progressive Caucus, Jim. I'm hoping that they'll have a strong influence in the months ahead, as the country debates universal health care, a greener economy, and a tax structure that is geared more to help the poor and middle class. This is the time when Progressive and Green ideas are needed. I'd especially like to hear about Progressive arguments for universal health care, especially single payer health care. I'm in favor of universal health care, but don't have strong convictions on what is the best way to achieve that. Many progressives are in favor of single payer health care, and I'd be interested in knowing why many in the Left feel that is better than Obama's plan.
I think it's a good thing that the Democrats are a big tent, especially when I see how the Right have dominated the Republican Party in the past few years. It's to the detriment of the Republican Party when they allow the Right to marginalize the more moderate Republican voices and the party becomes too uniformly conservative. It makes it harder for Democrats to have any sort of bipartisan collaboration when there is no middle ground to go to.
It's messier to have a big tent, but I think the Democrats benefit more from the diversity of ideas.
Angelo
I'm Sorry Gary, But..
while our policies in Latin America are far from perfect, that does not justify praising a tin-horn egomaniac such as Chavez. If he could rule by fiat and get away with it, he'd do it in a second.
Good Job Gary
Thanks Gary. After what happened in Iraq, is there any doubt about why the Venezualians are paranoid?